In Geopolitics Today - Tuesday, May 25th
The Panama Canal approaching an inflexion point, the dangers of exaggerating the threat China poses to Taiwan, and Turkish mobster's ties to government stir controversy
The Panama Canal Approaching an Inflexion Point
The Panama Canal is a critical variable in international economic, and in turn, political concerns. The Canal sees an annual transit count of over 14,000 vessels since it was last expanded in 2016, which equals roughly 6 percent of global trade. Since the expansion, the Canal has seen its role in shipping increase drastically due in part to the disruption of global supply chains caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, as well as the increasing drive by the US to decouple from China. But with the 25-year contract for the Port of Cristobal set to expire on January 16, 2022, how this critical waterway will be governed in the future is still up in the air.
Of all countries which regularly use the Panama Canal transit, the United States is the most prominent — in 2019, 66 percent of all cargo traffic transiting the Canal began or ended its journey at a U.S. port. This amount of traffic compared to China is considerable, with cargo from or destined to China making up just 13 percent of Canal traffic. But China is the primary source of products going through the Canal and its increasing presence in the region has made the waterway a potential flashpoint for US-China competition.
China’s growing influence in the Panama Canal has been evident since at least 2017, when the then-president Carlos Varela severed diplomatic ties with Taiwan and recognized China, further opening the door to China’s expanded footprint in strategic infrastructure and potentially opening the door for a future alignment with the Belt and Road Initiative. In all, the stakes are high as the residue of US-China competition spills into Panama, and while the current operators of the transit have applied for an extension, little else is know about what shape the next agreement will take.
Read more about this story here.
The Dangers of Exaggerating the Threat China Poses to Taiwan
Of all the corners of the globe where violence and conflict rage daily with no end in sight, it would be strange to say that Taiwan is the most dangerous place on earth. But that is exactly what an article published by the Economist suggests.
The piece titled The Most Dangerous Place on Earth argues that to ensure that a war over Taiwan would be too costly for China, the US and Taiwan need to think ahead. This, according to whoever wrote the article, would involve devoting fewer resources to big, expensive weapons systems in Taiwan that are vulnerable to Chinese missiles, and focusing US strategic objectives on the tactics and technologies that would frustrate a Chinese invasion.
But to understand how to avoid a conflict in the Taiwan Strait, a good start would involve an examination of the contradicting interests that have kept the peace during the past few decades. While Beijing insists it has a duty to bring about unification — even, as a last resort, by force, — the Taiwanese have taken to electing governments that continually stress its distinction from China while stopping short of declaring independence. And the United States has, even while diplomatically recognising Beijing as the legitimate government over Taiwan, continued to supply arms in a bid to deter China from overwhelming Taiwan. These opposing ideas are bundled into what has essentially been the status quo since Nixon’s visit to Beijing in 1979 and the thawing of relations between China and the US that took place at the height of the Cold War.
But things are changing rapidly, as the US is entertaining dialgue with increasingly senior Taiwanese officials. For example, Biden’s staff invited a Taiwanese representative to his inauguration and a delegation of former US officials headed to Taiwan in April. These visits have been coupled with US officials sounding the alarm that China will attack Taiwan in the near future. The U.S. military commander for the Indo-Pacific region, Admiral Philip S. Davidson, stated without providing evidence or reasoning to his claim that “the threat is manifest during this decade, in fact, in the next six years.”
Read more about this story here.
Turkish Mobster’s Ties to Government Stir Controversy
A Turkish ‘mobster’ Reis Sedat Peker, who until recently organised rallies in full support of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has embroiled the Turkish government in controversy. While he had been known to enjoy the favor of pro-government circles, he has been rattling Turkey since early May by posting a series of videos which expose what he paints as close links between the high stratum of politics and the criminal underworld.
Though the Turkish government is no stranger to stories of dubious intermingling between state officials and criminals, the scope and gravity of the claims has fuelled vocal concerns among Turks over the country’s transformation under Erdogan, who, opponents say, has been monopolizing the Turkish state since assuming sweeping executive powers in 2018.
The video series in question explicitly targeted Interior Minister Suleyman Soylu, who had allegedly promised Reis Sedat Peker protection but did not keep his word; hence, Peker’s quest for score-settling. The accusations included drug dealing, racketeering and even murder against members of the ruling party, and have prompted opposition calls for a parliamentary probe into his allegations.
Read more about this story here.