Thread by @ambassadorbrief

Weekly Geopolitical Brief

Three stories:

Ukraine scandal: @stephenWalt argued that “the bottom line is now clear…you cannot trust...Trump to place the interests of the nation ahead of his own, or to conduct a foreign policy that would faithfully advance the national interest”.

Walt argued that the founding fathers granted the President an extraordinary degree of latitude in foreign policy, because they understood it was necessary for navigating a dangerous world. But granting this latitude “depends on a minimal level of presidential integrity”.

Trump has now abused this trust, and shown he does not have this integrity. Americans cannot be confident that his dealings with foreign powers are intended to advance the broad national interest and not his own private ends. “That is why…he should be impeached”.

Brexit: Per @A_Sloat, Britain’s Supreme Court found that “Boris Johnson unlawfully advised the Queen to suspend Parliament for five weeks at a critical juncture for the country. Parliament promptly returned to session, with Johnson flying home early from the [UNGA]”.

But, per Sloat, “none of the fundamentals have changed”: EU leaders are not persuaded by British proposals; legislation requires the government to request an extension to the Oct 31 deadline if no deal; & the opposition remains averse to new elections before that extension.

Sloat continued, “Johnson’s best choice remains negotiating a revised deal with the EU. At this late stage, the most viable option is a revised version of the Northern Ireland-only backstop negotiated by Theresa May in early 2018”.

Per Bloomberg the Trump admin is “discussing ways to limit U.S. investors’ portfolio flows into China”. Options include: “delisting Chinese companies from U.S. stock exchanges & limiting Americans’ exposure to the Chinese market through government pension funds”.

Per Stratfor, “if the idea moves forward, it would disrupt U.S. investment in Chinese firms and risk a broader decoupling of [US-China] financial ties…Even the threat itself could be enough to compel…some Chinese companies to reconsider… their [US] exposure”.

Three thought-provoking articles / speeches:

.@HalBrands argued that “Europe has to choose a side in the U.S.-China rivalry…A Europe that has thrived in an American-led world would not be particularly comfortable in a system led by a mercantilist China that demands strict deference from lesser powers”.

Brands continued, what China is aiming for is a “divided, dependent Europe - one that is unable or unwilling to side decisively with Washington”. Beijing understands that it “can’t win Europe over, but it can neutralize it by fracturing the continent and co-opting some pieces”.

Dominique Mosi argued that France’s new policy of rapprochement toward Russia “makes more sense than persisting with failed Western efforts at containment” – even if it does carry significant risks due to continuing bad Russian behaviour.

Her reasoning: “Russia, with an aging, shrinking population and a huge, largely uninhabited landmass, is a natural prey for China’s long-term ambitions”. EU leaders “should not resign themselves passively to seeing Russia, lacking any other alternative, align with China”

Instead, EU leaders “should try to convince Russians that their future is with Europe, and not as China’s junior partner in a deeply unbalanced relationship”. This is especially so as Russia has now “returned as a serious global actor”.

.@SenatorWong pushed back against the US’ “with us or against us” rhetoric on China. It’s a “binary frame in which the gains are unclear, but the losses could be catastrophic”. It ignores: China’s economic heft, China’s place in the world, & the need to live with China.

The real choice for countries isn’t between the U.S. & China: it’s "are we simply to be spectators to…this [U.S.-China] strategic competition…or do we work proactively & collectively to shape [regional] rules, norms & standards in line with our interests & values?”

Three events to watch in the near-future:

US-India trade skirmishes: per Stratfor, U.S. Trade Rep Robert Lighthizer met with Indian Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal on the sidelines of the UNGA, raising expectations of a limited deal. But no concrete agreement came to be.

They continued, “even so, India counts the United States as a vital export market and will avoid escalating the dispute beyond tit-for-tat measures”. India wants to stave off a larger trade war, while Trump is eyeing some trade victories ahead of the 2020 election.

Egypt unrest: @Ola_Salem argued the protests have come as a surprise: “many Egypt watchers had thought [Sisi] had foreclosed any possibility of organized protests against him after leading an extraordinarily repressive & unprecedented crackdown” on opposition leaders.

As surprising is their leader – a 45-year-old Egyptian actor living in Spain. He’s been releasing viral videos discussing Sisi’s nepotism & corruption. The videos are targeted at ordinary Egyptians & spoken in the “cadence & slang of someone from the Egyptian countryside”.

70th anniversary of the PRC: ahead of the event, @jessicacweiss argued that China’s nationalist propaganda, which emphasises historical grievances, has produced a hawkish Chinese public. And in the long run, CCP leaders run risks by hardening public desire for future vindication.

Further, the CCP is leadership is already incurring costs for turning the dials on nationalism: “each time the government spins up and then winds down nationalist anger, whether online or in the streets, it breeds resentment against its heavy-handed manipulation”.

Thanks as always to everyone who has been liking, retweeting and spreading the word. We are continually humbled by the following we are gathering amongst the world’s leading diplomats, journalists, and thinkers.

Have a great week!

The Ambassador’s Brief Editors