Thread by @ambassadorbrief

Weekly Geopolitical Brief

Three stories:

Ukraine Scandal: @Robert_E_Kelly argued that “Impeachment will stabilise US Foreign Policy. Despite all the bluster, Donald Trump’s effect on foreign affairs has been too shallow to last beyond him”.

His reasoning: “Trump is nearly alone in the US foreign policy community in pursuing ‘disruption’”. And, chaos aside, he’s failed to establish “real alternative” policies. So, his removal would “most likely bring a snap-back to previous US liberal internationalist positions”.

But in the short term, “things may get worse”: Trump “will likely become more desperate as the Ukraine scandal accelerates. He may endorse a diversionary war with Iran or Venezuela, or, more likely, accept a lopsided deal with North Korea just for the sake of a...’win’”.

North Korea working level talks breakdown: talks between US North Korea envoy Stephen Biegun and his North Korean counterpart broke down within less than a day, with North Korea claiming it was “greatly disappointed” with the US’ inflexible approach.

.@WonkVJ argued “I cannot overstate how lethal Trump-Kim personal interactions are for nuclear negotiations”. From North Korea's perspective, there's nothing to be gained from engaging at a working level as long as they know they may get more from Trump personally.

Per Jackson, reasons for the breakdown included: (i) Trump has signalled publicly that he's ready to do another fake summit (ii) The working level was not authorized to make concessions on nukes & (iii) Kim's goal is sanctions relief & US didn't satisfy that.

Iraq protests: per Stratfor, “Baghdad's endemic economic woes…have resulted in deadly [protests], which could ultimately lead to the current government resigning...Sizable protests erupted across Iraq on Oct. 1 and will continue to unfold…into next week”

So far, the Iraqi PM has only offered “piecemeal solutions” which are unlikely to satisfy angry protestors. And “in the long term, Iraq will struggle to reform its inefficient, energy-dependent economy even as continued unrest drives home the need for such reforms”.

Three thought-provoking articles:

.@Rob_Malley argued that “the war that now looms largest [in the Middle East] is a war nobody apparently wants”. None of the US, Israel, Iran, or Saudi Arabia want a war. “Yet the conditions for an all-out war…are riper than at any time in recent memory”.

To de-escalate tensions, the US should: (i) end its support for the Yemen war (ii) rejoin the Iran nuclear deal & negotiate a more comprehensive agreement (iii) consider new ways to end the Israeli occupation (iv) no longer force [Iraq] to pick a side between Tehran & Washington.

And (v) as far as the Iranian-Saudi rivalry is concerned, the US should facilitate confidence-building measures before “moving on to the more ambitious task of establishing a new, inclusive regional architecture that would begin to address both countries’ security concerns”.

.@le2huong argued that US 5G strategy in South East Asia “needs to go beyond banning Huawei & asking partners & allies to do the same”. It’s not working: countries are making the 5G decision based on the “practical needs” of their developing economies, not US pressure.

She continued: “the reality is that for many in the region, Huawei’s technology is more advanced than its Western competitors’ offerings [and] it also comes at a fraction of the cost”. These advantages are proving more decisive than political or security concerns.

She continued, “among those that have embraced Chinese tech companies are two US treaty allies, Thailand and the Philippines, along with Cambodia and Myanmar’. To arrest this trend, the US needs to offer not just pressure, but alternatives. The US needs “a [5G] horse in the race”

.@thomaswright08 argued “Democrats need to act now to deter foreign interference in the 2020 election…The country’s defenses against political warfare, especially in the cyber domain, are weak and porous. Such attacks are easy to execute, but difficult & expensive to thwart.”

He continued, “When defense is difficult, deterrence becomes important.” Democratic frontrunners should therefore signal that any foreign meddler will face a cost if Democrats win. Even if Dems are only a 40% chance to take office, that threat should have a deterrence effect.

Three events to watch in the near future:

Modi and Xi summit: per the Times of India, the leaders will have four meetings, two events, and seven hours together in India. And per Shishir Gupta, China’s support of Pakistan is the key issue posing a potential roadblock to progress.

Per Gupta, “at the heart of India-China mistrust lies Beijing’s all-weather ally, Islamabad”. China “back[s] Pakistan entirely on issues like cross-border terrorism, nuclear suppliers group, UN expansion, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) & Jammu & Kashmir”.

He continued, India perceives China as unwilling “to give India space on the global high table”, and as making efforts “to confine New Delhi to a regional power locked in death combat with Pakistan”. The success of the summit turns on whether China can reshape this perception.

US-China trade talks: per Stratfor, there’ll be a deputy-level negotiation on Oct 7-8 & a high-level round with chief negotiators on Oct 10-11. These will be “critical to determin[ing] the outcome of the Trump administration's threat to leverage additional tariffs on Oct 15”.

They continued, “even though there might be some hopes for another tariff truce, [the] significant disagreements that remain between Beijing & Washington on trade issues & more complicated national security issues will make any possible detente a frail one”.

Kurds under the bus: after a Trump call with Erdogan, the White House effectively gave an all clear to a Turkish operation against US allied Kurds in Northern Syria. @IgnatiusPost called it a “major, consequential mistake” & a “guarantee of future bloodshed & instability”.

.@jricole argued, “I am all for the U.S. getting out of Syria. But it should be done in a way that ISIL doesn’t come roaring back and the Kurds who came to the defense of US interests aren’t hung out to dry. The US…could make those arrangements if it wanted to”.

@jricole 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