GEOPOLITICA DEL MONDO MODERNO

Category archive

Politics - page 4

L’UE sempre più “operativa” nelle aree di crisi: nuova missione in Iraq, confermata missione in Bosnia, adottata nuova strategia per l’Afghanistan

Il 16 ottobre è stata una giornata impegnativa per la politica di sicurezza dell’UE, per vari motivi.

In primis, il Consiglio ha lanciato una nuova missione civile nell’ambito della politica di sicurezza e di difesa comune (PSDC) in Iraq. La missione sarà incentrata sul sostegno alle autorità irachene nell’attuazione degli aspetti civili della strategia di sicurezza nazionale dell’Iraq, e sarà guidata dal tedesco Markus Ritter. Saranno 35 gli esperti dell’UE che forniranno consulenza e assistenza in diversi settori fondamentali identificati come “critici” (nel senso anglosassone del termine) dalle autorità irachene.  La missione dovrebbe essere dispiegata a Baghdad entro la fine dell’anno, e dovrebbe avere un costo (inziale) di 14 milioni di euro. La missione, sotto egida PSDC si inquadra nelle missioni così dette “civili” dell’UE: ossia quelle missioni che hanno il principale obiettivo di ricostruire le istituzioni nei paesi martoriate dalla guerra, che ne siano usciti o ne stiano uscendo. Normalmente l’UE invia degli esperti (per l’appunto) civili, affinché affianchino le autorità locali e tentino di riformare e rifondare i settori della pubblica amministrazione: polizia, apparato giudiziario, sanità. Ma gli esperti possono fornire consulenza anche in settori come l’uguaglianza di genere ed i diritti umani; insomma: tentano in ogni modo di ripristinare o di stabilire lo stato di diritto. Le missioni dell’UE vengono dirette dal Comitato Politico di Sicurezza, che risponde all’Alto Rappresentante per la Politica Estera dell’UE (ora Federica Mogherini). L’Alto Rappresentante è a capo del SEAE, il Servizio di Azione esterna dell’UE, e presiede anche il Consiglio dell’UE nella sua versione “Affari Esteri” (cosa anomala per il Consiglio, la cui presidenza nei diversi settori

La sede del Servizio Europeo di Azione Esterna a Bruxelles

di legiferazione, normalmente, è a rotazione).  L’Alto Rappresentante è anche uno dei Vice Presidenti della Commissione europea: è l’unica figura, quindi, a cavallo sia del Consiglio che della Commissione. Il Comitato Politico di Sicurezza ha due ulteriori entità alle sue dipendenze: il Comitato Militare dell’UE, che guida le missioni di taglio più “robusto” o militare, ed il così detto CIVCOM o comitato per la gestione civile delle crisi. A occhio e croce questa nuova missione in Iraq dovrebbe inquadrarsi sotto l’egida del CIVCOM. L’obiettivo della strategia di sicurezza nazionale dell’Iraq è creare istituzioni statali capaci di consolidare la sicurezza e la pace e di prevenire i conflitti, rispettando nel contempo lo Stato di diritto e le norme in materia di diritti umani. La strategia individua una serie di minacce urgenti alla sicurezza nazionale – tra cui terrorismo, corruzione, instabilità politica e polarizzazione etnica e settaria – che la missione PSDC contribuirà ad affrontare.

La missione opererà in stretto coordinamento con la delegazione dell’UE in Iraq e con i partner internazionali presenti nel paese, compresi il Programma delle Nazioni Unite per lo sviluppo (UNDP), la NATO e la coalizione internazionale contro lo Stato Islamico. Il che significa che le questioni squisitamente militare

Soldati dell’EUFOR e forze di polizia della Bosnia Erzegovina (fonte www.euforbih.org)

resteranno un affaire della NATO.

In secundis, il Consiglio ha ribadito e confermato il suo impegno a favore della prospettiva europea della Bosnia-Erzegovina come paese unico, unito e sovrano ed ha ufficialmente stigmatizzato il fatto che, negli ultimi mesi, le riforme siano state rallentate a causa di politiche legate al (triste) passato e di polemiche sorte in occasione delle elezioni anticipate.

Per tale motivo, l’Istituzione europea ha dichiarato, con una nota, che approva ed accetta di buon grado il fatto che l’operazione ALTHEA continui ad esistere in BiH. Le forze militari impegnate nell’operazione contribuiscono ormai da tempo alla capacità di deterrenza delle legittime autorità bosniache nelle situazioni di crisi. Inoltre, non si può non dire che la forza multinazionale europea, con sede presso la base di Butmir e “succursali” in tutto il paese,  ha effettivamente contribuito anche a formare ed incrementare le capacità delle forze armate e di polizia bosniache e, più in generale, a sostenere tutti i settori della pubblica amministrazione che andavano riformati.

Infine, sempre il Consiglio ha adottato delle conclusioni su una strategia dell’UE relativa all’Afghanistan. Nel documento è stato ribadito l’impegno a lungo termine dell’UE e degli Stati membri in Afghanistan per promuovere la pace, la stabilità e lo sviluppo sostenibile. La strategia si concentra su quattro settori prioritari, così come elencati nel documento: la promozione della pace, della stabilità e della sicurezza nella regione; il rafforzamento della democrazia, dello stato di diritto e dei diritti umani e la promozione della buona governance e dell’emancipazione delle donne; il sostegno allo sviluppo economico e umano; la gestione delle sfide legate alla migrazione. L’UE vanta ormai una lunga storia di cooperazione con l’Afghanistan ed in Afghanistan volta a contrastare la corruzione e la povertà ed a favorire la crescita economica ed il rafforzamento delle istituzioni democratiche.

In un solo giorno tre segnali da parte di un UE sempre più impegnata ben oltre i suoi confini, e – come nell’ultimo caso esaminato – ben oltre le così dette politiche di vicinato. In futuro, aspettiamoci un’Europa sempre più solida e più compatta nel campo della risoluzione (militare o civile) delle crisi internazionali, magari anche al fianco della NATO e, sicuramente, su mandato dell’ONU.

 

(fonte www.consilium.europa.eu)

12 e 13 ottobre: i Ministri della Giustizia e dell’Interno europei si incontrano a Bruxelles.

Il Palazzo Justus Lipsius, sed eprincipale del Consiglio dell’UE.

Varie volte su queste colonne abbiamo avuto modo di parlare delle istituzioni europee deputate alla sicurezza interna, ossia all’interno delle frontiere dell’Unione. Una di queste è di sicuro il Consiglio Giustizia  Affari Interni, che riunisce a Bruxelles, con cadenza mensile, tutti i ministri dell’Interno e della Giustizia degli Stati membri. Ovviamente gli argomenti oggetto di discussione si soffermano sulle proposte legislative in itinere tra le viari istituzioni europee coinvolte. Di volta in volta, vuoi su input della Commissione europea, vuoi sulla base del lavoro dei  sottogruppi strategici e tecnici che sempre in seno al Consiglio si riuniscono, il Consiglio GAI affronta gli argomenti più disparati: dalla gestione delle frontiere esterne, all’ordinamento delle agenzie europee che operano nel settore, dal terrorismo all’eguaglianza di genere, dal cybercrime all’immigrazione ed all’asilo, dalla cooperazione giudiziaria alla procura europea. A distanza di qualche mese dall’avvio delle primissime attività della Presidenza estone, non possiamo non lodare le numerosissime iniziative intraprese nel settore dallo Stato membro baltico, di cui abbiamo esaltato parecchie peculiarità diverse volte qui su Europeanaffairs.it (qui, qui e qui ): un particolare impulso è stato dato proprio alle banche dati, allo scambio delle informazioni tra forze di polizia, alla cooperazione con le agenzie GAI specializzate; il tutto nell’ottica di una visione sempre più analitica e statisticamente intellegibile dei fenomeni securitari dell’Unione, volta a cercare rimedi e soluzioni altrettanto analiticamente misurabili e subito operativi sul campo.

Non a caso, la velocità con cui il Consiglio GAI promuove l’iter legislativo, la rapidità con cui discute di quanto portato alla sua attenzione in sede strategica e tecnica e l’efficacia delle azioni intraprese, molto dipendono dalla Presidenza di turno. Repetita iuvant, chi assume la Presidenza del Consiglio dell’Unione, guida tutti i tavoli  anche a livello ministeriale, quando il Consiglio si riunisce in diverse “versioni” per legiferare rispettivamente in “diverse” materie.

Ma veniamo a noi: il 12 ed il 13 ottobre a Bruxelles si è riunito un’altra volta il Consiglio GAI. Sono stati affrontati vari argomenti. Ci soffermeremo su quelli più inerenti gli home affairs, facendo un volo in planata sulle questioni attinenti alla giustizia.

Dopo un breve scambio di vedute sulla proposta di modifica del Codice Frontiere Schengen, già da tempo all’ordine del giorno del Consiglio, i Ministri hanno subito rinviato a quanto verrà loro suggerito a livello tecnico: la riforma del Codice Schengen prevede dei cambiamente nelle regole che disciplinano la reintroduzione dei controlli alle frontiere interne agli Stati membri. Inutile nascondere che l’argomento è un topic sensibile e non è facile, almeno a livello politico, raggiungere immediati accordi: pertanto è necessario che i tecnici, i così detti “eurocrati” (termine che noi non consideriamo dispregiativo, anzi) trovino prima delle possibili soluzioni compromissorie, sul campo.

A sinistra il commissario europeo per la Migrazione,Avramopoulos e a destra, il Ministro dell’Interno Estone, presidente del Consiglio GAI, Andreas Anvelt (foto www.consilium.europa.eu)

Alto argomento dibattuto è stato il terrorismo: è già il secondo mese che la Presidenza propone scambi di vedute sullo scambio di informazioni in chiave anti-terrorismo tra le Forze Armate e le Forze di Polizia. Anche questo argomento è però di difficile evoluzione: come abbiamo già detto su questo giornale (qui) non intravediamo nel breve periodo la nascita di una intelligence europea. Nessuno la intravede. E questo gli Stati membri, tutti gelosi della loro intelligence – dove non esistono alleanze – lo sanno bene. Si sta tentando allora di diffondere chiaramente l’idea che le Forze Armate, ormai da parecchi anni impegnate in medio-oriente ed in altre aree di crisi, godono dell’immenso privilegio di raccogliere intelligence durante le operazioni da loro condotte in queste aree e sono, sull’argomento, molto ferrate. Le loro informazioni, che sono quindi processate ed analizzate con rigore scientifico e , per l’appunto, militare, sono una risorsa preziosa. Queste informazioni sarebbero utilissime se condivise tra gli Stati e, ancora di più, tra le loro forze di polizia. Di sicuro i Paesi di origine “latina”, che annoverano tra le loro forze di polizia delle componenti di gendarmeria (ossia di forze di polizia a statuto militare, con competenza anche sulle questioni civili e di ordine pubblico) saranno avvantaggiati in questo ambito, proprio perché le gendarmerie possono dialogare indistintamente ed efficacemente sia con le forze militari sia con le forze di polizia ad ordinamento civile. Ma a parole sono bravi tutti: come abbiamo cercato di dimostrare in passato, un conto è scambiare informazioni di polizia, di taglio investigativo, ed un conto è scambiare ed utilizzare in ambito giudiziario informazioni coperte dal segreto perché raccolte dall’intelligence militare. Ogni ordinamento giuridico, e giudiziario,  di ogni Stato membro, è diverso dall’altro:  in qualche caso, molti Stati sono favorevoli ad una raccolta ed una condivisione dell’intelligence senza limitazioni ed a tutta birra; in alcuni Stati – sembrerà assurdo – l’azione penale non è obbligatoria da parte degli inquirenti (il che significa che un magistrato od un poliziotto potrebbero anche tenere per sé un’informazione relativa ad un reato, utilizzandola in un secondo momento… cosa impossibile in Italia!); in altri Stati la privacy, la corretta utilizzazione delle informazioni in sede giudiziaria, la più precisa separazione tra “poteri”, rappresentano capisaldi del diritto, che non possono essere intaccati se non in casi eclatanti, per necessità ampiamente comprovate. Ma va da sé che se l’intelligence si chiama così proprio perché è molto difficile parlare di dati “comprovati”. Insomma, l’Europa è in realtà ancora lontana, secondo chi scrive, dal raggiungere un accordo in materia. Altro argomento spinoso, di cui i Ministri hanno discusso, è quello dell’immigrazione: avanza l’iter legislativo per l’istituzione di un Sistema Europeo Comune di Asilo (CEAS – Common European Asylum System), e per il miglioramento del sistema EURODAC (che consente di identificare in maniera chiara ed incontrovertibile l’identità dei richiedenti asilo, principalmente per evitare che una persona possa richiederlo in più paesi contemporaneamente o in caso di diniego da parte di uno degli Stati membri). È una novità invece il tentativo della Presidenza di ricevere mandato dal Consiglio per avviare i negoziati con il Parlamento europeo su una normativa che disciplini e regoli la ricollocazione dei migranti e le prescrizioni in capo agli Stati membri nel settore della loro accoglienza. Una norma che, se approvata come piace a noi, metterebbe in mora gli Stati che fanno finta di non sentirci, quando si tratta di accoglienza dei migranti e, in più, metterebbe in ridicolo tutti quei movimenti di destra più o meno estrema che, cavalcando la tigre dell’intolleranza e della disoccupazione dei connazionali, rendono impossibile il processo di integrazione europea ed espongono i propri governi alle ire della Commissione, sempre pronta – con draconiana e giusta severità – ad avviare procedure di infrazione contro gli inadempienti.

Il Ministro italiano Orlando, il 12 ottobre, alla riunione dei Ministri della Giustizia (foto www.consilium.europa.it)

In ogni caso, non si può negare che ciascuno – a modo suo – sta cercando di far confluire in uno sforzo congiunto il tentativo di risolvere i problemi e le paure dei cittadini in questi settori.

Il giorno 12 ottobre, invece, i ministri della Giustizia hanno portato avanti l’iter legislativo per la creazione di una procura europea (EPPO – Europeana Public Prosecutor’s Office), che avrà tra i primi incarichi quello di indagare e punire chi si macchierà di offese agli interessi finanziari dell’Unione. Altro tassello  che si sta felicemente incasellando è quello della creazione del sistema ECRIS: European Criminal Records Information System, una banca dati centralizzata dei casellari giudiziali degli Stati membri, che dovrebbe facilitare il contrasto a vari fenomeni criminali, specialmente ste transfrontalieri e transazionali.

Saudi Arabia: first leg of Trump’s international trip

Policy/Politics di

Yesterday Donald Trump opened his first international trip as US President. The busy agenda includes The Vatican, Israel and Brussels, for a nine-day tour around Europe and the Middle East.  He chose Saudi Arabia for the inaugural meeting, a well-calculated choice that clearly marks the new administration’s approach toward one of the US historic and most strategic allies.

This international trip is a crucial political moment, especially for a newly elected president. Especially for a newly elected president that is already having political scandals back home. Indeed, it represents an excellent opportunity to meet several heads of states and government representatives all over the world, as well as a key moment to strengthen US alliances and to give a new breath to the nation posture in the international political arena.

The choice of Saudi Arabia as the first meeting is, therefore, a first quite unequivocal sign of the path President Trump wants to undertake. Saudi Arabia has always been one of the most important US allies in the region and the two countries share economic, political and strategic interests. Relations have been very close and friendly, showing a strong mutual understanding and the willingness to cooperate in several areas. However, under Obama’s administration, the happy marriage went through a very hard time, often referred by Saudi representatives as the worst in the US-Saudi history. Trump’s decision seems to be a smart move to show Saudi Arabia and the entire world the administration intention to go back to the strong and loyal relationship between the countries, after the challenging times of Mr Obama.

Several reasons stand behind this strategic choice, which can be read within the US-Saudi Arabia partnership’s framework, but also within the broader context of the US strategy in the Middle East.

Regarding US-Saudi relations, economic and security interests are the main issues on the table. Deals on weapons and defence systems are back on track after Obama stopped selling arms to the monarchy, worried about its possible influence –better said military support- in Yemen’s war (Saudi Arabia leads an international coalition supporting the government against the Houthi rebels). Trump seems not be sharing these concerns: the deals include, indeed, a Terminal High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD) missile defence system, a C2BMC software system for battle command and control and communications as well as a package of satellite capabilities, all provided by Lockheed. Under consideration also combat vehicles made by BAE Systems PLC, including the Bradley Fighting Vehicle and M109 artillery vehicle. Contrary to the previous administration, the US appears to be supporting a more interventionist Saudi role in the region. Along the commercial agreements, Washington and Riyadh are also enhancing best practices in maritime, aviation and border security.

Looking at the broader US strategy in the Middle East, the visit in Saudi Arabia makes even more sense.

Since taking office, fighting the Islamic State (ISIS) has been Trump’s top national security priority. As the president made clear, ISIS -and terrorism in general- is not a regional problem, but one that affects the all international community, harming, therefore, also US interests back home and abroad. Similar consideration for the security conditions in the Middle East, which are essential to protect US economic and strategic interests in the region. These reasons made Trump reconsidering the US role in the Middle East. If Obama tried to step back and put some distance between the US politics and Middle Eastern affairs, giving the impression that the American power was turning the back to its allies in the region, Mr Trump has clearly shown different intentions.

The US is to re-take its posture in the Middle East, perhaps that security guarantor role that used to play in the past, willing to bring safety and stability in the region and, therefore, at the global level. Hence, the strong position taken by Iran’s antagonist behaviour and the attempt to reassure the US allies in the Gulf can be easily related to this new approach.

So, what does that mean in terms of regional security and international political games?

–    With the US support in fighting terrorism, the Gulf monarchies will be able to strengthen their positions against the Islamic State and terrorist groups. ISIS and other terrorist groups, indeed, have been trying to destabilise the Gulf monarchies. On the one hand, they took advantages of religious minorities and social differences in the countries. On the other, they benefited from an inconsistent European strategy in the region and a US administration probably more focused on domestic authoritarian issues and human rights records in its ISIS-fight partners than on the actual final goal. Trump seems to be setting priorities and boundaries: ISIS and terrorism come first; democracy and authoritarian tendency are a domestic issue that the US does not have to deal with now. To fight ISIS we need stable countries: simple as that. As the Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said “When everything is a priority, nothing is a priority. We must continue to keep our focus on the most urgent matter at hand.”

–    A new challenging US-Iran relation. If Obama’s era will be remembered in all history books for the multilateral nuclear deal with the Islamic Republic, Trump administration will unlikely follow the same path. As initial steps, Trump tightened sanctions against Iran, thus sending the message that time had changed and Iran must better behave. Several press statements denounced Iran’s antagonistic behaviour and defined the country as a plague for the Middle East and US interests there. No surprise, then, if engagement and accommodation of Obama’s office will be replaced by confrontation and hostility, a move very welcomed by the Arab countries.

–    By signing new weapon deals with Saudi Arabia, the US indirectly supports the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen, a conflict that involves Iran too. The Islamic Republic, indeed, militarily support the Houthi rebels against the government. As mentioned above, Iran is considered a real threat to Middle East stability.

–    A stronger commitment to the Middle East stability cannot overlook the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Trump is pursuing peace talks between Israel and Palestine to set a lasting agreement. The two-state solution has been a core pillar of US foreign policies for decades -an independent state of Palestine in West Bank and Gaza in return for Israel’s safety and security. However, Trump affirms to be also opened to a one-state solution, where Israel will be the only state and Palestinians will either become citizens of Israel or else live under permanent occupation without voting rights. As the president said, “I’m happy with the one they [Israelis and Palestinians] like the best”. Not easy to understand, though, how Palestinians could like the second one.

–    Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia, a Muslim country but also the home of the most significant Islamic religious sites, can be read as a strategic move to achieve the role the US would like to play in the Middle East. With the implementation of the immigration policies in the States and several statements against the Muslims, President Trump has attracted severe criticisms, describing him and his policies as anti-Muslim. Not the best precondition for someone that aims at playing a greater security role in the region. Hence, visiting the Saudi monarchy shows that the US and Arab Muslims can actually form a partnership and cooperate on some issues.

–    At first glance, it is understandable to think that a more interventionist US role in the Middle East could upset Russia. On several capillary topics -such as Syria and Yemen- Russia and the US have quite divergent views and stand on the opposite sides of the fight. A US administration willing to play the police role in the region and -possibly- put feet on the ground is not exactly what the Kremlin would like to see. However, the scandal that has recently hit the White House- regarding Trump sharing highly classified information with the Russians-questions the real relationship between Washington and Moscow.

In conclusion, Trump’s meeting with Saudi Arabia’s leaders goes beyond the routine diplomatic visits, as it also entails powerful political messages to the Arab countries and the entire world. A new page for the US foreign policy that aims to bring the old glory and its leader role in the Middle East. It looks like the new administration is backed by a crispy and definite strategy; however, on some topics it seems like Trump is proceeding blindly, just reacting to whatever it happens. The question is: does he have a strategy in mind? The US is a very powerful nation and -willing or not- its actions have a substantial impact worldwide. Hopefully, there will be some still unrevealed aces in the hole: the last thing that the world would like to see is the US wandering around without knowing what to do. It is time to take sides, it is time to make decisions, and Trump seems to be quite confident in doing so. However, to be effective, those decisions need directions, need a strategy, a smart long term project aiming at a specific goal. Let’s hope the current US administration truly has one.

Paola Fratantoni

Saudi Arabia toward the economic diversification

Middle East - Africa/Politics di

In the past few weeks, Saudi Arabia has been at the centre of intense diplomatic activities, mainly directed to make significant economic deals. It is not a coincidence that some of the actors involved are the three biggest world economies: The United States, China and Japan. Indeed, while King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud has taken a six-week trip in Asia, His Energy Minister Khalid-Al Falin headed for in Washington, to meet the US President Trump at the White House.

Such an intense effort goes beyond the normal diplomatic relations, especially given that the King’s visit in Japan has been the first visit to the country by a monarch of the Middle East oil-rich countries in the past fifty years. So, what is behind this busy agenda? First and foremost, oil. For decades, the vast availability of oil combined with the harsh regulations imposed by the monarchy -which did not encourage foreign companies entering Saudi markets-  have made oil the country’s one and only source of income.

However, the recent drop in oil price has been worrying the oil-rich monarchy. IMF projection for Saudi economic growth is not more encouraging, sharply foreseeing a drop from 2% to 0.4% this year. Hence, Saudi Arabia is exploring alternative economic paths, which include attracting foreign capitals and developing other industrial sectors. The short-term strategy, indeed, sets investments and infrastructure maintenance, especially electricity and transport networks, as first priorities. In a long-term perspective, “Vision 2030” expresses goals and expectations of the nation, based on three strong pillars: leading role in the Arab and Islamic word, become a global investment powerhouse and become a global hub, thus connecting Asia, Africa and Europe.

Having said that, Saudi effort to diversify its economy is more understandable. However, it is important to analyse also the political implications that these visits and commercial agreements may have.

Let’s start with Japan, the first trip of King Salman. As mentioned above, the Saudi King arrival in the Asian island is not an ordinary event, though the Kingdom is the largest provider of oil export and the two countries have friendly relationships. But this time King Salman has decided to travel all the way to the East and meet the Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. The two leaders, then, agreed and signed the “Saudi-Japan Vision 2030”, a governmental project that aims to enhance the cooperation between the two countries.

By developing this project, Saudi Arabia and Japan will become equal strategic partners and Japanese companies will be given a designated zone in Saudi Arabia to allow fluid entry into the country, thus facilitating the economic partnership. The developmental projects outlined in the document include both government-related and private sector ones.

Notable names emerge with the private projects. Toyota is opting to produce cars and components in Saudi Arabia; Toyobo will cooperate in technological developments of desalination plants and several banks -i.e. Mitsubishi Tokyo UFJ Bank- will be promoting investments in the Kingdom, while Softbank Group is planning to create investment funds worth 25$ billion for technological investments.

Therefore, Japan raises as a key actor to diversify Saudi Arabian economy. However, there are also political reasons behind this stronger partnership. The Japanese government is trying to contribute to Saudi Arabia political and economic stability, which is a fundamental factor to maintain the stability in the region. The competition between Saudi Arabia and Iran for the leadership in the Middle East has been deteriorating security and stability in the area for a long time. Japan has friendly relations with both countries and welcomes a productive dialogue between the two powers. Helping Saudi Arabia to strengthen its economy is indeed essential to maintain some balance between the two nations, also given that the relationship with the US -traditional ally and a core pillar of Saudi foreign policy- has recently gone through a hard time.

Moving forward, or better said westwards, King Salman reached China, the world’s second-largest oil consumer as well as the third largest economy. Similarly, as for Japan, the Sunni monarchy is the primary source of China’s energy demand. The two countries have sharply deepened their relationship by signing up to 65$ billion economic and trade deals. Within this framework, the countries are promoting manufacturing and energy sectors, included downstream oil opportunities. Moreover, the deals include a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the oil firm Saudi Aramco and China North Industries Group Corp (Norinco) to look into the construction of refining and chemical plants in China. Meanwhile, Sinopec and Saudi Basic Industries Corp (SABIC) agreed upon the development of petrochemical projects both in China and Saudi Arabia.

The stronger economic relationship comes as mutually beneficial for the countries. On the one hand, Saudi Arabia may see new trade opportunities in sectors other than oil, while confirming his position as key energy partner for China; on the other, China can benefit from further Saudi investments in its markets but also for the kingdom’s strategic location in the Middle East. Indeed, Saudi political, religious and economic influence in the region is a key factor for the Chinese “One belt, one road” initiative, that aims to build connectivity and cooperation between Eurasia and China.

However, Saudi Arabia also has its strategic advantages. From a security perspective, Saudi Arabia has always strongly relied on the US and its military presence in the Gulf. However, under Obama’s administration concerns and disappointments arose, as the US failed to show a firm determination in dealing with Iranian attempts to further develop its nuclear capabilities, thus jeopardising the stability of the region. In the past, China has refrained from interfering in the Middle East issues, trying to keep a neutral position between the two rivals, Saudi Arabia and Iran and stressing the importance of close consultation. Some changes occurred, though.

In 2016, China backed Bashar al-Assad, offering its military cooperation and supported Yemen’s government against the Iran-backed Houthi rebels (A Saudi-led military coalition supports Yemen’s government). Lastly, the Chinese government signed an agreement to set the first factory for Chinese hunter-killer aerial drones in Saudi Arabia, first in the Middle East.

Is China going to replace the US in the Middle East? Perhaps it is still too early to make such an assumption, especially given the new development in Syria. However, it seems that China may and would like to play a more influential role in promoting security and stability in the region, having all the means (military and economic) to do it.

And here comes the third core piece of this puzzle: The United States. As mentioned above, Obama administration has seriously challenged the relationship between the West power and the Saudi monarchy. The major issue was the multilateral nuclear deal signed with Iran, which allowed Iran to sell its vast oil supplies more freely and solicit investment in its energy industry, increasing competition with top oil exporter Saudi Arabia. However, the new presidency has made clear its approach toward Iran, by immediately imposing additional sanctions on entities involved in the nuclear program.

Saudi Arabia visit to Washington seems to open a new phase in US-Saudi relations. While the King was busy in Asia, Saudi Energy Minister Khalid Al-Falih and the Deputy Crowne Prince Mohammed bin Salman met President Donald Trump at the White House. As Saudi minister pointed out, US-Saudi relationship is one of the most central to global stability and now seems to be better than ever. Indeed, the two countries again align on all the major issues, such as confronting Iranian aggression and fighting ISIS, but also enjoy the benefit of a closer personal bond between his royal highness, the Deputy Crown Prince and President Trump.

At the economic level, new investment programs are focused on energy, industry, infrastructure and technology. According to the Financial Times, Saudi Arabia is interested in investing up to $200 billion in US infrastructure, which is a core pillar of Trump’s agenda. As Falih explains, “The infrastructure program of President Trump and his administration is something that we’re interested in because it broadens our portfolio and it opens a new channel for secure, low-risk yet healthy return investments that we seek”.

These are only some of the economic negotiations and deals that Saudi Arabia is currently conducting, but they help to understand the new economic course of the country. They represent, indeed, a “Plan B” against the drop of oil revenue and the chance to reinforce and diversify the economic capabilities of the country, which can rely on resources other than oil, such as phosphate, gold, uranium and other minerals. Developing new sectors will also attract foreign investments and create new job opportunities for a young and ambitious local population.

One of the risks of such a massive network of economic deals is the reaction that other partners may have to commitments taken with other countries. As known, commercial arrangements have political consequences and impacts. Therefore, one of the main challenges for Saudi leaders will be to pursue its economic goals, while balancing its position toward all his major allies and friend nations, especially when some of its partners are not the best friends ever.

An obvious example is China. Despite years of lack of interest for Middle East issues, China is now trying to play a bigger role in the region, as the support in Yemen and Syria but also the Chinese warship tour in the Arab Gulf (January 2017) prove. Saudi Arabia welcomes this kind of assistance, as it can help to reduce Iran’s influence in the region. However, it is important not to upset a key and historical ally, the United States. As the new administration has shown a different approach toward the main regional issues -Syria and Iran- it might be a strategic mistake to bond too closely to the new player. Indeed, this might give the impression that a new guarantor of security in the Middle East has replaced the United States, a change that President Trump may not be entirely happy with.

In conclusion, the diversification of Saudi Arabia’s economy is a smart and necessary move to make. However, it goes beyond the economic sphere, as it also shapes Saudi political posture, as a regional power but also among the biggest foreign nations involved in the Middle East political struggle. It appears that the country is trying to bond closer ties with all those powers that have more interests -but also economic and military capabilities- influencing the stability and security of the region, thus trying to get the strongest support possible against its main rival, Iran. China and USA are on the spot but do not forget Russia, which has developed bilateral ties with Saudi Arabia in the past few years and has strong political and strategic interests in the Middle East. Lastly, a key factor will be the development of the Syrian war, especially after the US Tomahawk missile strike on an air base in Syria, very well welcomed by Riyadh.

It is likely that the future economic strategy of the Kingdom will follow the political and strategic needs of the country, confirming once again the strong interrelation between economic and political dimensions, but also the importance of a robust and independent economy to maintain an influential and leading role in the region.

 

Paola Fratantoni

Focus on Estonia: Chapter 3

Europe/Policy/Politics di

The celebrations of the 60th Anniversary of the EU foundation held in Rome during the last weekend, gives us the opportunity to talk about Estonia, as we promised in our previous articles, from an european point of view.  

As we mentioned, Estonia is holding the Presidency of the Council of the EU in the second half of 2017, starting from july, and taking over this job from Malta. This means that Estonia will be responsible for defining the Council’s positions, while taking into account the interests of all member States and remaining neutral at the same time.

Estonia will act as the first country of its &trio&, in partnership in the next 2018, with Bulgaria and Austria. We described what the &trio& in other previous occasions. This estonian &european& task will end while the country will start its centennial anniversary in the mentioned 2018 (in effects, Estonian consider the period under the Soviet Union like a military occupation; and also a good part of the international community recognizes that their history, as an indipendent State, never stopped during that period).The Estonian Permanent Representation to EU

While new legislation is normally initiated by the European Commission, it is negotiated and adopted by the Council of the European Union, which represents the governments of member states, and the European Parliament: national ministers from each country meet at Council meetings to take decisions at the political level. The most important rule is that the meetings are chaired by the Minister of the country holding the EU presidency, and this procedure also works at the strategical groups level and at the techinical subgroups level (the so called working parties).

During the presidency, Estonia will be responsible for leading the work of nearly 200 working parties in both Brussels and Tallinn, organizing the work of the Council and working parties, developing agendas for meetings, trying to achieve common positions trough the single different opinions, while chairing the meetings and negotiating. As leader of the Council, Estonia will have to face the Commission and the Parliament in negotiations.

All the issues which the Presidency will focus on comes from the past; but each Presidency generally tries to add something more, something specific that should be remembered at the political and legislative level.

From official sources, we read that the Baltic republic will focus on the single and digital markets, the energy union and the closer integration of the Eastern partners into Europe. They also want to promote and disseminate e-solutions across the Union and support the information society in EU policy areas (as we said, in our first intervention, Estonia is the most “e-educated” country in Europe).

It has been planned that approximately 20 high-level meetings will be held in Estonia, during the semester (JHA and defense/security events included). In addition, while the majority of meetings and working meetings will take place in Brussels, on the other hand, Estonia is going to host nearly 200 different events, whose scale of levels will be different, with an expected total of 20,000 to 30,000 international guests. So, it’s a fact that this future and temporary leader will increase its visibility in the fields of culture, business, information technology, tourism, education and research, raising in the meanwhile all issues which are important for Estonians.

Organizing the Presidency also means increasing the country’s capacity to have a say and assert its interests and objectives in Europe and elsewhere. The Government already declared that the semester will not be an one-off effort, but the work done and the related investments are supposed to bring long-term benefits for the country.

This strategical work starts from the past. Since 2012, the Government of this smart and high-technological country formed a commission responsible for the preparations for the presidency, chaired by the Secretary of State and started to recruit and train the necessary staff, organizing the above mentioned unofficial ministerial meetings and other high-level events.

c-justus lipsius ilustracka_mensiaTogether with the Committee of Estonia 100, which is not obviously related to the semester, they prepared the political and legislative time table of the Presidency, with the aim to earn time and save money and efforts in order to jointly implement an international programme in foreign countries to introduce Estonia and Estonian culture.

Approximately 100 officials and support staff will supplement the existing staff of the Estonian Permanent Representation to the European Union in Brussels.

This demonstrates that this IT-high-specialized country, formerly governed by the Soviet Union, is now playing an important role in its history and in all the European main issues. What we’ve tried to show in these chapters is that Estonia represents a modern country, available to host international institutions, open to new fundamental political experiences, like the Presidency and the celebrations of its centennial anniversary.

In the next chapter we will focus on the NATO in Estonia, and the “estonian NATO” seen by Russia.

Focus on Estonia

Policy/Politics di

estonia (1)Not everybody knows in a deep manner that lovely and small country settled in the far northeastern corner of Europe, very close to the Russian borders: Estonia. A former soviet baltic Republic, with nothing to do with the marxist or leninist revolution. A country speaking a very poethic language, with finno-ugric roots and balanced vowels in the words. A small country, as mentioned, but with a very large and advanced IT infrastructure, where Skype was born and – also according to Wikipedia – it is very usual to find everywhere free wi-fi hotspots and also aged peolpe is used to buy, to vote (since 2005 they’ve been voting online for their politicians), to live a better and more confortable life using PCs and mobiles. Someone calls it e-Stonia.

estoniaEstonia, which is now celebrating its 99th indipendence anniversary (from Russia). In reality, we know that Russians occupied the estonian territory also after the WWII, after a short period of nazi militay occupation. But they’ve been always celebrating since 1918, because they never felt as part of the Soviet Union. A small country, with a strong patriotic pride – bigger than others – that they defend also from the finnish neighbors: their languages are very similar, but they don’t really like when a finnish guy, moving in Tallinn, wants to talk in finnish and not in estonian. You must speak estonian. If you are not able to, english is an asset.

Finland and Estonian are actually good friends. They are 30 minutes far (by plane). And a ferry boat continuously links Tallinn and Helsinki every single day.

But this european country is not only a technological heaven. It is also the next EU Member State which is holding the Presidency of the Council of the European Union after the current maltese Presidency. As we wrote some time ago on this magazine, the Presidencies are linked in groups of three: this is called Presidency Trio; the Trio is supposed to follow an uniform policy in most of the field of action of the legislative procedures. On the 1st July 2017, Estonia is starting its adventure, leading the executive branch of the EU insitutions, and will be the first of its own “trio” (followed in 2018 by Bulgaria and Austria).

Estonia joined the Euro common currency system in 2011. The general economic and financial asset seems to be very good and the country is open to foreign investments.

Estonia hosts one of the most important european Justice and Home Affairs Agency, called eu-Lisa, founded in 2014. Ten years before, in 2004, it joined the N.A.T.O., and subsequently its soldiers started to work together with their N.A.T.O. colleagues in most of the latest peacekeeping missions (I remember them in Kosovo, in the Multinational Specialized Unit Regiment).  

Last but not least, in Tartu (the second city after the Capital), the government is hosting the Baltic Defence College, whose motto is “Ad Securitatem Patriarum” (“To secure Homelands”): isn’t it a little too much for the closest Russia?

Europeanaffairs.media will start in the next days to focus on Estonia, its insitutions, its policies announced for the  semester of Presidency. We will also concentrate on the foreign presence in the international instiutions and on the modernity of this country, which actually holds a millenary history.

Stay tuned….

European complaints against DPRK missile launches

In the early morning of yesterday, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) has launched a ballistic missile, another violation of multiple UN Security Council Resolutions, including Resolution 2321 adopted in November 2016.

The DPRK’s repeated disregard of its international obligations is provocative and unacceptable. The DPRK must halt all launches using ballistic missile technology and abandon once and for all its ballistic missile programmes in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner, as required by the UN Security Council. We call on the DPRK not to raise tensions further and to re-engage in a credible and meaningful dialogue with the international community, in particular the Six-Party Talks“. That’s what the European Union External Action Service (EEAS) Spokeperson said, from Brussels.
The High Representative/Vice-President, Federica Mogherini will speak in the coming days to the Foreign Ministers of international partners to further discuss the international response.

DKPR’s behaviour continues to worry all the international community. Of course, Brussels seems to be so far from Pyongyang, but is a common opinion thet the nuclear tests and, generally speaking, the nuclear proliferation in the northern part of the Korean peninsula constitues a real danger for all countries.

Of course, the game hides some differents and complicated balances: first of all, the role of China, which missiles paradein facts is the only trade partner for the DKPR. Also Putin’s Russia aims to keep the remote control of the region and – despite of the Trump’s russia – fliendly policy – does not like very much the american “temporary” presence in South Korea… and also american missiles and army in the area. Anyway, the Kim’s last launch makes some doubts rise. It is not a secret that one of the Trump’s ideas for the region was to reduce the american military contingent in the peninsula. So, this launch could seriously put in danger all the plans and political efforts to reduce Uncle Sam’s troops.

According to some geopolitical studies, North Korea and South Korea will never fight – directly – one each other. This, because the goals for each contendant in a new war, beetween the two enemies, could cancel each other. The common opinion – extremely summing – is that the DKPR has a strong defensive asset and a very well-motivated army, that could easily face attacks from south also using old planes, cold-war subarines and very obsolete boats. The South Korean Army is well trained and equipped, with new systems, boats and submarines, but her weakness is in the leadership (some units are entirely directed by american officers in charge), in the ideological motivation and, of course, in the potential feeling of loneliness without a clear american guidance and support. And we all know the political scandal that recently hit the Southkorean political leadership. That’s why this missile launch, in an moment while academics started to speculate about a progressive and slow american withdrawal, change the scene of play. Of course, the launch is a muscles demonstrations, but its meaning seems to be changed.

From an european point of view, we can only wait the next days. For sure, since now, the EU has been supporting international efforts to promote peace, stability, denuclearisation and an improvement in the human rights situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.  Since 1998, the EU has been conducting regular political dialogue with the DPRK. The European Community established diplomatic relations in May 2001 and some EU countries have diplomatic relations with the DPRK.  As far as we can read on the official EU institutions’ websites and portals, the EU has been involved in providing assistance to some of the most vulnerable communities in the DPRK since 1195. Current activities are mainly oriented towards support for the agricultural sector and are financed under the Food Security Thematic Programme of the Development Cooperation Instrument.

Trump attacks the judiciary: the courts are too politicized

President Trump is back to attack the judiciary today during a meeting with the sheriffs and police chiefs of the largest cities of the country. Trump said that in his view the courts are too politicized and that they should be able to do their job without dealing with policy, in fact, according to Trump’s decision Robarts Judge, who has blocked her travel ban, would be contrary to the principle of separation of powers, the same charges were brought by the Democrats to the President. By next Wednesday we will know the decision of the Court of Appeals of San Francisco that must decide if reinstate the travel ban or confirm his suspension, if there will be a confirmation the government would appeal to the Supreme Court which currently has 8 members (4 Liberals and 4 Conservatives).

The agreement between Gentiloni and al-Sarraj is already null

On Wednesday the Tobruk-based Libyan House of Representatives said that it considers a recent Memorandum of Understanding signed between the Italian prime minister Paolo Gentiloni and Chairman of the Presidential Council of Libya Fayez al-Sarraj to be null and void. The agreement was for cooperation and development and against clandestine migration, human trafficking and smuggling. It also included measures to strengthen border control. The anouncement was made by the Tobruk parliamentary body itself in a statement through the Al-Wasat website, which said that the presidential council and its president did not have jurisdiction to make such choices on the basis of the constitution and judicial sentences. ”An issue like that of clandestine migration, ” the statement said, ”is one of the important issues linked to the choice of the Libyan people through the representatives that they elected democratically through voting, and not the interests of individuals that do not have the trust of the House of Representatives, which is the legitimate power, nor the interests of European countries, and especially the Italian Republic.” Italy, it continued, ”is trying to get rid of the burden and the dangerous problems caused by clandestine migration at the security, economic and social level in exchange for a bit of material support that it is forced to offer to reduce the number of illegal migrants.”

Moscow ready for dialogue with International partners but won’t let them infringe its interests

BreakingNews @en/Defence/Politics di

During his annual address to Russian lawmakers, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Moscow is ready for dialogue with its international partners, but will not allow them to infringe on its interests or meddle in its decision-making. He noted, however, that Russia is ready to participate in solving global and regional crises when necessary. Putin also said that Russia’s policy towards its Asian partners, China and Japan, is not opportunistic or a response to the deterioration in US-relations, but based on Russia’s plans for long-term development. In his speech, the Russian President also urged the United States to join Russia to jointly fight international terrorism. It has been the 23rd such event in Russia’s modern history and the 13th speech delivered by Vladimir Putin.

Redazione
0 £0.00
Vai a Inizio
×