Category: Uncategorized

In 1972, President Richard Nixon opened relations with China as a strategic counterweight to the Soviet Union. Several, self-proclaimed Marxist-Leninist governments were formed in the second half of the 1970, including Afghanistan. In 1979, there was a collapse between Russia-U.S. political relations, with the beginning of the Soviet-Afghan War.

         In 1982, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) elected Hu Yaobang, as a president of the party and the country. In 1982, President Reagan and the Secretary of State George Shultz, opened sincere détente, despite some uncomfortable conversations and bruised egos, the United States of America, Taiwan, and People’s Republic of China (PRC) fulfilled all their core interests. Beijing was uncomfortable with Washingtons flexible communique, but the PRC achieved another decade of U.S.A assistance as it built its economy and military power and its ability to play an independent role in world affairs.

         Washington had the ability to pursue sides like Taiwan to cooperate with China on common Anti-Soviet imperatives, such as intelligence sharing and support of the Afghan insurgency. Taiwan had a chance to negotiate with China. The most anti-Communist and pro-Taiwan President since Nixon had been able to preside a normal relationship with the People’s Republic of China without any crisis.

         President Xi of PRC had forgotten the work of his predecessors and had moved into territories which made the global world to feel uncertain. Mr. Xi has repeatedly called for alignment of the reforms, in the global governance system. The President of China doesn’t collaborate and take actions in matters of Ukraine. Like his predecessor, Mr. Hu did in the Cold War. Mr. Xi wants norms in international institutions to reflect Chinese preferences such elevating the right to development over civil rights and put state controls over the flow of information.

         The CCP needs to find their core values, beliefs, and nobility that they showed with diplomats like Deng Xiaoping so they can move into a more flexible international world. Mr. Xi, during the years, had showed that he can achieve much more than of what he works right now. The United States of America is open for collaborations and dialogues and is ready to help leaders like Mr. Xi. Let’s hope that he has time to take the advantage.

 As the newsmill pumps out headline after headline about BRICS, and the threat of a new world currency, we see the same question being posed: Is this the start of a new world order? With BRICS being a Chinese-dominated institution, we must look at the relationship between the US and China, and how China’s rise is affecting the world order and the U.S’ role in it. 

All of this week’s readings were published before 2023, with the earliest being 2017 and the most recent in 2022. This rise in power isn’t a new development, and was to be expected. Especially with the previous presidential administration’s policy of unilateralism, we have allowed other countries to become more involved in the global state, like China. China has begun using their own money to fund the BRI, or Belt and Road Initiative. This initiative funds all infrastructural development, and provides labor and materials for those projects. (Economy 2022) This has allowed for China to begin to spread its influence in Latin America, Africa, and Asia. Regions where the US used to primarily be involved, have now been taken over by the Chinese and their influence. “The BRI has positioned China at the center of the international system, with its physical, financial, cultural, technological, and political influence flowing to the rest of the world.” (Economy 2022) China’s role in the global stage is undeniable, but it isn’t going without opposition.  

The readings also mentioned the Quad partnership which is an alliance between the United States, India, Japan, and Australia, who were formed to counter China’s role in the Indo-Pacific. While this partnership has not been successful with member states waning in their interests and goals, this brings up the steps countries are taking to protect itself from China. We are seeing a stance taken by the US to ally itself with others against the growing power in China. We see this also with the Bidens’ administration stance on a free Taiwan. Multiple European countries and NATO began increasing their security involvement in the Asia-Pacific region.  (Economy 2022) The US and its allies have been taking steps to protect itself from China, which shows that while China may be growing on the global stage, there are still many who oppose this. There is is still some of the “old” world order that is remaining and ready to stop China’s ever growing influence. 

Do I personally think there will be a new world order? According to the most recent news, BRICS declaration of a shared currency is one of impracticality. 90% of global trade and foreign exchange markets currently use the US dollar. (Naysmith 2023) This would take a massive amount of work to undo, and with China being the dominant force in BRICS it would presumably want to be the main currency. This obviously wouldn’t go down too well with the other nations. I do believe the US has lost most of its power as a global leader, and China has definitely begun to grow in power especially in their presence in Africa and South Asia. However, I don’t think it will be as easy as China being the new hegemon without any fight from other countries. There is already  huge military intimidation being used by China in Asia and specifically in the South China Sea. If the US intervened and rebuilt relations with these countries, I think it would be welcomed.

Of the many readings for this week, the one I found more interesting was Feng Zhang’s “Chinese Thinking on the South China Sea and the Future of Regional Security”, which analyzes the competing views within Chinese government and society when formulating security policies for the South China Sea.

When interpreting the actions of foreign states, especially those whose political systems are not Western style democracies, both academics and policy makers of any given country have a tendency to view the other side as a monolith. Their actions are more often than not interpreted through a single lens, as if all of them were part of a single cohesive strategy. That bias leads in many instances, in my opinion, to gross misinterpretations.

Understanding the inner workings of a foreign country, how its foreign/security policy is actually formulated and implemented, the competing visions that exist behind it, should always be a priority of any country’s decision makers. This type of analysis helps avoiding unnecessary conflicts and provides inputs for different courses of action.

Kim Jong Un’s trip to Russia:

Kim Jong Un’s trip to Russia is significant because it’s happening at a time when Russia is at war with Ukraine. This meeting between the two countries is noteworthy as both countries have experienced isolation on the world stage. While the main purpose of the meeting remains uncertain, there is speculation about the potential for an arms deal. The United States has expressed concerns about such an agreement, fearing it could grant North Korea access to advanced Russian military technology, potentially increasing regional and global tensions.

On the other side, Moscow has a pressing demand for ammunition and small arms, which North Korea produces in mass. Exporting small arms and artillery munitions to Russia at this point could prolong the war. South Korea is also concerned about the possibility of an arms deal between North Korea and Russia. Such an agreement could lead to North Korea acquiring advanced military technology, including missile systems, which could pose a threat to South Korea’s security.

Although the cold war ended, there is a long lasting tension between former global powers, US and Russia (formerly known as the Soviet Union). Historically, Russia has had its many attempts of using its military power to regain its previously colonized territory. However, no matter how successful Russia was able to expand, its incapability to have a stable military power, had cost them to maintain their colonized territories. The more I dig deep in this weeks readings, the more I think about until how long will Russia will continue to try to dominate the Eurasia.

Freedman raised a great perspective as to why Russia seems to fail in its expansion. The answer is its weak military command. Putin, similar to previous Russian leaders, have an unstable chain of command. As Ukraine sought help from the global community and became part of NATO, placed sanctions, etc it has taken Russia by surprise on how to maintain control during the invasion. Even if it were possible for Russia to annex  eastern Ukraine, the financial consequences it would faces would be too great to bare.

Another question to keep in mind when analyzing this week assigned readings is to think who is really to blame for Ukraine invasion? Is it US and its Allies or Russia? Even though it might be easier to place the blame on Russia and its delusions to restore the Soviet Union. It seems the invasion is a direct result of NATO expansion and threating Russia’s political agenda.