MIDDLE EAST: US PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ASSERTIONS ON GAZA AND IRAN (FEBRUARY 2025) PORTEND GREATER TURBULENCE AND VOLATILITY

US President Trump's latest assertions on future of Gaza and signing orders to put into force US plans to prevent Iran going in for nuclear weaponization will inherently push the Middle East to greater geopolitical instability and military turbulence.

Lying at the core of these two stirring plans is United States larger strategic aim to neutralize Iran's geopolitical sway in the Middle East and liquidation of threats to Israel's security. More significantly it is to emasculate sponsoring capabilities of Hamas and Hezbollah.

President Trump's Gaza Plan envisages United States taking over control of Gaza Strip on long term basis for reconstruction and incorporating the re-location of Palestinian Arabs to neighboring Arab countries like Jordan and Egypt. 

Obviously, this has raised a howl of strong protests from all major Arab Nations. Even close allies like United Kingdom though not openly opposing President Trump's Gaza Plan have stressed that no 'forcible relocation' should take place.

However, the Hamas is likely to oppose the Gaza Plan implementation both by use of military force and terrorism. as the central aim of Gaza Plan is to liquidate Hams completely from its hold over Gaza.

It remains to be seen whether leading Arab Nations will aid the Hamas to retain its hold over Gaza. It is Iran's countermoves of keeping Gaza under Hamas control that would require watching.

Either way, any implementation of Gaza Plan by Trump Administration is fraught with greater volatility and turbulence as it would involve virtual forced relocation of over one million Gaza Palestinians, acceptability of hosting by neighboring Aram countries under increased overhang of military opposition by Hamas.

Similarly, the Trump Plan to prevent nuclear weaponization of Iran is fraught with even more military risks and escalation as Iran can be expected to stoutly resist giving up its nuclear weapons option.

United States diplomacy and geopolitical/ economic pressures are unlikely to yield any results from Iran to give up its nuclear weapons option, especially learning from the Ukrainian experience.

President Trump may be left with no option but to order US & Israeli air strikes/cruise missiles attacks against Iran's nuclear weapons setup. The outcome could be horrendous for United States, Israel and Iran.

Any US/Israeli strikes plans against Iran's nuclear facilities needs to be accompanied in tandem with destruction of Iran's missiles/rockets launching sites as Iran in response can unleash hundreds of missiles, rockets and suicide drones against US military bases in Middle East and against Isreal with crippling effects.

More significantly, Iran can resort to blockade of Hormuz Straits both by physical means and military means. This will cripple the global oil supplies sending oil prices sky high.

The last factor that needs to be considered is Russia's responses to US military intervention against Iran against the backdrop of recently signed Mutual Security Treaty,

Russian responses underway to cater for such eventualities focuses on assisting Iran's buildup of its Air Defence networks with supplies of S400 missiles, surveillance and radar networks besides intelligence sharing. In brief, Russia short of sending troops to Iran can be expected to pull out all stops to enable Iran to make the costs of US/Israeli strikes prohibitive.

Concluding, what needs to be said is that should United States move ahead with President Trump's Gaza Plan and Iranian nuclear sites strike plans what is likely to unfold is greater bloodying of Middle East sands with a host of unintended consequences.

RUSSIA'S TWO DISCERNIBLE GEOPOLITICAL COUNTERWEIGHTS TO BALANCE CHINA

Russia's ardent ambition to continue as an 'Independent Center of Power" in global geopolitics was articulated more than a decade back by President Putin. Russia's intent to continue as such, independent of Russia's present strategic linkages with China, seems to have grown more intense.

Russia's strategic denouement with China being underway was analyzed in my article posted on January 15, 2025. Two geopolitical moves in recent past by Russia, draw attention to this trend. 

These concerns seem to have led Russia to draw Iran into its strategic fold and consummate a Mutual Security Treat with Iran in January 2025. 

Similarly, Russia made strategic moves to intensify its relationship with North Korea and reduce North Korean dependency on China.

 Notably, till Russia made the above moves, Iran and North Korea could be said to be beholden to China. China signed a 25 Year Comprehensive Strategic Partnership in 2021.

Contextually, with both Iran and North Korea, standing 'unhinged' from China's strategic embrace, and preferring Russia as a more 'reliable strategic partner' creates serious strategic implications for China.

Much of the import of this realignment of Iran and North Korea has evolved in the wake of Russia's Ukraine Invasion of 2022 and Russia's stalled offensives thereafter.

Iran and North Korea rose up to Russian expectations of provision of sizeable military aid to Russia in contrast to China's pattern of hesitant military aid to Russia.

Russia so gains substantially in terms of geopolitical capital in West Asia and Indo Pacific at the expense of China.

North Korea for decades was considered to be a satellite of China, and its actions then so demonstrated it. This imparted to China a 'halo' by US policymakers that to control North Korea, they had to negotiate and motivate China to twist North Korea's tail.

Not so any longer, as now US policymakers will have to bargain with Russia to do so, to tame North Korea.

Russia's Mutual Security Treaty with Iran is a real game changer not only in West Asian geopolitics but also at the global level. 

In terms of West Asia geopolitical dynamics, United States, West, and Israel, now will have to contend the strategic combination of Iran as West Asia's dominant regional power with Russia as an erstwhile Superpower, notwithstanding, Russia's strategic diminution post-Ukraine.

At the global level, China positioning itself as the sole contender of United States global predominance gets that much diluted. 

In stark geopolitical terms, Russia today has gained two significant 'Strategic Partners' if not outright allies, giving Russia a strategic spread in West Asia and Northeast Asia/Indo Pacific.

 In January 2025, the emerging strategic profile is that of China currently having no substantial 'Strategic Partners' with the exception of Pakistan, which itself is wavering with growing public anti-China sentiments.

Concluding, it needs to be stressed that while the Russia-China Axis may continue tenuously, but a lot depends on new US President Trump's policy approaches to China and China's reluctance to give up its 'Russia Card' in its policy approaches to United States.

IRAN'S TWO SECURITY TREATIES WITH CHINA (2021) AND RUSSIA (2025) --- A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

Iran's two Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Agreements with China (2021) and Russia (2025) both need to be read as 'Security Treaties' arising from strategic convergences to put in place existential counterweights by Iran against possible threats of United States military interventions.

Iran noticeably with acute adversarial relations with United States was a '"Strategic Magnet" to China and Russia to be drawn in for a security presence and influence in the world's largest Shia-majority State in a largely Arab Sunni monarchial kingdoms of Gulf, allied to the United States.

Iran before the initiation of these Security Treaties was militarily engaged with China and Russia for decades. 

From Iranian Islamic Revolution of 1979 to 2021, despite Iran being under severe military and economic pressures in a hostile neighborhood, Iran entered into a Security Treaty with China only in 2021 after hard bargaining. It had much to do with China prioritizing Saudi Arabia over Iran, including Chines supplies of CSS2 IRBMs.

The period 2021 to 2024 is strategically notable for Iran in relation to Russia.

In 2022 the Russian Invasion of Ukraine brought Iran closer to Russia wherein Iranian supplies of thousands of Drones assisted Russia in its faltering offensives in Ukraine. Iran also assisted Russia with ammunition supplies for its war in Ukraine.

In October 2023 and 2024, Iran was engulfed in a running war with Israel through its Proxy Militias---Hamas and Hezbollah, and for the first time direct Iranian Missiles/Rockets attacks on Israel.

United States Military Intervention in Iran had now become a distinct possibility, including destruction of Iran's nuclear weapons capabilities.

This hastened the Security Treaty with Russia, finally materializing in January 2025 and with incoming US President Trump's advent as catalyst.

Analytically, the question that comes to the fore is that did Iran feel inadequate with its Security Treaty (2021) with China, in terms of coping with a possible US Military Intervention against it?

Did Iran assess that Russia was a more reliable guarantor of Iranian security and assured source of advanced weapons and weapons technology than China?

Or were there other geopolitical factors weighing-in with Iran which prompted Iran to have an additional Security Treaty with Russia tto beef its security?

The answers will unfold sooner than later.

Judging by available reports in January 2025 what emerges is that Russia's Security Treaty with Iran notably caters for Mutual Security Assistance in case of aggression.

Further, the scale of intensity and levels of   Russia's military cooperation with Iran surpasses the notional Chinese military assistance to Iran since 2021.

 To sum it up, the Security Treaty with China was more of 'economic security' and less of military security for Iran. China's promise to invest $400 billion in Iran infrastructure, more specifically petrochemicals was an inducement for Iran. 

Geographical proximity of Russia with Iran as compared to a 'distant' China may have also weighed in with Iran to prefer Russia over China, in the bilateral context.

Concluding, Iran's 'Security Treaty' with Russia is an ominous development in the Middle East strategic calculus with serious implications and challenges for United States, West and Isreal. 

Possibility of proactive Russian military involvement to assist Iran against any US military intervention will now be a factor for consideration. 

RUSSIA-CHINA AXIS 2025: STRATEGIC DENOUEMENT UNDERWAY?

The Russia-China Axis of the two Communist Giants did not emerge from any strong Communist ideological bonds but from a single point strategic convergence of checkmating United States global predominance with this strategic convergence intensity varying from China's side depending on state of US-China relations.

Strategic denouement between Russia and China seems to be underway, chiefly, in the wake of Russia's lack of military success in its war on Ukraine and China not rising up to the occasion to reinforce Russia's war efforts.

China seems to have perceptively failed in supporting Russia in the much publicized "No Limits" strategic partnership as other than geopolitical support, China seems to have not provided Russia with any substantial lethal military aid that could have turned the tide in Russia's complete military success. 

China could have aided Russia with tanks, artillery equipment and drones from China's massive inventories.

Russia had to turn to North Koea and Iran for lethal war supplies to add punch to its offensive strikes in   Ukraine.hina

Norh Korea's military aid to Russian War in Ukraine was both in terms of fire-power ammunition supplies and more notably sending a much-needed contingent of 10,000 North Korean troops to aid Russian war effort. Russia is woefully short of military manpower.

China expectedly as a 'No Limits' strategic partner of Russia should have aided Russia with its military manpower. China did not do so. North Korea did so.

Iran has provided Russia with hundreds of hard-hitting military drones which have provided Russia with coercive devastation power. Why was China reluctant to do so?

China sustained Russia's Ukraine War by buying Russian oil supplies at dirt cheap rates but that too is waning as reports indicate that a dozen Russian 'Shadow Oil Tankers' anchored off the Chinese Coast are not being allowed to off-load oil supplies at Chines ports.

China has 'shied-off 'fearful of additional US sanctions which prohibit countries buying oil from Russia to drawback Russian Invasion of Ukraine.

China has been fearful in terms of global reactions to any unreserved Chinese military support to Russia. Indicators at the beginning of 2025 point towards China's 'rethink' on its 'No Limits' military aid to Russia.

The other major reason for China's reluctance for limitless military aid to Russia can be analyzed as China's decision not to deplete its military inventories by preserving them for a possible 'War with Unite States' over Taiwan.

In Conclusion, it can be analytically asserted that besides many other pinpricks in Russia-China strategic relations, China's lack of lethal military aid to Russia in its Ukraine War may mark the 'tipping point' for a strategic denouement in the Russia-China Axis with profound impact on global geopolitics.

 partnership

PHILIPPINES SQUARELY IN UNITED STATES STRATEGIC FOLD 2025: OUTGOING US PRESIDENT BIDEN'S SIGNIFICANT FOREIGN POLIC ACHIEVEMENT

United States most significant foreign policy achievement under outgoing US President Biden was to induce the Philippines to squarely re-pivot to the American strategic fold after years of cavorting with Communist Chinese rulers in Beijing under previous Filipino President Duterte.

The Philippines hosted two major US military bases in the Philippines earlier --Subic Bay Naval Base and Clarkes Air Force Base. United States was asked to remove its Military Bases in 1991 when the Philippines Senate voted against US military bases.

Thereafter, limited US-Philippines security ties were kept in existence under the 'Visiting Forces Agreements' in various forms.                

This resulted in a serious military void in the US-crafted security architecture in Western Pacific as these two US Bases were critical 'springboard points' for United States to deter Communist China from invasion of Taiwan and also Forward Military Bases for any US military intervention against Mainland China.

Philippines losses were heavy in terms of domestic economy which thrived on a large US Forces presence in the country.

Geopolitically, the Philippines did not gain anything by its period of flirtation with Communist China, a fact which previous President Duterte realized belatedly at the end of his term.

In 2025, the US Military Bases picture has changed with United States under President Ferdinand Marcos Jr having granted permission to United States not only to return in force to erstwhile five US Military Bases but to establish two additional US Military Bases in the North.

In tandem, joint US-Philippines Military Exercises have intensified to endure more military inter-operability between the two countries.

Notably, Japan, India and Australia as QUAD Security Initiative members are supplementing the US-led military capacity building of the Philippines to withstand Communist China's political and military coercion over China's festering dispute over the Scarborough Shoals in the South China Sea.

India significantly, has sold Three Batteries of BRAHMOS Cruise Missiles which add greatly to Philippines deterrent power against Communist China aggression. Discussions are reported to be underway for additional BRAHMOS Cruise Missiles and other Indian military equipment. Security ties are intensifying.

Japan is intimately involved in enhancing the security profile of the Philippines both in cooperation with the United States and also on its own. Japan- Philippines "Reciprocal Access Agreement" permits both nations to use each other's military bases thereby integrating security mechanisms of bath nations.

Japan too is providing military equipment to the Philippines in addition to various training programs. 

 Philippines also has an "Enhanced Defence Cooperation Program" with Australia which focuses on maritime security and counterterrorism.

While Japan and Australia have long-standing security ties with the Philippines under the aegis of the US security template to counter China, the entry of India as a 'security provider' to Philippines is a recent envelopment and intensifying.

India stands out in terms of providing 300 km range BRAHMOS Cruise Missiles to the Philippines in a glaring & military geopolitical signaling to China.

Highlighting needs to be done that in 2025 what strikes analytically is that besides the bilateral security arrangements with the Philippines, all Four Nations of QUAD are engaged in enhancing the military capacity-building of the Philippines against Chinese aggression.

Concluding, it needs to be emphasized that the strategic location of the Philippines astride the vital sea-lanes of communication traversing the South China Sea over which China claims 'dubious sovereignty' are critical for Indo Pacific security. 

Philippines security can be guaranteed not by Communist China intent on military adventurism in the region, but, by United States and the QUAD Nations--a fact now registered by the Philippines.