Thursday, March 27, 2025

UNITED STATES CONFUSING ITS ALLIES AND STRATEGIC PARTNERS WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP 2:0 POLICY STANCES 2025

Global geopolitics have been thrown into uncertainties and uncharted waters by US President Trump 2:0 policy stances and reckless assertions by top US personages leaving United States longstanding Allies and its 'Strategic Partners' confused.

In the pervading geopolitical milieu wherein United States predominance is under a severe pushback by the Russia-China Axis, can the United States be oblivious to the strategic sensitivities of its Allies and Strategic Partner

NATO and Trans-Atlantic unity and solidarity have been seriously dented by US Vice President Vance and Defence Secretary reckless assertions at recent Munich Security Conference and thereafter.

The incendiary faceoff by Ukrainian President Zelensky at the White House with President Trump and Vice President Vance and United States tilt towards Russian demands on Ukraine peace was not only bad optics but generated perceptions that United States is no longer committed to European Security and has abandoned Ukraine which for all practical purposes was fighting a Proxy War for the United States. 

Moving to Asia Pacific where ever since 1945 Japan has been a steadfast US Ally, US President Trump heaped 'Trade Tariffs ' on Japan. The United States forgets that Japan pays handsomely for US Military Forces stationed in Japan.

India which has evolved into a 'Robust Strategic Partner' in the US-India Global Comprehensive Strategic Partnership was publicly threatened with imposition of US Trade Tariffs.

Trade Wars and Trade Tariffs may be a good weapon for use against hostile States like Russia and China, but not against Allies and Strategic Partners.

Such American dismissiveness of US Allies and Strategic Partners has never been witnessed before. Differences in opinion have occurred in the past but were ironed out by 'discreet negotiations' away from public gaze so as not to threaten Allies/Strategic Partners solidarity.

Does the United States really believe that it can retain its global predominance solely on its own economic, military and diplomatic strengths?

Not so really!! 

The mainstays of US global predominance ever since the disintegration of Former USSR and China Threat emerging as the 'Prime Threat to US security' rested on United States military postures in Europe and Asia Pacific and on the cumulative strengths of its European and Asia Pacific Allies,

The United States 'singularly' is not geared today geopolitically in 2025 to dispense with its dependence on United States European Alles and its Asia Pacific Allies. 

Similarly, the United States can ill-afford to antagonize India by threats of Trade Tariffs and sanctions which may be relevant in terms oof Russia and China.

Reflected in my Book: "China India Military Confrontation: 21st Century Perspectives" (2015) was the assertion that in the evolving geopolitical scenarios' United Staes embedment in Asia would be squarely dependent on India adding 'Strategic Ballast' to United States' security architecture against the China Threat.

India has many other geopolitical options other than the United Sates. The United States has India 'ONLY' as the Credible Option against China Threat in the years to come. 

Concluding, one needs to highlight how Asian perceptions of the United States have drastically changed in 2025. Singapore has been a longstanding reliable Ally of the United States and the statement made by Singapore Defense Minister Ng Eng Hen at the Munich Security Conference 2025, as reported by South China Morning Post of February 17 2025  reflects sadly and regrettably Asia's changed perceptions of the United States in 2025.

The Singapore Defense Minister asserted that" The image (of United States) has changed from Liberator to Great Disruptor, to a Landlord Seeking Rent." 

The above assertion from one of United States most notable Asian Ally came in a prepared statement posted also on the Government website, as per South China Morning Post dispatch.

Notably this perceptive assertion came soon after United States Trump 2:0 Administration top officials had made it clear at Munich that United States was no longer committed to European Security and abandoning Ukraine.

The big question that perceptively must be plaguing Asian capitals, and especially US Allies and Strategic Partners in Indo Pacific, would be 'If the United States could renege from its security commitments to NATO/European Security, could a similar fate await US Allies and Strategic Partners in Indo Pacific Security in context of the China Threat?' 

Hopefully not. But then it is incumbent upon US President Trump and Trump 2:0Administration seniormost security advisors to clear the geopolitical fog generated by them.

Superpowers are guarantors of global security and stability and not "Rent Collectors" for security services provided in furtherance of their own national interests.





 Munich Conference

Tuesday, March 18, 2025

UNITED STATES -RUSSIA-CHINA POWERPLAY 2025 WITH ADVENT OF US PRESIDENT TRUMP 2:0 & IMPLICATIONS FOR INDIA

   Global geopolitics and dynamics of United States-Russia-China powerplay in 2025 underwent a seismic shift with the advent of US President Trump 2:0 in Washington and under his stewardship an apparent and unprecedented American tilt towards Russia.

United States is the only country powerful enough to shape the external and internal environments of both China and Russia. To that extent, President Trump 2:0 will have its main focus on China and Russia, and the Russia-China Axis, and their threat neutralization to safeguard US national interests. 

In pursuit of the above, President Trump seems ready to accept any collateral damage to US Allies and strategic partners, 

Global reactions labelling President Trump as unpredictable, impulsive and transactional betray the lack of deeper analysis of the underpinnings of his calculated geopolitical strategies towards United States main rivals---Russia and China.

Contrary to prevailing analysts' opinion, my take is that the unpredictability, impulsiveness and apparent transactional projections of President Trump are tools of putting his opponents on the backfoot. It should not be forgotten that US Presidents in run-up to their elections devise their strategic blueprints with their top advisers.

Then what is President Trump's strategic blueprint? What is its central focus? What geopolitical trajectories are likely to be adopted? 

President Trump's blueprint has at its core the end-aim of 'Make America Great Again' (MAGA". 

The central focus of MAGA is to Re-establish United States unrivalled global geopolitical and economic predominance which for some years has been whittled by China and in recent years, more pointedly after the Russian Invasion of Ukraine, the Russia-China Axis.

In 2025, China predominantly, and Russia to a lesser degree, hover menacingly in United States 'Threat Perceptions. 

The strategic trajectory that President Trump is primarily adopting is to (1) Eliminate/ diminish the China Threat to United States security interests and influence, and (2) To disrupt and diminish the Russia-China Axis.

Going by President Trump's actions and pronouncements in the last few weeks, it emerges that President Trump's first priority is to disrupt and diminish the Russia-China Axis.

On China, President Trump has yet to reveal the cards he is likely to play. Though President Trump made some conciliatory calls/statements on China, but that do not seem to be at the expense of the main aim of strategically eliminating/diminishing the China Threat to US security and its interests.

President Trump is not likely to impart overall priority to 'military containment' of China but to focus on degrading further China's sluggish economy with impact on China's defence spending thereby reducing its military adventurism and   war-waging capabilities.

This US strategy of 'Warfare by Economic Means' was first enunciated by a former US Ambassador to India, Robert Blackwill in a paper for a US thinktank, if I remember correctly, US Council on Foreign Relations.

Once President Trump completes his reset of Russia-policy and secures ceasefire/peace in Ukraine, giving meanwhile China time to arrive at a possible deal with United States on American terms, one can expect the American President to play his cards on China.

If China is reluctant to settle for a "Deal' on President Trump's terms, then one can expect United States 'War by Economic Means' to be put in full throttle with central focus on--- Trade Wars, Economic Sanctions, Disruption of China's Supply Chains, Technology Denials, and Flight of US Capital/ FDI from China.

In the above strategy, the 'grey area 'is as to what extent Russia will stand by China as it enters on a phase of acute confrontation with United States?

 China can be expected to escalate tensions on Taiwan/ South Chinna Sea to relieve US economic siege.

Surely, US President Trump and his policy advisers would have worked out the contingencies.

Lastly what are the implications for India in the ensuing US-Russia-China powerplay?

 India is well placed as it has had a long strategic partnership with Russia and a much more robust strategic partnership currently with the United Staes. 

United States and Russia arriving at a good relationship is beneficial for India's national interests.

United States and China relations can be forecasted to persist as adversarial/ confrontationist.  In my writings right from 2001, I have maintained that a United States-China armed conflict was inevitable. The question was not IF but WHEN? Maybe that moment is arriving soon.

In the above dismal scenario of a US-China Armed Conflict, however limited, India's foreign policy will be seriously challenged. If India shirks from taking sides with United States, then India can forget its aspirations to emerge as a Major Global Player in world geopolitics.

Concluding, my assessment is that US President Trump will attempt to inflict on China what a Former US President Ronald Reagan inflicted on the Former USSR, that is, economic disintegration as a prelude to political disintegration.





 

Wednesday, March 12, 2025

CHINA'S COOMMUNIST REGIME AND ITS IDEOLOGICAL UNDERPINNINGS PERCEPTIONALLY UNDER ASSAULT 2025

 In a rare departure from Chinese President Xi Jinping's normal exhortations on China's national security priorities, President Xi Jinping's latest exhortation perecptionally betrays apprehensions that China's Communist regime, Communist political system and Communist ideology are in 2025 under assault.

The South China Morning Post media report of last week quoted Chinese President Xi Jinping's exhortations on China's national security priorities stated: "We should safeguard the safety of the (Xi Jinping) regime, the political system, as well as ideology".

Analytically, when each of the above three components are analyzed, my earlier assessments on China's strategic vulnerabilities stand reinforced.

In 2025, Communist China after 12 years of iron-handed and highly centralized rule, President Xi Jinping betrays apprehensions that Xi Jinping's regime is not all that secure and that an exhortation was necessitated to call for "safeguarding the safety of the (Xi Jinping) regime".

President Xi Jinping apprehensions betray fears of China being externally and internally besieged, something that my writings of last five years have reflected.

Things have come to head in 2025 for President Xi Jinping where under his regime, the fundamentals of Chinese economy which propelled China's stupendous economic and military rise have lost their traction

The second national security priority exhortation made by President Xi Jinping was on safeguarding the political system. In the 75th year of establishment of Chinese Communist political system in China, President Xi Jinping may be recalling that the other Communist gigantic empire, the Former Soviet Union, disintegrated in its 75th year.

Perceptionaly, Communist political systems are no longer geopolitically in vogue in 2025. This is my considered assessment.

Surprisingly, Chinese President Xi Jining in 2025 prioritizes safeguarding of "ideology" as the third and last priority.

Analytically, the above conveys the perception that the Chinese President Xi Jinping concedes that Communist ideology in China has frayed under impact of external and internal factors.

China's teeming millions for decades under high economic affluence were permissive in accepting Communist ideological repression. Communist ideology as a palliative ceases to operate when China is entering a 'Deflation Phase' and high rates of unemployment.

Responding to the ongoing downturn, Chinese President Xi Jinping has geopolitically reined-in his 'wolf warrior diplomats', initiated political reach outs to Japan and India, and to recall and sit down for discussion with Chinse billionaires' tycoons like Jack Mia. who were earlier hounded and disgraced by President Xi Jinping

The major question that arises from the foregoing analysis is whether President Xi Jinping can bring about a "turnround" to ensure that Xi Regime can survive when both his regime and its Communist political ideological underpinnings are under assault in 2025.

Can China's Peoples Liberation Army, the mainstay of Chinese Communist Party regimes be counted upon by President Xi Jinping to protect and safeguard his regime and its ideological underpinnings? This is a strong debatable point. Depends on ideological commitment and purity of rank and file of PLA and not on loyalty of Chinese President's handpicked PLA generals.

Overall, the answers lie in the geopolitical choices that Chines President Xi Jinping makes in the complex power equations in the US-Russia-China Triangle, and on which is also dependent China's economic resilience.

Summing-it up, Chinese President Xi Jinping's implicit apprehensions of regime-change, says it all and encapsulates the strategic vulnerabilities of Communist China in 2025.








Friday, February 28, 2025

CHINA'S FOREIGN POLICY UNDERPINNINGS 2025 AMIDST GLOBALGEOPOLITICAL UNCERTAINTIES

China's foreign policy underpinnings in 2025 as China faces increasingly global geopolitical uncertainties cannot but be a reflection of Chinese President Xi Jinping's struggle to inject resilience in China's foreign policy when China stands both externally and internally besieged.

Contextually, China faces major imponderables in 2025 as it braces to navigate through the choppy waters of global uncertainties. 

These can be briefly spelt out as: (1) US-Russia relations in wake of US President Trump bailing out President Putin on Ukraine (2) President Trump consequently can be expected to press home the advantage by driving a wedge in the Russia-China Axis (3) China's geopolitical irrelevance in Middle East and Europe generated in 2024, can it be retrieved? (4) President Trump launching a new round of Trade Wars on China coupled with pivoting US Military Forces in Europe to Asia Pacific.

The first three factors have the potential to reduce China's global geopolitical weightage and the leverages it has enjoyed so far on the global stage courtesy both Russia and United States.

China seems confident presently that US President Trump will not be able to dilute or cause a serious breach in the Russia-China Axis. May be so, but as posted by me earlier on this site, a somewhat strategic denouement was creeping in.

The fourth factor stated above will damage China's unsuccessful attempts of China's economic recovery and compound China's growing social unrest as a result of high unemployment rates and loss of foreign investors' confidence in China's economic resurgence.

President Trump despite a conciliatory call to Chinese President soon on assuming office can be expected to adopt even more 'Hard Line' strategies towards China, than even his earlier term. .

In the imponderables outlined above, China's national security, and continuance of Chinese Communist Party's supremacy, is the bedrock of China's foreign policy, get impacted.  How China configures its foreign policy to meet these eventualities has yet to unfold.

China would not be overly worried about diversion of greater US Military Forces to Asia Pacific but would be certainly concerned over US efforts to dilute the Russia-China Axis.

Economic security which forms the second pillar of China's foreign policy has already acquired threatening contours for China.

China today is plagued with a stagnant economy said to be entering a 'deflationary phase', growing unemployment and with consequent domestic social unrest. China's exports are slowing with increased loss of investor confidence and flight of capital reducing China's economic resilience.

What are the options open for China's foreign policy in 2025? It can push-back United States military and economic pressures or accept a "US Deal" on President Trump's terms?

China's push-back against US military and economic pressures would require Russia's unstinted support. This now emerges as an imponderable and would depend on Russian President Putin's pay-back contours, to President Trump for bailing him out of the Ukraine morass.

In the triangular United States-Russia-China power-play what has been a constant is a severe 'Strategic Distrust' in US-China relations whereas as I have posted earlier that some strategic denouement has crept in Russia-China relations.

Nearer home in Asia, China also suffers from a severe 'Strategic Distrust' with Japan and India. Both Japan and India are Asia's major contending powers against China and strategic partners of United States and therefore cannot throw any lifelines to China.

China is however unlikely to submit to US dictates without a bitter fight. To breakout from its external and internal siege, China can be expected to generate serious security challenges for United States and its Allies hoping that US President Trump "resiles" from his apparent 'China Containment' strategy and also force Russia to take sides.

 And herein lies China's foremost foreign policy challenge in 2025 and how it navigates through these geopolitical uncertainties? 

Contextually, current geopolitical configurations do not offer any possibilities of any Major Global Players siding with China, externally and internally besieged.  




  


Thursday, February 20, 2025

EUROPE PERCEIVES 'MUNICH 2:0 MOMENT' INFLICTION BY US PRESIDENT TRUMP CONCEDING TO RUSSIAN DEMANDS ON UKRAINE

"Munich 1:0Moment" has been a historically infamous juncture in world history noted for then British PM Neville Chamberlain in a desperate bid for "Peace at any Cost", abjectly surrendered control of   German-speaking Sudetenland Region of Czechoslovakia to Germany as demanded by Hitler in September 1938. 

British appeasement of Nazi Germany could not ensure peace. It only emboldened Hitler to launch in September 1939 the large-scale invasion of Europe leading to World War II, 1939-45.

"Munich 2:0 Moment" in February 2025, is being perceived in European capitals as similar appeasement of Russian Communist dictator Vladimir Putin by American President Donald Trump policies on Ukraine by reversing gears of US policies on Ukraine of past Biden Administration and US commitment to European security and NATO. 

Ironically, in February 2025, it was at Munich Security Conference that the sum total of United States policy pronouncements of the new US Trump Administration fell heavily on Ukraine and future of European Security.

In brief, President Trump, Vice President Vance, US Defense Secretary Hegseth and Secretary of State Rubio, in their pronouncements leading to Munich Security Conference and at Munich widely quoted in global media, amply indicated that the United States was going in for direct talks with Russia to end the Ukraine War.

Implied in US pronouncements was also that Ukraine should be ready to cede control of 20% of Ukrainian territory captured by Russia. 

In tandem, to discourage European countries to rally around Ukraine to resist a United States 'Imposed Peace Deal' appeasing Russia, the European leaders were put on notice that the Trump Administration intended to cut its military presence in Europe and that NATO N increase defence spending to 5% of GDP for their security.

Worse, was damaging US statements that Ukraine had started the War with Russia, and that Russia was not a threat to Europe.

The strategic reality was the reverse of US pronouncements at highest levels. Russia had launched a devastating 'war of aggression 'against Ukraine.

Further, the United States was a party to the enunciation of the 'NATO Vision Document 2030' in which Russia was designated as the prime threat to European Security. 

 Russia was emboldened to invade Ukraine in 2022 as in 2014, the world looked upon helplessly as Russia militarily annexed Crimea from Ukraine.

Extremely galling for European capitals was US President Trump's strategy to cast aside Europe and Ukraine from any Peace Talks on Ukraine that United States would hold with Russian President Putin.

Contextually emerging from the above developments are disturbing geopolitical and strategic implications unleashed by US President Trump.

Topping the list is the future of Transatlantic unity, European Security and NATO Solidarity. Ever since end of World War II in mid 1945 these three elements were the cornerstone of United States and European security policies.

The next disturbing implication that comes to the fore is that are United States security policy formulations going to be based on the 'Dyad Precept' of managing global security. The 'Dyad Precept' was first aired by US President Obama who asserted that a Dyad of United States and China could manage global security.  It was foredoomed geopolitically and met its demise soon.

In a similar vein, President Trump soon on assuming office, shared views with Chinese President Xi Jinping that both United States and China could ensure global peace and security.

In February 2025, what is becoming visible is another version of the Dyad Precept in which United States is set to deal directly with Russia and imposing a harsh peace deal on Ukraine on terms demanded by Russia.

 Critically at stake for Ukraine and NATO Nations which had so far loyally supported US Biden Administration policies of militarily aiding Ukraine against the Russian Invasion, was not only the future of the Ukraine State but also the future of NATO and its credibility.   

Concluding, it needs to be observed that it takes decades to build security alliances, and it does not take much effort to wreck them with reckless statements/ assertions as has been visible by US President Trump's pronouncements leading to Munich Security Conference and his Vice President Vance's pronouncements at Munich in February 2025 at Munich.

European leaders are not wrong in perceiving the current trend of United States policies on Ukraine and European Security as Europe's "Munich 2:0 Moment" where United States in a bid to appease Russia has indulged in a "sell-out" of Ukraine and European Security.  

In geopolitics, perceptions count, and United States is being perceived widely as sacrificing Ukraine and Europe to appease Russia in pursuit of an elusive peace, more determined by US domestic politics rather than long-term US security interests.

Can the United States gain geopolitically with this trend? Unlikely, as inherent in United States rewarding Russia as the "Aggressor" with 20% of captured Ukrainian territory, are the seeds of future conflict.