China Remains Main Danger – USA Gov Policy

Although dramatic and intense events are unfolding by the hour in the Russian war in Ukraine, the US cannot afford to take its eyes off of the other bad boy in the international community. China continues to push up the global threat level from its intensifying military collaboration with Iran to its aggressive efforts in the Solomon Islands in the southwestern Pacific Ocean.

Earlier this week Chinese Defense Minister Wei Fenghe visited the Iranian capital for discussions with Iranian Armed Forces Chief of Staff Maj. Gen. Mohammad Bagheri concerning expanding the ties between the two countries’ militaries. “In today’s meeting with the Chinese Minister of Defense, it was agreed to develop bilateral cooperation in the field of holding exercises, exchange of experiences, training issues and other common fields between the armed forces of the two countries so that we can provide better security for the regions under our control,” Bagheri said. China joined Iran and Russia in joint naval exercises in 2019 and again earlier this year just prior to the start of the war in Ukraine. But China is not only actively pursuing its military relationships in the Middle East/Persia, it also is continuing to push the boundaries of its influence in the Indo-Pacific region.

Last week China signed a formal security cooperation agreement with the Solomon Islands. If China gets a toehold there, it could lead to military ship visits, a naval base, and further militarization of the Indo-Pacific region. A version of the document leaked last month indicates that China intends “help maintain order,” according to John Ruwitch of NPR. This could include sending in Chinese soldiers, conducting military training, and naval ship visits. The Solomon Islands are slightly over 2,000 miles from Australia. The leaked draft of the bilateral cooperation document raises serious concerns for Australian officials who believe a Chinese military base would allow Beijing to project power further into the Pacific and pose a potential threat to Australian national security interests.

China is a strategic, patient, long-term planner that has been active behind-the-scenes for several years in the Solomon Islands. Beijing first provided the country economic assistance. It then turned that aid into a diplomatic cache followed by the signing of the security agreement in April. China has repeated this pattern in many countries where it seeks to constrain the United States’ influence or to improve Beijing’s image or military position. The geopolitical location of the Islands places it squarely between the US and its allies in the area and near key commercial shipping lanes. Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare, who is up for re-election, is a strong supporter improving relations with China. The Biden Administration in Washington reacted to the situation this week when Daniel Kritenbrink, US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, said on Monday: “We have respect for the Solomon Islands’ sovereignty, but we also wanted to let them know that if steps were taken [by China] to establish a de facto permanent military presence, power projection capabilities or a military installation, then we would have significant concerns and we would very naturally respond to those concerns.” Typical of the Biden Administration’s foreign policy, the announcement to reporters contained no details on how Washington would change the direction of the Solomon’s away from the Chinese security orbit. Kurt Campbell, the National Security Council’s Indo-Pacific coordinator, and Kritenbrink traveled to the Honiara last week in reaction to the announced agreement and to attempt to reverse the impression that the United States is in retreat across the Indo-Pacific at a time when security concerns in the area are swelling due to Chinese belligerence. Michael Ausin of the Hoover Institution points out in Politico that is going to be difficult for the US to make up for years of neglect. The Clinton Administration closed the US Embassy in in the Solomon Islands in 1993. Auslin suggests giving Sogavare whatever he wants to block China’s advances. To date, Sogavare has refused to release details of the security cooperation document to officials in Washington. China is a strategic player and likely timed the signing when it knew Washington was busy responding to the kinetic conflict in Europe. If the Solomon’s Prime Minister is playing “the China card” with the Biden Administration, it is a dangerous game with long-term consequences for the region.

Photo: Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi (R) meets with visiting Chinese State Councilor and Defense Minister General Wei Fenghe in Tehran, capital of Iran, on April 27, 2022. (mod.gov.cn/Photo by Li Xiaowei)

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Department, specializing in China

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.