Foreign Policy Update – USA Gov Policy

ARCTIC

In response to a press conference question on US policy in the Arctic, Secretary of State Michael Pompeo stated that the “Arctic is a space where there should be freedom of navigation; there should be low tension; there should be security; there should be rule of law; there should be transparency about what’s taking place.”

In recent years the Russian military has become heavily involved in the Arctic region, which represents a potential threat to the United States, its allies, and maritime commerce. In addition to the world’s only nuclear heavy icebreakers, the Russians have developed 10 military air bases above the Arctic Circle. Pompeo added that Washington is working with other democracies to ensure that malevolent powers do not create new or expanded problems in the region which could impact the rest of the world.

In recognition of the Arctic challenges posed by Russia, and to some extend China, the United States is updating its US Coast Guard’s (USCG) aging icebreaker. China operates two heavy icebreakers. While the USCG has two heavy, non-nuclear icebreakers; only one is operational. Both are beyond their expected 30-year service limit. There is a critical need to secure US interests in the region and maritime commerce.

For the first time in 40 years the United States is building a new heavy ice breaker. Congress recently restored $650 million in funding for the ship-building program to begin replacing the Polar Star, the United States’ only working heavy icebreaker. Congress also allotted $20 million in funds to begin purchasing materials for a 2^nd icebreaker, with a goal of building a total of six, three of which are scheduled to be heavy ice breakers. In comparison, Russia operates the world’s only 2 nuclear heavy icebreakers along with 38 non-nuclear heavy icebreakers.

Moscow has 11 additional ships in production making it the dominant force in the region. When complete Russia will be operating 51 icebreakers in the mineral- and oil-rich Arctic environment. This raises additional concerns in the West if Arctic ice continues to melt and opens a year-round passage which military ships from China and eastern Russia could traverse to quickly reach the US East coast and Western Europe.

IRAN

The greatest security challenge in the Middle East is Iran, according to Secretary of State Pompeo. In a press conference in Iceland last week he spoke about how the US and its allies have vanquished ISIS and eliminated the caliphate in Syria. He added that this will allow Washington to withdraw troops but doesn’t end the mission. “We fight ISIS on multiple continents today, but our tactics will change, and they’ll continue to change, and we will adapt just as ISIS adapts. We get the threat from radical Islamic terrorism. President Trump understands this intently. We’re determined to fight them where we find them and to reduce the risk to not only the United States but to our allies,” he said.

Here, let us take a look at some of the disturbing aspects and facts related to these drugs. cheap professional viagra Most tadalafil tablets 20mg of the men are facing with this erection at any age. Whom to consult? If you are unable to cope best prices on viagra pdxcommercial.com with stressful life then you are bound to suffer from erectile dysfunction. buy viagra from india Every man is searching solutions either this way or that way.

SUDAN

On February 20, 2019, the governments of the United States, Norway and the United Kingdom issued a joint statement concerning the escalating conflict in South Sudan, which is in breach of the December 2017 Cessation of Hostilities Agreement and the September 2018 revitalized peace agreement.

The statement notes that recently thousands of South Sudanese have been displaced and fled across the border into the Democratic Republic of the Congo to escape the violence. It also calls on all parties involved, the Government of South Sudan, the SPLM-IO, and the National Salvation Front to end the violence and allow unrestricted access to Yei and the surrounding area for the UN Mission in South Sudan, the Ceasefire and Transitional Security Arrangements Monitoring and Verification Mechanism, and other humanitarian groups.

DARIA NOVAK served in the United States State Department during the Reagan Administration, and currently is on the Board of the American Analysis of News and Media Inc., which publishes usagovpolicy.com and the New York Analysis of Policy and Government. Each Saturday, she presents key updates on U.S. foreign policy from the State Department.

Illustration: Pixabay

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.