Can 2014 belong to Russia?

2013 in global security matters truly belonged to Russia. While President Vladimir Putin almost lost face over the Syrian Civil War, he managed to thwart American plans for airstrikes by helping to broker a disarmament deal at the last second. This was such an unforeseen and overall better choice for global security that rumours were circulating that the controversial Russian strongman might be chosen to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. Instead the award went to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). The indirect diplomatic signal this sends to Russia is one of encouragement, to incite the nation to go beyond UN vetoes and global grandstanding and propose concrete alternatives, as was the case with Syria.

Many perceived Putin to play a Machiavellian, or Metternich-like role for his own good, but he did indeed contribute to help global security while boosting his standing with the world community and refurbishing Russia’s image as a big power that can be counted on and which can shake up deadlocked situations.

Will lightning strike the same place twice in 2014? The answer is yes, if Vladimir Putin wills it. While the “gay propaganda” law, the tug-o-war with Europe over Ukraine and the recurring problems with terrorism certainly cast a shadow over Russia as it readies to host the Sochi Olympics, Russia will likely want to go beyond a two-week sports celebration to reassert itself with the world community after getting a taste of victory in 2013. And that is not a bad thing for most of us.

For the first time in years we are seeing positive developments on the Iranian front in the light of the Geneva interim agreement. While President Rouhani should ensure that belligerent rhetoric be kept to a minimum – or even better be eliminated altogether – chances are that there will be flare-ups and difficulties in communicating and agreeing on the various points of the road map. But here again, Russia can intervene and keep things together before another situation in the Middle East gets out of hand.

Everybody wins then, right?

The Russian Gambit

As we soon enter the fall season, the talk of a strike, a conflict, even a war against Iran grows louder and louder.

While Israel is extremely worried and increases its military readiness and the United States timidly drag their feet into uncertainty, Iran keeps a steady course and presses on the accelerator.

In the past weeks stories have surfaced that Israel could launch a preemptive strike in September or October, ahead of the US election. This time, it might be for real, as the increase in intensity of the covert operations against Iranian nuclear interests in the past year might indicate.

It is clear now that the US and the EU are not capable of deescalating the tensions, and the UN Security Council resolutions are not diminishing Iranian resolve. Further attempts on their behalf at this point would likely be futile.

What can the world do to deescalate the conflict?

In my opinion there is one but option left: to call on Russia. Give Putin, Medvedev and Lavrov all the tools, the leverage, the latitude and the trust that is necessary to try and turn down the dial through the political back channels, for the sake of avoiding another bloody conflict in the Middle East.

Russia is a historical behemoth that has known all the plagues. Russians are no strangers to the ugliness of war, the fear of terrorism and political instability. It is a nation in which might is right, for better or for worse, but that can be an effective game changer if treated with respect and truly empowered to make a difference.

While some could argue that Russia’s efforts towards Iran have been counterproductive in the past, insisting with their diplomatic authorities that the last thing the world’s largest nation needs is a war over nuclear matters on its southern front, not too far from the Caucasus, could be a simple yet effective incentive.

Vladimir Putin’s return to the presidency, his will to assert Russia’s presence on the international stage and to restore the nation’s glory might worry some; however the West playing its cards right with Russia, with whom it shares a considerable culture, could help steer the country into becoming a proud yet truly responsible international actor, while bolstering their pride and help the West achieve is foreign policy goals.

It is time to give Russia an opportunity to shine, for all our sakes, before we venture past the point of no return. It is time to let Moscow lead one last diplomatic ballet, in order to avoid a belligerent mosh pit.

The Great Game

The hot-zones today. How many G20 countries can you count in their vicinity?

The current state of relations between the American and Russian governments will no doubt remind some of the Cold War. Sharp tongues, covert operations, proxy wars, threats of using force – it’s all there, albeit, in a much less intense fashion. It is also a complete waste of time.

Last June, when it hosted the G20 summit in Los Cabos, the Mexican government did not convene a follow-up meeting of the G20 Foreign Ministers, even though it had been tentatively put forward after their first informal gathering last February. It is unfortunate because it could have been used to discuss frankly, openly and face to face the current challenges to international security that are posed by North Korea, Iran and most recently, Syria.

While hoping for some kind of major agreement on upcoming steps in all three scenarios might have been far-fetched, the world could have used some sense of unity in the broadest sense from the G20 nations’ chief diplomats. Instead, we are privy to yet another “Great Game” between the US-Russia and China troika, played out in diplomatic circles, through covert operations, weapons shipments and UN Security Council vetoes, while our world becomes increasingly dangerous.

Syria is the last remaining “active” fire of the Arab Spring and is quickly catching up to Libya in terms of bloodbath. However, because of the country’s strategic location – at the very heart of the least stable region of the globe – the conflict has been at the very centre of a tug o’ war between the US and Western nations and the Russia/China strategic alliance.

Certainly, Bashar Al-Assad bears most of the blame for the extreme escalation of the conflict. But Russia and China, fearing a repeat of the “over-interpretation” of UNSC resolution 1970 on Libya have consistently vetoed any bold proposal against Syria. Russians went as far as attempting to deliver Mi25 attack helicopters and missiles to Al-Assad’s regime earlier this summer, and are likely politically flexing their muscles by deploying amphibious assault ships and hundreds of marines in their naval base at Tartus shortly.

On the other hand, news broke this past week that the US President Barack Obama authorized clandestine support to the rebels by the CIA through humanitarian, logistical, communications and financial help which likely explains the growing progress they have made in the recent weeks. Official sources claim no arms are being sent by the US; this may or may not be true. And of course, financial help begs the question: what is stopping the recipients of US funds from acquiring weapons with that money? What is truly worrying about the Syrian rebels is the growing legions of foreign fighters affiliated to Al-Qaeda joining their side. In the advent of a rebel victory, what will happen to them? Could US help be in fact diverted to help a new generation of Al-Qaeda terrorists?

While East and West throw an encore of the Cold War, Iran coldly calculates its next move with its nuclear program, sending its Basij and financing Hezbollah to support the fledging Al-Assad. When Damascus finally falls, no real distraction will remain in the Middle East, and all eyes will look to Teheran. What some call the “Syrian Uprising” is but a prelude to the next chapter: a confrontation with Iran.

Old problems, new developments

Two months away from a potential follow-up meeting of the G20 Foreign Ministers in Mexico, international security issues are all over the radar.

Iran’s nuclear programme and the heated rhetoric of its leadership continued to heighten the tensions in the past weeks. With increased talk of preventive Israeli strikes on the horizon, naval deployments near Iran’s maritime border, negative feedback from the International Atomic Energy Agency’s reports and potential new Security Council sanctions, it seems that things had reached a significant, perhaps boiling point. However yesterday in Istanbul, the P5+1 (US, UK, France, China, Russia, Germany) and Iran broke a 14-month deadlock and reached an agreement on a framework for talks and a date for upcoming negotiations. It is a positive step, but concrete and measurable results will have to be taken quickly by both sides for a significant de-escalation to bear fruit. Russia’s role in this is key and its bridging approach with Iran must be supported.

Teheran can thank the belligerent and reckless leadership in Pyongyang for diverting international attention from its own nuclear activities. It is now very clear that there will not be any reforms, no glasnost any time soon for the leadership of Kim Jong Un, which is still very much in its assertive phase. The face of the leader may have changed, but the military elitist system remains very much in place and it has taken a life of its own under an inexperienced and untested youth. The senseless and illogical botching of the recent US food aid deal over the failed launch of a long-range missile suggests that there may be trouble in the hermit kingdom. As I elaborated in my paper Pre-Emptive Peace, I fundamentally believe that the top of the pyramid of the leadership in North Korea is akin to the incomplete top floors of Pyongyang’s iconic Ryugyong Hotel: chaotic, incoherent and full of holes. It started in the dawning years of the sickly Kim Jong Il and under Un, it is now practically open season: rival old-timer generals vying for power and position in a decaying nation through various acts of faith in contradiction, try to cater the favour of the Dear Leader. Kim Jong Un’s appointment of 70 new generals and the public admission of the launch failure a few days ago is likely a response to his current advisors’ shortcomings (who will likely be severely punished for the pathetic spectacle of the exploding rocket).

South Korean analysts now believe that a new nuclear test by North Korea is a strong possibility, to rally their wounded pride. Should this occur, the international community should twist in the final screws by imposing the toughest sanctions possible and sever all ties with North Korea. Furthermore, China should be actively talked into getting on board, not only to deter Pyongyang from further provocations, but to remind them that they have crossed the line and that they will no longer be supported as an embarrassing client-state.

Iran is monitoring the North Korean situation very closely, and its choice of whether or not to develop a nuclear arsenal to face off with the international community will depend on how Teheran perceives the risks and gains of a standoff like the one in the Korean peninsula.

All of this being considered, I expect the G20 Foreign Ministers to discuss these pressing international security matters should they decide to meet in Mexico in June. All of the world’s strength, world powers and emerging economies alike must be focused on coordination for global peace and security, and it is nations like Russia, China, Brazil, Turkey and Mexico who will be true game changers.