Ghosts of Vietnam haunt Biden in Ukraine

In 2009, shortly after his inauguration, Barack Obama undertook an intensive policy review to assess the desirability of a military “surge” in Afghanistan.

Then-vice president Joe Biden, who has just announced his intent to run again for president in 2024, was one of a handful of older advisers repeatedly reminding their new boss to remember the terrible consequences of an earlier generation’s escalation in Indochina.

Think very carefully, Biden said at one point, according to Bob Woodward’s recounting, or you’ll be “locked into Vietnam.”

Obama was not dissuaded and committed 30,000 new forces to Afghanistan. Vietnam was “not like this ghost in his head,” recalled Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security adviser — reflective of the generational divide between the two men noted by James Mann in his book “The Obamians.”

As president, Biden continues to respect the Vietnam “ghost” — and it hovers over his deliberations and decisions concerning Ukraine.

On one hand, Biden is emphatic about support for Ukraine and his passion for stymieing Vladimir Putin’s aggression. In Kiev in February 2023, the president assured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky of America’s “unwavering and unflagging commitment to Ukraine’s democracy, sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

These were anything but empty words, given the billions of dollars’ worth of aid and military equipment that the US has sent to Ukraine (US$27.5 billion to date), the sanctions imposed on Russia and the coalition of powerful allies that Washington has helped to organize that provided another $21 billion in aid.

On the other hand, Biden has kept sturdy guardrails around such words and actions.

Aid with restraint

Massive aid to Ukraine, yes — but restraint that keeps Americans themselves out of harm’s way on land, at sea and in the air.

Massive aid, yes — but arm’s-length enough to steer clear of a tripwire in the tense relationship with Moscow, especially as a frustrated Putin warns about tactical nuclear weapons.

Recent examples of US restraint include:

Lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan have obviously shaped the American balancing act in Ukraine, creating greater sensitivity to the problematic gap between desirable goals and prudent methods to achieve them.

Those 21st-century experiences highlighted for many the profound costs that can come with overconfident military commitments in distant and difficult terrains.

For someone Biden’s age, however, Vietnam offered a key initial lesson — one that caused him to try mentoring younger leaders in the Obama years, and one that provided weight and momentum to his controversial decision to end the US combat mission in Afghanistan in 2021.

US President Joe Biden awards the Medal of Honor to Major John J. Duffy, who fought in the Vietnam War, in the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC, USA, July 5, 2022. Photo: EPA via The Conversation / Jim Lo Scalzo / Pool

The benefit of Biden’s age

Being an 80-year-old in 2023 means that the lived experience of the Vietnam War adds substantial heft to what others might see as mere ghosts.

Biden was first elected to the US Senate in 1972, surrounded by the storms of protest rising out of war in Southeast Asia. He knew full well how earlier arm’s-length engagement in Vietnam by former presidents evolved into direct embroilment:

The shadows of such Vietnam ghosts are evident in Biden’s carefully calibrated approach toward Ukraine — especially in his studied resistance to committing US forces to combat.

Avoiding Vietnam’s mistakes?

But the current war is not yet over.

Will the president be able to maintain the balance that has so far allowed him to avoid serious Vietnam-like errors? Will the mature judgment emerging from the 80-year-old’s lived experiences have further staying power?

Problematic past decisions should figure in speculation about what may come next in US support of Ukraine. All the presidents involved in Vietnam had intelligence at least equal to Biden’s.

Each was also capable of both shrewdness and restraint — witness Truman’s firing of wild-eyed General Douglas MacArthur during the Korean War and Kennedy’s handling of the Cuban missile crisis.

At the same time, determination and feistiness — hardly absent in Biden given his intention to remain in office until he’s 85 — led these presidents down the road to tragic failure in Vietnam.

Just look at Eisenhower’s notion of a viable South Vietnamese nation led by the autocratic Diem, or Johnson’s conviction that awe-inspiring US military power could squash a “damn little pissant country” like Vietnam.

American soldiers meet US President Lyndon Johnson in South Vietnam. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Kennedy was insightful enough to fear the implications of committing even a small number of forces to Vietnam: “It’s like taking a drink. The effect wears off and you have to take another.” He took the first drink anyway.

Johnson then guzzled — even though he wondered if he was acting like a catfish gobbling “a big juicy worm with a right sharp hook in the middle of it.

Protracted wars create profoundly complex challenges for all leaders. The absence of victory and/or the unpredictable behavior of enemies lead to military, political, economic and psychological stresses that can undercut pragmatism.

Biden is likely facing a difficult internal struggle that will continue if he’s elected for a second term in 2024. Will the ghosts of Vietnam be vanquished by a new generation of Ukraine-focused anxieties and phantoms?

Ronald W Pruessen is an emeritus professor of history at the University of Toronto.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Asia’s Best Managed Companies 2023 – Market winners

Every year, FinanceAsia publishes its highly regarded benchmark of Asia’s best companies.

Based on nomination by Asia’s active community of influential investors and financial analysts, the poll evaluates the corporate behaviour and performance of Asian peers over the past 12 months.

It is with this in mind that the FA team is delighted to announce the winners for 2023.

Following very positive market participation, we have decided to award up to three medals per category to reflect corporate achievements. Gold, silver and bronze medallists are detailed where applicable.

Read on for the winners of the following categories:

– Best Overall Company
– Best Large-cap
– Best Mid-cap
– Best Small-cap
– Best Corporate Esg Strategy
– Best DEI Strategy
– Best Investor Relations
– Best CEO
– Best CFO

Don’t forget to read about our Industry Winners here.

Thank you to all those who participated and congratulations!

—  WINNERS BY MARKET —

— Best Overall Company —

China
Gold – China United Network Communications Group Co., Ltd.
Silver – Tencent Holdings Ltd.
Bronze – Xiaomi Inc.

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – Sun Hung Kai Properties Ltd.
Silver – Link Real Estate Investment Trust
Bronze – Swire Pacific Ltd.

India
Gold – Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. & Tata Power Company Ltd.
Silver – Infosys Consultants Private Ltd.
Bronze – Hdfc Bank Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – Pt. Bank Rakyat Indonesia (Persero) Tbk
Silver – Pt Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero), Tbk
Bronze – Pt Bank Mandiri (Persero) Tbk

Philippines
Gold – Sm Prime Holdings, Inc. / Megawide Construction Corporation
Silver – Bank Of The Philippine Islands
Bronze – Ayala Corporation

Singapore
Gold – Amtd Group Company Ltd.
Silver – Dbs Bank Ltd.

Taiwan
Gold – Chunghwa Telecom Company, Ltd.
Silver – Far Eastern New Century Corporation
Bronze – Far Eastone Telecommunications Co., Ltd. & Wistron Neweb Corporation

Thailand
Gold – Ptt Global Chemical Public Company Ltd.
Silver – B. Grimm Power Public Company Ltd.
Bronze – Central Retail Corporation Public Company Ltd.

Vietnam
Gold – Vingroup Joint Stock Company
Silver – Vinfast Joint Stock Company
Bronze – Vinhomes Joint Stock Company

— Best Large-cap —

China
Gold – China Mobile Ltd.
Silver – Wuxi Biologics Cayman Inc.

Indonesia
Gold – Pt. Bank Rakyat Indonesia (Persero) Tbk
Silver – Pt Bank Mandiri (Persero) Tbk
Bronze – Pt Bank Central Asia Tbk

Taiwan
Gold – Far Eastone Telecommunications Co., Ltd.
Silver – Chunghwa Telecom Company, Ltd.

— Best Mid-cap —

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – Asiainfo Technologies Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – Pt Bank Tabungan Negara (Persero) Tbk
Silver – Pt Perusahaan Minyak Nasional
Bronze – Pt Mayora Indah Tbk

Philippines
Gold – Bloomberry Resorts Corporation
Silver – Sm Prime Holdings, Inc.
Bronze – Gt Capital Holdings, Inc.

Taiwan
Gold – Far Eastern New Century Corporation

— Best Small-cap —

China
Gold – Yiren Digital Ltd.
Silver – Tarena International Inc.
Bronze – Hello Group Inc.

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – Sa Sa International Holdings
Silver – Far East Consortium International Ltd.
Bronze – Viva China Holdings Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – Pt Bank Keb Hana Indonesia
Silver – Pt Perikanan Nusantara (Persero)
Bronze – Pt Adi Sarana Armada Tbk

Philippines
Gold – Manila Water Company, Inc.
Silver – Security Bank Corporation
Bronze – Megawide Construction Corporation

Singapore
Gold – Amtd Digital Inc.

Taiwan
Gold – Wistron Neweb Corporation
Silver – Hwahsia Glass Co., Ltd.

Thailand
Gold – Dohome Public Company Ltd.
Silver – Forth Corporation Public Company Ltd.
Bronze – Gunkul Engineering Public Company Ltd.

— Best Corporate Esg Strategy —

China
Gold – China Telecom Corporation, Ltd.
Silver – Wuxi Biologics Cayman Inc.
Bronze – Meituan Inc.

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – Sun Hung Kai Properties Ltd.
Silver – Sino Land Company Ltd.
Bronze – The Mass Transit Railway Corporation

India
Gold – Infosys Consultants Private Ltd.
Silver – Tata Power Company Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – Pt. Bank Rakyat Indonesia (Persero) Tbk
Silver – Pt Bank Mandiri (Persero) Tbk
Bronze – Pt Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero), Tbk

Philippines
Gold – Ayala Corporation
Silver – Sm Prime Holdings, Inc.
Bronze – Sm Investments Corporation

Singapore
Gold – Sp Group Pte. Ltd.

Taiwan
Gold – Chunghwa Telecom Company, Ltd.
Silver – Wistron Neweb Corporation
Bronze – Far Eastern New Century Corporation

Thailand
Gold – B. Grimm Power Public Company Ltd.
Silver – Ptt Global Chemical Public Company Ltd.

Vietnam
Gold – Vinfast Joint Stock Company
Silver – Vingroup Joint Stock Company
Bronze – Vinhomes Joint Stock Company

— Best DEI Strategy —

China
Gold – China United Network Communications Group Co., Ltd.
Silver – Baidu, Inc.
Bronze – Trip.Com Group Ltd.

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – Far East Consortium International Ltd.
Silver – Asiainfo Technologies Ltd.

India
Gold – Tata Power Company Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – Pt. Bank Rakyat Indonesia (Persero) Tbk
Silver – Pt Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero), Tbk
Bronze – Pt Bank Mandiri (Persero) Tbk

Philippines
Gold – Sm Prime Holdings, Inc.

Taiwan
Gold – Wistron Neweb Corporation
Silver – Far Eastern New Century Corporation
Bronze – Chunghwa Telecom Company, Ltd.

Thailand
Gold – B. Grimm Power Public Company Ltd.

Vietnam
Gold – Vinfast Joint Stock Company

— Best Investor Relations —

China
Gold – China United Network Communications Group Co., Ltd.
Silver – Asiainfo Technologies Ltd.
Bronze – Wuxi Biologics Cayman Inc.

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – Far East Consortium International Ltd.
Silver – Sun Hung Kai Properties Ltd.
Bronze – Asiainfo Technologies Ltd.

India
Gold – Tata Power Company Ltd.
Silver – Tata Motors Ltd.
Bronze – Titan Company Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – Pt. Bank Rakyat Indonesia (Persero) Tbk
Silver – Pt Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero), Tbk
Bronze – Pt Bank Mandiri (Persero) Tbk

Philippines
Gold – Sm Prime Holdings, Inc.
Silver – Bdo Unibank, Inc.
Bronze – International Container Terminal Services, Inc.

Taiwan
Gold – Wistron Neweb Corporation
Silver – Far Eastern New Century Corporation
Bronze – Far Eastone Telecommunications Co., Ltd. & Chunghwa Telecom Company, Ltd.

Thailand
Gold – Central Retail Corporation Public Company Ltd.
Silver – Dohome Public Company Ltd.
Bronze – B. Grimm Power Public Company Ltd.

Vietnam
Gold – Vingroup Joint Stock Company
Silver – Vinhomes Joint Stock Company
Bronze – Vinfast Joint Stock Company

— Best CEO —

China
Gold – Liu Qiangdong – Jd.Com, Inc
Silver – Pony Ma Huateng – Tencent Holdings Ltd.
Bronze – Ke Ruiwen – China Telecom Corporation, Ltd.

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – Adrian Cheng – New World Development Company Ltd.
Silver – David Chiu – Far East Consortium International Ltd.
Bronze – Raymond Kwok – Sun Hung Kai Properties Ltd.

India
Gold – Rajesh Gopinathan – Tata Consultancy Services Ltd.
Silver – Sandeep Bakhshi – Icici Bank Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – Sunarso – Pt. Bank Rakyat Indonesia (Persero) Tbk
Silver – Royke Tumilaar – Pt Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero), Tbk
Bronze – Jahja Setiaatmadja – Pt Bank Central Asia Tbk

Philippines
Gold – Jeffrey C Lim – Sm Prime Holdings, Inc. & Tg Limcaoco – Bank Of The Philippine Islands
Silver – Edgar Saavedra – Megawide Construction Corporation
Bronze – Enrique K Razon – International Container Terminal Services, Inc. /Bloomberry Resorts Corporation

Singapore
Gold – Piyush Gupta – Dbs Bank Ltd.

Taiwan
Gold – Chee Ching – Far Eastone Telecommunications Co., Ltd.
Silver – Douglas Tong Hsu – Far Eastern New Century Corporation
Bronze – Jeffrey Gau – Wistron Neweb Corporation

Thailand
Gold – Preeyanart Sunthornwatha – B. Grimm Power Public Company Ltd.
Silver – Phawat Witoopakorn – Eastern Polymer Group Public Company Ltd.
Bronze – Gunkul Dumrongpiyawut – Gunkul Engineering Public Company Ltd.

Vietnam
Gold – Le Thi Thu Thuy – Vinfast Joint Stock Company

— Best CFO —

China
Gold – Li Yuchao – China United Network Communications Group Co., Ltd.
Silver – Li Yinghui – China Telecom Corporation, Ltd.
Bronze – Li Ronghua – China Mobile Ltd.

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – Vanessa Lau – Hong Kong Exchanges And Clearing Ltd.
Silver – Brian Sum – Sun Hung Kai Properties Ltd.
Bronze – Edward Lau – New World Development Company Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – Viviana Dyah Ayu Retno K – Pt. Bank Rakyat Indonesia (Persero) Tbk
Silver – Sigit Prastowo – Pt Bank Mandiri (Persero) Tbk
Bronze – Novita Widya Anggraini – Pt Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero), Tbk

Philippines
Gold – John Nai Peng Ong – Sm Prime Holdings, Inc.
Silver – Estela Tuason-Occena – Bloomberry Resorts Corporation
Bronze – Riza Maniego – Globe Telecom, Inc.

Singapore
Gold – Chng Sok Hui – Dbs Bank Ltd.

Taiwan
Gold – David Wang – Far Eastern New Century Corporation
Silver – Jona Song – Wistron Neweb Corporation

Thailand
Gold – Siriwong Borvornboonrutai – B. Grimm Power Public Company Ltd.

Vietnam
Gold – David Mansfield – Vinfast Joint Stock Company

 

¬ Haymarket Media Limited. All rights reserved.

Continue Reading

Asia’s Best Managed Companies 2023 – Industry winners

Every year, FinanceAsia publishes its highly regarded benchmark of Asia’s best companies.

Based on nomination by Asia’s active community of influential investors and financial analysts, the poll evaluates the corporate behaviour and performance of Asian peers over the past 12 months.

It is with this in mind that the FA team is delighted to announce the winners for 2023.

Following very positive market participation, we have decided to award up to three medals per category to reflect corporate achievements. Gold, silver and bronze medallists are detailed where applicable.

Read on for the winners of the following categories:

– Best Basic Materials Company
– Best Consumer Cyclicals Company
– Best Consumer Non-Cyclicals Company
– Best Energy Company
– Best Financial Company
– Best Healthcare Company
– Best Industrials Company
– Best Real Estate Company
– Best Technology Company
– Best Telecommunications Company
– Best Utilities Company

Don’t forget to read about our Market Winners here.

Thank you to all those who participated and congratulations!

— WINNERS BY SECTOR —

— Basic Materials Company —

Indonesia
Gold – PT Aneka Tambang Tbk
Silver – PT Krakatau Steel (Persero) Tbk & PT Petrokimia Gresik

Philippines
Gold – Nickel Asia Corporation

Taiwan
Gold – Far Eastern New Century Corporation

— Consumer Cyclicals Company —

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – ANTA Sports Products Ltd.
Silver – Viva China Holdings Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – PT Mitra Adiperkasa Tbk
Silver – PT Erajaya Swasembada Tbk
Bronze -mPT Media Nusantara Citra Tbk

Philippines
Gold – Megawide Construction Corporation

Taiwan
Gold – Far Eastern New Century Corporation

— Consumer Non-Cyclicals Company —

China
Gold – Chongqing Hongjiu Fruit Company, Ltd.

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – Hengan International Group Company, Ltd.
Silver – Chongqing Hongjiu Fruit Company, Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – PT Unilever Indonesia Tbk
Silver – PT Indofood CBP Sukses Makmur Tbk
Bronze – PT Sumber Alfaria Trijaya Tbk

Taiwan
Gold – Far Eastone Telecommunications Co., Ltd.

— Best Energy Company —

China
Gold – China Shenhua Energy Company Ltd.
Silver – CNOOC Ltd
Bronze – China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation

Indonesia
Gold – PT Perusahaan Minyak Nasional
Silver – PT Adaro Energy Indonesia Tbk
Bronze – PT AKR Corporindo Tbk & PT Perusahaan Listrik Negara (Persero)

Philippines
Gold – Aboitiz Power Corporation
Silver – ACEN Corporation & Semirara Mining And Power Corporation

Taiwan
Gold – Far Eastern New Century Corporation

Thailand
Gold – B. Grimm Power Public Company Ltd.
Silver – Energy Absolute Public Company Ltd. & Gunkul Engineering Public Company Ltd.

— Best Financial Company —

China
Gold – Industrial and Commercial Bank Of China (Asia) Ltd.
Silver – China Life Insurance Company Ltd.
Bronze – American International Assurance Company Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – PT. Bank Rakyat Indonesia (Persero) Tbk
Silver – PT Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero), Tbk & PT Bank Mandiri (Persero) Tbk
Bronze – PT Bank Central Asia Tbk

Philippines
Gold – Bank Of The Philippine Islands
Silver – BDO Unibank, Inc. & Metropolitan Bank & Trust Company

Taiwan
Gold – Cathay Financial Holding Company, Ltd.
Silver – Chailease Holding Company Ltd. & First Financial Holding Company Ltd.

— Best Healthcare Company —

China
Gold – Wuxi Biologics Cayman Inc. & Innovent Biologics, Inc.
Silver – Akeso, Inc.

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – Sino Biopharmaceutical Ltd.
Silver – Canbridge Pharmaceuticals Inc.

India
Gold – Apollo Hospitals Enterprises Ltd

Indonesia
Gold – PT Prodia Widyahusada Tbk
Silver – PT Kalbe Farma Tbk
Bronze – PT Medikaloka Hermina Tbk

Thailand
Gold – Bangkok Dusit Medical Services Public Company Ltd.
Silver – Intermedical Care and Lab Hospital Public Company Ltd.
Bronze – Praram 9 Hospital Public Company Ltd.

— Best Industrials Company —

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – TK Group Holdings Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – PT Astra International Tbk
Silver – PT United Tractors Tbk
Bronze – PT Krakatau Steel (Persero) Tbk

Taiwan
Gold – Far Eastern New Century Corporation

— Best Real Estate Company —

China
Gold – China Resources Land Ltd.

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – Far East Consortium International Ltd.
Silver – Sun Hung Kai Properties Ltd.
Bronze – Swire Properties Company Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – PT Ciputra Development Tbk
Silver – PT Bumi Serpong Damai Tbk
Bronze – PT Pakuwon Jati Tbk

Philippines
Gold – SM Prime Holdings, Inc.
Silver – Ayala Land, Inc. & Robinsons Land Corporation

Taiwan
Gold – Far Eastern New Century Corporation

Thailand
Gold – Origin Property Public Company Ltd.
Silver – Quality Houses Public Company Ltd.

Vietnam
Gold – Vinhomes Joint Stock Company

— Best Technology Company —

China
Gold – Tencent Holdings Ltd.
Silver – JD.Com, Inc.
Bronze – Alibaba Group Holding Ltd.

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – Asiainfo Technologies Ltd.
Silver – BYD Electronic Company Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – PT Telkom Indonesia (Persero) Tbk
Silver – PT DCI Indonesia Tbk
Bronze – PT Elang Mahkota Teknologi Tbk

Taiwan
Gold – Wistron Neweb Corporation
Silver – Sercomm Corporation
Bronze – Topco Scientific Co. Ltd.

Vietnam
Gold – Vinfast Joint Stock Company

— Best Telecommunications Company —

China
Gold – China Mobile Ltd.
Silver – China United Network Communications Group Co., Ltd.
Bronze – China Telecom Corporation, Ltd.

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – China United Network Communications Group Co., Ltd. (Hong Kong)
Silver – China Tower Corporation Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – PT Telkom Indonesia (Persero) Tbk
Silver – PT XL Axiata Tbk
Bronze – PT Sarana Menara Nusantara Tbk

Philippines
Gold – Globe Telecom, Inc.
Silver – Converge ICT Solutions Inc.

Taiwan
Gold – Chunghwa Telecom Company, Ltd.
Silver – Far Eastone Telecommunications Co., Ltd.
Bronze – Taiwan Mobile Corporation Ltd.

— Best Utilities Company —

China
Gold – China Power International Development Ltd.
Silver – China Datang Corporation Ltd.

Hong Kong SAR
Gold – Tian Lun Gas Holdings Ltd.

India
Gold – Tata Power Company Ltd.

Indonesia
Gold – PT Jasa Marga (Persero) Tbk
Silver – PT Indonesia Kendaraaan Terminal Tbk
Bronze – PT Kencana Energi Lestari Tbk

Philippines
Gold – Manila Water Company, Inc.

Taiwan
Gold – Far Eastern New Century Corporation
 

¬ Haymarket Media Limited. All rights reserved.

Continue Reading

Climate change, carbon bootprints and the future of war

It was pitched as the “most significant” shift in Australia’s armed forces in decades. And among the headline announcements, climate change was recognized as an issue of national security.

But the strategic review of Australia’s military released yesterday doesn’t go a lot further than that when it comes to the climate crisis. The review devotes just over one of its 100 pages to what climate change means for defense.

And while overseas analysts and militaries seriously address the strategic effects of climate change and the role for defense, the Australian review focused more on climate change as a potential distraction from the military’s core business of warfighting.

As our armed forces are increasingly called to respond to natural disasters, the review reports, they are less ready to fight a war.

This focus is too narrow. It’s also a long way from what the research is telling us, and a long way from what our allies are doing.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Australian Defense Force chief Angus Campbell launched the defence strategic review. But climate change did not take center stage. Photo: AAP

What’s the link between climate change and national security?

At a fundamental level, security doesn’t mean much if it doesn’t extend to conditions of survival. The climate emergency has been described as a direct threat to both human and ecological security.

But climate change also hangs over the traditional security agenda, which is to defend against any attacks. Forward-thinking militaries around the world have begun to prepare for these effects.

Climate change could make armed conflict more likely by acting as a “threat multiplier.”

Climate-driven droughts, desertification, changing rainfall patterns and the loss of arable land could lead to the collapse of governments or a fleeing population.

Former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon and some analysts have pointed to the role of climate change in contributing to armed conflict in Sudan’s Darfur region and Syria’s civil war.

Unchecked climate change is likely to trigger more demand for armed forces to respond to natural disasters, predicted to increase in intensity and frequency on a hotter planet.

Yesterday’s strategic review focuses on this demand, and for good reason – it’s already happening.

Increasingly, the army and air force are being called on to respond to Australia’s tide of “unprecedented disasters” like the floods of the last three years, and the summer of fire in 2019–20. Navy ships evacuated hundreds from the beach at Mallacoota in Victoria, under eerie light.

The navy rescued hundreds of people from the beach at Mallacoota in eastern Victoria as intense fires raged in early 2020. Photo: EPA / Royal Australian Navy

And then there’s the world. The demand for army-backed humanitarian help is rising. Our neighbors are among the most vulnerable in the world to the effects of natural disasters.

Beyond responses to refugees, conflict and natural disasters, there’s the question of how militaries are equipped, trained and resourced.

Higher temperatures, rising seas and natural disasters could threaten defense infrastructure and bases. Australia’s defense department is the largest landholder in the country, much of it in exposed coastal areas.

Our military has a substantial “carbon bootprint”, given it relies heavily on machines that burn fossil fuels, from destroyers to tanks. Ensuring these have enough fuel in the future is a concern, especially if the substantial military contribution to greenhouse gas emissions comes under more scrutiny.

In this sense, it was good to see the review note the importance of the military accelerating a transition to clean energy. But the urgency of the climate crisis suggests our military should also be factoring climate change into procurement considerations and equipment management now. To date, there’s little evidence Australia has done so.

What are other countries doing?

Key partners like America, the UK and many other countries are well ahead of us. In my ongoing research, I’ve analyzed climate responses and interviewed policymakers from other nations. This suggests we’re lagging well behind.

The US military began analyzing what climate change would mean for it back in the 1990s. Biden’s government has given climate change greater priority in its National Security Council and firmly linked climate and security in what one interviewee told me was a “game changer.”

A US soldier overlooks a flood disaster in New Orleans. Image: Facebook

The UK has an expert body within its defense ministry examining the security implications of climate change. In 2021, it produced a strategic document with emissions cut goals for its armed forces, as well as investment to make the transition possible.

New Zealand has gone beyond reactive responses and embraced an active role for its military in responding to natural disasters at home and in the region. One interviewee told me this was central to the military’s “social license.”

New Zealand’s position has been strongly influenced by the concerns of its Pacific neighbors. Wellington decision-makers also decided defense will not be exempt from government-mandated goals to get to net zero.

France has taken a similar position on humanitarian assistance and disaster relief focused on its overseas territories and the wider Francophone world. These operations are presented not as a distraction but as a core commitment.

Sweden and Germany used their time on the UN Security Council in recent years to push for a resolution on the organization’s role in addressing the international security implications of climate change.

And when Sweden joins NATO, it’s likely to push for more military preparation for climate change given recent NATO commitments on this front.

Can Australia catch up?

Yes. But the first step is to recognize where we are – and where the world is heading.

Australia’s defense sector must seriously engage with what climate change will bring, not least given our region’s acute vulnerabilities and the existential concerns of our Pacific neighbors.

Unfortunately, the recently-released strategic review suggests our defense establishment does not wholly share these concerns.

Matt McDonald is Associate Professor of International Relations, The University of Queensland

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Alignment of incendiary forces torching Sudan

The worst-case scenario is coming to pass, apparently, in Sudan. That is, at any rate, the apocalyptic message streaming out of Khartoum in the Western media.

US President Joe Biden lent credence to the alarmist perception by confirming that on his orders, the US military had conducted an operation “to extract government personnel from Khartoum.”  

According to the US Department of State, about 16,000 American nationals are currently in Sudan. The US Embassy in Khartoum had an excessive staff strength – on par with its Mission in Kiev – which was unwarranted by the scale and volume of US-Sudanese bilateral ties, leading to speculation that it was a key intelligence outpost.

In the Horn of Africa, the Arab Gulf states traditionally took a deep dive into the complexities of power projection, political rivalry and conflict across the Red Sea, which has lately re-emerged as a geo-strategic space in which competing global and regional players have sought to project influence. 

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates on the one hand, and Qatar and Turkey on the other, intensely competed to counter each other’s influence and project their rivalries on to the politics of the Horn, but after years of fierce competition, signs have appeared lately that they’ve begun cautiously recalibrating their respective roles.

The post-Covid strain on their financial resources, the drawdown in Yemen, and the eagerness of the Gulf states to appear as constructive and reliable partners, adopting a more pragmatic approach on regional issues – all these contributed to the notable signs of détente replacing the intense intra-Gulf competition in the Horn of Africa. 

In Sudan, Saudi and Emirati efforts to shape the political transition after Omar al-Bashir’s ouster in April 2019 led to partial successes but also significant difficulties, as they came at a severe reputational cost under scrutiny from both the Sudanese population and the international community.

The US and the European Union saw Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries as useful partners in the Horn in terms of their surplus capital to invest that Western powers lacked, as well as their good personal networks. The Faustian deal between the Donald Trump administration, Israel and the Gulf states to lure the Sudanese military leadership into the Abraham Accords in 2020 was a defining moment. 

However, that dalliance proved short-lived, and the Western powers’ game plan to ride on the wings of the Gulf states to counter the growing influence of Russia and China in the Red Sea met a sudden death too, as the ground beneath the feet of the US-Saudi alliance shifted dramatically under the Biden presidency and Riyadh began strengthening its ties with Moscow and Beijing.

Wang Yi, China’s top diplomat (center), in Beijing on March 10, 2023, with counterparts Musaad bin Mohammed Al Aiban of Saudi Arabia and Ali Shamkhani of Iran. Image: China Daily

This, in turn, compelled the Western powers to explore the opportunity to push for greater coordination and constructive engagement directly with the generals in Khartoum, banking on their own efforts and resources running parallel with the Gulf states’ recalibration of their involvement in the Horn. 

In a nutshell, the crux of the matter is that the Western understanding of stability and sustainable development in Sudan through the prism of the neocon ideology that permeates the Biden administration lies at the core of the aggravation of the sluggish internal political crisis in Sudan that has been brewing since 2019 between the army led by the de facto leader Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and armed formations led by Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo. 

The immature, unrealistic political settlements promoted by the Western liberal democracies significantly fueled the military’s infighting.

The Anglo-American dealmaking was largely limited to the Transition Military Council and the Forces for Freedom and Change, an inchoate coalition of hand-picked civilian and rebel Sudanese groups (Sudanese Professional Association, No to Oppression Against Women Initiative, etc) that by no means represented the national forces in Sudan.

Unsurprisingly, these neocon attempts at imposing exotic settlements on an ancient civilization were doomed to fail. 

The spin propagated by the Western media reduces the present crisis in Sudan – manifesting it as conflict within the military establishment – is a grotesque oversimplification and attempt at a cover-up. Simply put, this crisis cannot be reduced to a personal dispute between the two generals – Burhan and Hemedti – who had been friends for a very long time. 

The crisis can be resolved only through a “security solution,” which means an integration process involving the Rapid Support Forces in an appropriate manner as a political partner in governance, not just a military force affiliated with the army.

Lest it is forgotten, Sudan is a vast country of great ethnic and regional diversity, inhabited by something like 400-500 tribes. The country’s stability depends critically on an optimal model of interaction between the elites and clans.

Basically, what drives the special forces in the current conflict is their expectation to increase their importance in the domestic political process of the country. It must be understood that the current strife is not about access to some military resource, but about control over the economy and the distribution of power. 

Meanwhile, the clumsy, inept handling of the formation of the new government by United Nations representative Volker Perthes significantly contributed to the present crisis. Perthes, a German establishment think-tanker, fired up by the neocon ideology, was the wrong man to handle such a sensitive mission.

This is yet another edifying example of the legacy of UN Secretary General António Guterres to prefer Westerners as envoys to those hotspots where the West’s geopolitical interests are at stake.

FILE PHOTO - U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres addresses a news conference during the 30th Ordinary Session of the Assembly of the Heads of State and the Government of the African Union in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia January 28, 2018. REUTERS/Tiksa Negeri
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres favored Western envoys in certain hotspots. File Photo: Agencies

The UN meeting on March 15 exposed that the overzealous Perthes was detached from reality by rushing through the transfer of power from the military administration to the civilian one – rather than concentrating on helping to form a government and creating a committee to draft a new constitution – which, alas, provoked the intensification of confrontation between the warring parties.   

The good part is that there is not yet any sign of radicalization in this conflict on religious grounds. Nor is there any power vacuum that could be exploited by a terrorist group. At the same time, mediation by external powers is required.

The countries of the region can help resolve the conflict. A comprehensive settlement may not happen soon, since the internal contradictions that accumulated over time require compromises, and so far at least, the parties are not ready for this. 

In the present climate of conflict resolution enveloping regional politics in the West Asian region and the Persian Gulf in particular, there are no objective prerequisites for the conflict to move to the regional stage. The main countries that are associated with the warring factions have come up with peacekeeping initiatives – the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.

In addition, other external partners, especially Russia and China, will make efforts to prevent a prolonged open conflict. By the way, Sudan has an external debt under US$60 billion, and most of it falls on China – and Russia, on the other hand, is well placed to foster rapprochement between Burhan and Dagalo.

Russia takes a balanced position. During his visit to Sudan in February, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov met with the leaders of both opposing sides. Russia is a stakeholder in Sudan’s stability.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement, “The dramatic events taking place in Sudan cause serious concern in Moscow. We call on the parties to the conflict to show political will and restraint and take urgent steps towards a ceasefire. We proceed from the fact that any differences can be settled through negotiations.”

The evacuation is on from Sudan. Image: Screengrab / CNN

However, the Anglo-American agenda remains dubious. Their focus is on internationalizing the crisis, injecting big power rivalries into the Sudanese situation and willy-nilly create pretexts for Western intervention.

But any attempt to reignite the embers of the Arab Spring will be hugely consequential for regional security and stability. The Gulf states and Egypt will need to be particularly watchful. 

Sudan would have figured in the phone conversation between Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Russian President Vladimir Putin on April 21.

This article was produced in partnership by Indian Punchline and Globetrotter, which provided it to Asia Times.

M.K. Bhadrakumar is a former Indian diplomat. Follow him on Twitter @BhadraPunchline.

Continue Reading

Hindu nationalists, white supremacists join forces

During Ramadan, a man attacked a mosque in Markham, Ontario, Canada. He allegedly yelled slurs, tore up a Qu’ran, and attempted to run down worshippers in his vehicle. Some people on Twitter have raised the idea that the attacker was connected to Hindu extremist groups; however, the investigation is still ongoing. This is one of […]Continue Reading

How to read Australia’s new defense strategic review

Before today’s release of the government’s defense strategic review, Defence Minister Richard Marles said it would be the most important examination of Australia’s defense capabilities since the 1986 “Dibb Report” authored by Professor Paul Dibb. As such, direct comparisons of the two documents were already being made before today’s release. The Dibb Report told a […]Continue Reading

Hot and heavy politicking in pre-election Indonesia

JAKARTA – Indonesian Democrat Party of Struggle (PDI-P) leader Megawati Sukarnoputri has finally named enigmatic Central Java Governor Ganjar Pranowo as her party’s presidential candidate, forced to show her hand earlier than she wanted to by the political fallout from Indonesia losing the FIFA Under-20 World Cup. The 76-year-old matriarch chose the Bogor presidential palace […]Continue Reading

Peace may finally be returning to Yemen

Last month, China brokered a rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran, a landmark deal that restored full diplomatic ties between the two bitter rivals. There was hope the detente could also bring an end to one of the world’s longest-running – and virtually forgotten – proxy wars in Yemen, as well. Indeed, peace talks have […]Continue Reading

China’s rosewood lust endangers African security

African countries are estimated to lose US$17 billion each year to illegal logging. High-value timber species are in global demand. Illegal logging is most prevalent in the continent’s tropical rainforests. Foreign demand for rare hardwoods from these forests has dramatically increased. A significant driver is Chinese demand for teak, redwood and mahogany. According to the […]Continue Reading