Provider of in-depth & balanced analysis on hot issues around the world

한국어로 읽기Leer en españolIn Deutsch lesen Gap اقرأ بالعربيةLire en françaisЧитать на русском Three years after a coup d'état reinstated military rule in Myanmar, armed rebels are on the offensive. The country's civil war is often described in terms of ethnic conflict, but opposition forces are the only ones keeping the hope of an inclusive democracy alive. The military seized power and controlled the country with an iron fist. They are backed by a superpower that benefits from a friendly military junta, prioritizing stability and trade over human rights or democracy. It's a familiar story. At first glance, Myanmar's political situation could easily be compared to that of Egypt (supported by the United States), Belarus (supported by Russia), or Syria (supported by Iran). But while the struggle for freedom and national self-determination seems stalled in many cases around the world, change is happening in Myanmar. Here, the rebels continue to fight against the Tatmadaw, the country's infamous military junta whose claim to power is backed by China. In October 2023, the rebels launched a major offensive, known as Operation 1027, which has been pushing the military government to its limits. So, what is different in Myanmar? "The rebels have been gradually wearing down the military since the fighting began," explains pro-democracy activist Michael Sladnick, who is currently in Myanmar. He started doing solidarity work, donated money to resistance groups, and learned Burmese while speaking online with rebel groups. He left the comforts of Chicago and moved to the borderlands between Thailand and Burma in July 2023. Now, he works with people from different rebel factions united with the goal of ending the dictatorship. According to Sladnick, the military has suffered devastating losses. A patient strategy of death by a thousand cuts is depleting their forces and explains the current success of the resistance. "The military losses number in the tens of thousands. Our estimates put the regime's dead soldiers at fifty thousand, but the actual numbers could be even higher. The junta is simply trying to control an area that is too large for its capacity, and it is finding it difficult to recruit new soldiers. The Tatmadaw has lost several bases on the border with Thailand, where the Karen National Union (KNU) is gaining strength. Just a few weeks ago, Myawaddy, not far from here, was besieged," says Sladnick, who is currently in an undisclosed village near the Thai border. The military, the Three Brothers, and the Revolution Since February 2021, Myanmar has been governed by General Min Aung Hlaing, the self-proclaimed Prime Minister. Before the coup, he commanded the Tatmadaw junta, which has controlled Myanmar since the 1962 coup that followed independence from British colonial rule in 1948. In the 20th century, communists (dominated by the Bamar ethnicity) and ethnic armed organizations fought against the military dictatorship, often at odds with each other. The communist resistance resisted the Tatmadaw until 1989 before collapsing. In this sense, the current insurgency didn't start in 2021 but it is the culmination of decades-long clandestine struggle for democracy. A brief attempt at democratization produced a new government between 2016 and 2021, led by the liberal National League for Democracy. However, the military never relinquished power. The democratic constitution of 2008 still reserved 25% of parliamentary seats for the Tatmadaw, enough to veto constitutional changes. The military remained a State within the State, with no oversight from the civilian government, retaining broad powers over the education sector and public officials, and a monopoly on matters of "national security." This also granted them emergency powers to overthrow even the limited elected government, a prerogative they exercised on February 1st, 2021. As evidence of the Junta's control over the judicial system, in December 2022, Myanmar's former elected leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, was sentenced to twenty-seven years in prison on fabricated corruption charges. The spark that ignited the Arab Spring is often traced back to December 2010 when Tunisian street vendor Mohammed Bouazizi set himself on fire to protest the confiscation of his vegetable stall. In Myanmar, a similar story unfolded when the regime committed a massacre in mid-March 2021, killing dozens of women union leaders in Hlaingthaya, the industrial district of Yangon, the country's largest city. This sparked an unprecedented outpouring of anger in the countryside, where most of the population still resides. For the first time, the rural population rose in support of the workers in Yangon. This formed the basis of a popular uprising, which also helps to explain the intensity of the confrontations. "Hundreds of thousands of workers left the cities and returned to their native villages to organize the revolution there," explains Sladnick. He adds, "When the regime attempted to replicate the repression tactics that had previously worked in the cities, the masses immediately began to take up arms and counterattack. A new generation directly supporting the People's Defense Forces (PDF) emerged in the heart of the country." Three of the largest organized resistance groups joined forces and formed the Three Brotherhood Alliance. They consist of larger, more centralized rebel groups among a mosaic of local autonomous forces. Their power is stronger in the eastern region of Shan state, where the junta also faces both rebel forces and powerful drug cartels. The UN estimates that 25% of the world's opium is produced in Myanmar, and 80% of that figure comes from the Golden Triangle in the eastern Shan state. In Shan state, you can also find the National Democratic Alliance Army and the Ta'ang National Liberation Army, two of the three "brothers" fighting to overthrow the Junta. Other Shan ethnic militias, previously supported by China and Thailand, paint an even blurrier picture of internal power struggles and a labyrinth of different factions. When the third brother, the Arakan Army, launched an insurgency in the Rakhine state in 2019, Aung San Suu Kyi's democratically elected government initially tried to appease the military by siding with them against the demands of armed ethnic organizations. Past mistakes like these continue to strain the relationship between the Brothers and the forces of the National Unity Government in the PDF. But for now, they remain united against General Min Aung Hlaing. In Sagaing, on the other side of the country and bordering India, the struggle took on a different path. Here, Sladnick sees a movement that resembles more of a mass revolution supported by the National Unity Government in exile and its armed wing. Sladnick says: ‘The Sagaing People's Defense Forces have universal support. Myanmar's urban working class grew significantly in the 2010s, but it originates from the rural mass of the population. They provide much of the funding to the PDF groups by sending money to their villages. The uprising in the countryside, which began in 2021, was sparked by the anger over the massacre of women leading protests in Yangon's textile factories.’ The military used to suppress dissent through punitive expeditions, with entire villages burned to the ground. Among the most brutal massacres were the Tatmadaw's reprisals in hundreds of villages like Let Yet Kone and Tar Taing, which were razed. It is estimated that at least six thousand civilians — 160 of them children — were killed by the junta just in 2022, with millions displaced since the 2021 coup. This adds to the millions of people already displaced by the decades-long war the army has been waging against ethnic and religious minorities, culminating in the Rohingya genocide in the 2010s. But the army has been worn down to the point that local militias of the PDFs were able to take control of small towns practically unopposed. As contemporary Myanmar comprises a diverse range of ethnicities, many foreign observers rushed to characterize the ongoing insurgency as "ethnically motivated." Two-thirds of the country's fifty-five million inhabitants are of Bamar descent, while the Shan (9%), Karen (7%), and Rakhine (4%) constitute significant minorities. This impression of a "melting pot of races" is further compounded by descendants of Chinese and Indians, the southern Mon, and the heavily persecuted Rohingya. However, presenting the conflict solely in ethnic terms is overly simplistic, as explained by Sladnick. ‘In Western media, things quickly get reduced to ethnic struggles. This overlooks the fact that all major rebel factions have declared that their offensive is part of a united Spring Revolution. The common denominator is the agreement that the regime must be uprooted in favor of a federal democracy. This is the shared vision of the movement that is gaining traction and spreading from the Shan state to the rest of Myanmar, including the Irrawaddy Valley, dominated by the Bamar, in the central part of the country.’ The protests began to spread even to Rohingya refugee camps, leading the Junta to specifically target Muslim activists during their bloody crackdowns in the cities. This "divide and conquer" approach was met with huge crowds from all backgrounds attending their funerals in displays of solidarity. China’s shadow The fact that the deeply unpopular Junta has been able to stay in power for three years is largely due to China. The northeastern superpower views Myanmar as a strategic partner, even amidst deteriorating relations with many other neighbors. For now, Beijing refrained from military intervention, which is surprising, explains Sladnick. "Since our revolution began, I feared that China would directly intervene and save the Tatmadaw as Russia and Iran did with [Syrian dictator Bashar] al-Assad. But China seems to have somewhat accepted the resistance," he states. In Myanmar, there were even rumors circulating that the Beijing government had given up considering the junta as a stable long-term partner and had started supporting the rebels. But this is likely an illusion, and it may be premature, explains Sladnick: "If China were really supporting the rebels, we would have won by now. The insurgency has achieved some significant gains, especially in Shan state, but the rebellion has not yet reached the larger cities. One of my fellow fighters from a local militia in the city of Loikaw [in central Myanmar] told me the other day that they have plenty of weapons but not enough ammunition or medical supplies." In reality, the Chinese intervention, or lack thereof, can be seen from a more pragmatic standpoint. China tacitly allowed the entry of arms from the black market into the Shan state, which enabled the Three Brothers to gain control over large areas of the region. Some view this as punishment for the government's inability to shut down Myanmar's infamous scam centers, which have generated billions of dollars for Chinese underworld syndicates. In a recent offensive, numerous centers were closed. It's no coincidence that weapons also stopped reaching the hands of rebels in Shan state once this issue was addressed, pressuring the Brothers to reach a ceasefire agreement with the government. "China gave a lot of leeway to the rebels and used it to force concessions from the Tatmadaw," explains Sladnick. This is also evident in the Junta's growing interest in maritime trade. For China, one of the strategic advantages of having a friendly government in Naypyidaw is access to the trade routes of the Bay of Bengal. This is also why the Beijing government has been pressuring the Junta to accelerate the construction of a new deep-water port in Rakhine, despite objections from local fishermen who fear it will destroy their livelihoods. The same dynamics are observed in the western province of Sagaing, where disgruntled workers shut down the Letpadaung copper mine in Salingyi, operated by the Chinese. Like hundreds of thousands of teachers, railway workers, and other public servants, the miners have been on continuous general strike since the 2021 coup. According to one of the miners' leaders, the Junta is now pressuring to resume operations there to appease China. "If you ask ordinary people in Myanmar, they have a very clear understanding of this relationship," Sladnick states. "Everyone sees that the ceasefire in Shan state was necessary because China demanded it. What else could the militias have done? They have been fighting alone for decades, and if they had refused to sign the agreement, China would have completely cut off their arms supply. The hope now is that they will continue to finance other resistance groups," Sladnick concludes. A desperate move Although things have recently calmed down somewhat in Shan state, through an uneasy truce, the pressure on the Junta remains intense. The Arakan Army accepted a ceasefire in Shan state but made no similar promises in Rakhine, where fighting continues. To the Tatmadaw's troubles are added the new resistance groups joining the revolutionary struggle. A few weeks after Operation 1027 ended in a temporary ceasefire, the Kachin Independence Army, which has been fighting since 1960, launched Operation 0307 in the Kachin state, quickly seizing control of dozens of cities and bases similar to the Brothers' offensive in the Shan state last fall. The Pa-O National Liberation Army (PNLA) broke the ceasefire in the Shan state, while the New Mon State Party split in the Mon state to the south, prompting a large number of people to join the resistance. The PDF is also gaining ground in Bamar ethnic regions, while Kalay, on the border with India, was nearly completely taken by insurgents. As the Junta weakens, the strategy becomes bolder. PDF forces in central Burma, still largely reliant on homemade weapons, are invading cities, a clear indication that the authorities' resources are dwindling, and their casualties cannot be replaced. So, how much control has the Junta lost? Although it's difficult to obtain precise information in Myanmar, where access to the internet has been cut off in large swathes of territory, some analysts estimate that up to 48% of the country is now controlled by resistance groups. Myawaddy, on the Thai border, was liberated in early April, while a Junta offensive to reclaim the border town was recently repelled. A drone attack was launched against the capital, Naypyidaw, a few weeks ago, and although Yangon remains firmly under the Junta's control, their authority here could soon deteriorate as well. In February, the Tatmadaw announced nationwide conscription to bolster their depleted ranks. "It's a desperate move," Sladnick asserts. Conscription is highly unpopular among ordinary people. It also means that urban middle-class citizens, who could previously pretend that everything was fine, are now forced to confront the truth. The Tatmadaw has been trying to avoid this measure for the same reasons Russia's regime is trying to keep people from Moscow and St. Petersburg out of its war in Ukraine. Don’t close the door From his base on the border between Myanmar and Thailand, Sladnick recently traveled to the Karenni state. There, the Junta completely cut off internet and phones, so Starlink is the only window to the digital world. This also meant that their group was able to witness combat in areas of the country that had not been reported before. After a three-day delay due to the Junta airstrikes, they were able to witness the deterioration of the dictatorship's control over the region. Only four Junta bases remain standing on the outskirts of Loikaw, where Karenni resistance militias and PDF forces are currently advancing. In some of the hill bases captured in February, the recent corpses of the Junta soldiers still littered the ground, while a trip to the village of Hpa Saung placed them directly in the line of fire. In the small town of Mese, twenty police uniforms still lay among the rubble of the former police station, whose occupants presumably perished in the final battle to liberate the city. Mese has now become a refuge for civilians fleeing from the southern Karenni. But while progress is steady, things could move much faster, explains Sladnick: ‘All the resistance fighters tell me they could take the last strongholds of the regime in a week if they had enough ammunition. But every time they advance, they must wait to resupply. It doesn't help that all the villages abandoned by the Tatmadaw forces are full of explosive traps, making it impossible for people to return. This also highlights the paradox of Myanmar's struggle. Despite ongoing successes - in March alone, five thousand square kilometers were liberated, according to researcher Thomas van Linge - the rest of the world seems to have forgotten about them. It might be a deliberate choice. Cooking oil, malaria medication, bullets, and global attention - everything is scarce here. There's even a shortage of raincoats in refugee camps, turning the upcoming seasonal monsoon in a few months into an imminent threat. "I asked one of my colleagues what she would say to the world if she had the chance. She said, 'Don't close the door on us. Open it!'" In Myanmar, enough is happening to fill the news every night, but the internet blackout and the abundance of other conflicts around the world make Myanmar almost invisible to the public," comments Sladnick. In his opinion, the lack of attention may also be due to an outdated image of Myanmar. "People in the West have this image of Myanmar's freedom fighters as rural peasants with an old rifle in their hands. Listen; these people are modern, connected, and very aware of the global struggle between fascism and democracy. They're aware of what's happening in Gaza, Ukraine, and Syria and see themselves fighting for both national self-determination and social justice worldwide. They know this is part of a broader struggle to prevent the spread of authoritarianism and fascism worldwide." With conscription looming, the last pretenses of normalcy under the regime are rapidly fading away. Everyone is forced to take sides, making the conflict even more intense, explains Sladnick. "The other day I had dinner with a former colleague of my wife, a real estate agent with a very sweet demeanor and a pleasant personality. She's not exactly the type of person you'd expect to be an armed rebel. I said to her, 'The revolution is scary.' She replied, 'Yes, but living under the regime is scarier.' I think this is emblematic of the current mood." Despite the challenging road ahead, Sladnick and the resistance fighters in Myanmar remain optimistic. "Everyone I spoke to in Myanmar believes the regime will collapse. Millions of people have already sacrificed everything in the fight for freedom, and I trust that in the end, we will prevail. If we don't receive help from outside, obviously it will take longer, but the regime's days are numbered. It's just a matter of time."

한국어로 읽기Leer en españolIn Deutsch lesen Gap اقرأ بالعربيةLire en françaisЧитать на русском The request by Karim Khan, chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), for arrest warrants for Israeli and Hamas leaders is a significant step in the effort to bring justice to the victims of international crimes in Israel and Palestine. Khan has asked ICC judges to issue warrants on charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes against Yahya Sinwar (head of Hamas in Gaza), Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri (also known as Mohammed Deif, the commander of the military wing of Hamas) and Ismail Haniyeh (head of Hamas’ political bureau, based in Qatar). They are alleged to bear responsibility for international crimes on Israeli and Palestinian territory at least since October 7 2023. Khan has also requested arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, again for war crimes and crimes against humanity. They are alleged to be responsible for crimes in the Gaza Strip since October 8 2023. What have they been accused of? Sinwar, Al-Masri and Haniyeh are charged in relation to the attacks on Israeli civilians on October 7, in which an estimated 1,200 Israeli civilians were killed and at least 245 taken hostage. In addition, the Hamas leaders are accused of other crimes in the context of the ongoing conflict in Gaza. These include: • extermination • murder • hostage taking • rape and other acts of sexual violence • torture • cruel treatment Khan said in his statement: I saw the devastating scenes of these attacks and the profound impact of the unconscionable crimes charged in the applications filed today. Speaking with survivors, I heard how the love within a family, the deepest bonds between a parent and a child, were contorted to inflict unfathomable pain through calculated cruelty and extreme callousness. These acts demand accountability. Khan noted his office conducted extensive investigations, including site visits and interviews with victim survivors, and relied on evidence relating to the conditions in which Israeli hostages have been held in Gaza. Netanyahu and Gallant are alleged to be criminally responsible for a number of international crimes since Israel launched its military action against Hamas in Gaza on October 8, including: • starvation of civilians as a method of warfare • wilfully causing great suffering • wilful killing • intentional attacks against a civilian population • extermination and/or murder • persecution. The prosecutor said the alleged crimes: … were committed as part of a widespread and systematic attack against the Palestinian civilian population pursuant to state policy. These crimes, in our assessment, continue to this day. Noting the horrific suffering of civilians in Gaza, including tens of thousands of casualties and catastrophic hunger, Khan alleged that the means Netanyahu and Gallant chose to pursue Israel’s military aims in Gaza …namely, intentionally causing death, starvation, great suffering, and serious injury to body or health of the civilian population – are criminal. What does this mean in practice? The next step in this process is for three judges in the ICC pre-trial chamber to decide if there are reasonable grounds to believe war crimes and crimes against humanity have been committed. If so, they will issue arrest warrants. It could take months for the judges to make this assessment. If arrest warrants are issued, however, they are very unlikely to be executed. And if none of the accused can be arrested, then no trial will take place because the ICC does not try people in absentia. So, why is it unlikely the accused will be arrested? There are several reasons. First, none of the accused will hand themselves in for prosecution. Netanyahu was outraged by Khan’s decision, calling it “a moral outrage of historic proportions” and accusing him of antisemitism. Hamas has issued a statement strongly denouncing the issuing of arrest warrants against its leaders, claiming it equates “the victim with the executioner”. Second, none of the accused are likely to put themselves in a position to be arrested and turned over to the ICC. Israel is not a signatory to the Rome Statute that established the ICC. Its chief ally, the United States, is also not a member. This would guarantee Netanyahu and Gallant could travel to the US without fear of arrest. Meanwhile, Haniyeh is based in Qatar, which is also not an ICC member state. He may need to curtail travel to other states to avoid risk of arrest. The other two accused Hamas leaders are believed to be hiding in Gaza – they appear more at risk of being killed by Israeli forces than arrest. However, Palestine is an ICC member state, so technically it is obliged to cooperate with the court. In practice, though, it is hard to see how this will happen. Third, the ICC relies on its member states to enforce its actions. It has no independent police force or capacity to execute arrest warrants. The ICC has 124 state parties, while the United Nations has 193 member states. This disparity makes clear the gap between what the ICC seeks to achieve – namely, universal accountability for international crimes – and what it can practically achieve when it lacks the support of implicated or nonaligned countries. What does this mean for the ICC? Khan’s move is unprecedented in one respect. This is the first time the prosecutor’s office has brought charges against a head of state who is supported by Western nations. The move triggered a predictable response from the US. President Joe Biden called it “outrageous” and added: […] there is no equivalence – none – between Israel and Hamas. We will always stand with Israel against threats to its security. But Khan emphasised the importance of the ICC’s independence and impartiality, as well as the equal application of law. No foot soldier, no commander, no civilian leader – no one – can act with impunity. The ICC has previously confirmed its jurisdiction over crimes allegedly committed by the five leaders this week. The prosecutor will be confident the pre-trial chamber will issue the arrest warrants, based on the highly visible nature of the alleged crimes and the volume of evidence available to show reasonable grounds for prosecution. The request for arrest warrants undoubtedly complicates relations between Israel and its allies that are ICC member states. In such a politically charged context, it is fair to describe this effort as a test of the international community’s commitment to the goal of ending impunity for international crimes.

한국어로 읽기Leer en españolIn Deutsch lesen Gap اقرأ بالعربيةLire en françaisЧитать на русском While Australian defence policy looks north, Kiwis focus west. New Zealand has always benefited from strategic isolation and the distance from international conflicts. But as global dangers increase, the reality of the geo-political situation is cutting through in New Zealand’s public discourse. With the active aggression of totalitarian powers like China and Russia causing disruption, New Zealand is waking up the threats they pose to the international order. That’s a good thing for Australia, creating a stronger, more engaged partner to work with in the Pacific and on regional security arrangements. Awareness of the threat that China and Russia pose has evolved in the past 10 years. In June 2022, then Labour prime minister Jacinda Ardern attended the NATO Summit, calling her participation a ‘rare thing’. She condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and said ‘China’s increasing assertiveness is resulting in geopolitical change and competition.’ This mild comment provoked the strong rebuke from Beijing that her comments were ‘unhelpful, regrettable and wrong.’ Her open criticism was a shift from a foreign policy that had been closely tied to protecting the strong trading relationship with China. This shift continued under Chris Hipkins, who replaced Ardern as prime minister until Labour lost office in November. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade released a strategic foreign policy assessment, ‘Navigating a shifting world’, in July 2023. And Hipkins’s defence minister, Andrew Little, said ‘In 2023, we do not live in a benign strategic environment’ as he unveiled a Defence Policy Strategy Statement that achieved cross-party support. With a three-party centre-right coalition government now in office, there is a growing recognition that New Zealand will need to spend more on defence. This is challenging due to excessive pandemic spending that has left a legacy of a bloated public service and a structural fiscal deficit. But on 10 May the government said money from cost-cutting elsewhere in the Defence budget would be recycled back into Defence rather than being subsumed by fiscal consolidation. All parties in the new government have made positive statements about New Zealand reaching the NATO standard of spending 2 percent of gross domestic product on defence. New Zealand last achieved this level in 1992, and spending has continued to decline in recent decades. Currently sitting just above 1 percent of GDP, the fraction is significantly less than Australia’s. New Zealand’s GDP per capita is only three-quarters of Australia’s, meaning its defence spending per person is much lower. The inaugural Australia–New Zealand Foreign and Defence Ministerial Consultations in February bought a new focus to the trans-Tasman relationship. Ministers of both countries said the meetings had taken place amid the most challenging global strategic environment in decades. They committed to increasing military integration. The debate in New Zealand has become sharper as the country has considered joining Pillar 2 of AUKUS, the part of the Australian-British-US defence partnership that deals with technology other than nuclear submarines. Active military collaboration for international security marks a strong shift away from the view of then Labour prime minister Helen Clark, who said in March 2001 that New Zealand was ‘very lucky to live in one of the most strategically secure environments in the world’ and that New Zealanders ‘would like other nations to experience the peace of a benign strategic environment too.’ For as long as her view dominated foreign policy circles, attention was on trade policy; there was little focus on national security or defence issues, beyond a fascination with nuclear disarmament. Clark and her generation promoted a so-called independent foreign policy. Encouraged by the anti-American and anti-nuclear lobby, this amounted to a shift away from the Western alliance. The more modern view in New Zealand is that, as a small country, it must help to uphold the international rules-based system and contribute to stability and security efforts. New Zealand has engaged with Asian-centred regional collaborative security frameworks. More spending is needed. The government will release a new Defence Capability Plan in June or July, setting out procurement priorities. There is no longer a sense that spending on defence will be unpopular. The main challenge will be renewing the fleet of the Royal New Zealand Navy (RNZN). Key units that need replacement are the two Anzac-class frigates, and there are clear signals that New Zealand will consider buying ships of the general-purpose frigate class that is intended for the Royal Australian Navy. Using the same design would promote interoperability and economy. The Royal New Zealand Air Force has modernised with the recent purchase of P-8A Poseidon maritime patrollers and C-130J Hercules airlifters. New naval helicopters are likely to come soon. New Zealand can provide better awareness of the eastern approaches to Australia with Poseidons. A runway extension on the Chatham Islands, 800km east of mainland New Zealand, was opened in January to handle aircraft of the size of Poseidons. These assets are vital to supporting ongoing participation in collective security efforts. The first international deployment of a New Zealand Poseidon was to Japan in April, to help enforce UN Security Council sanctions against North Korea. Kiwi gunners have trained Ukrainian soldiers in Britain. The RNZN is vital to Pacific relationships. New Zealand’s strategic isolation is becoming less apparent amid cyber attacks on the parliament in Wellington, great-power competition in Antarctica and acceptance that the country’s trade routes are exposed. Global conflicts feature on Kiwis’ screens daily, showing that the world is a more dangerous place and that foreign policy must change. It’s understood that stepping up will come at a cost. New Zealand needs to have defence capability that can integrate and enhance Australian forces in the Indo-Pacific. The new government knows that Australia, as New Zealand’s only formal defence ally, is the most important partner.

한국어로 읽기Leer en españolIn Deutsch lesen Gap اقرأ بالعربيةLire en françaisЧитать на русском How France manages the first outbreak of serious violence in New Caledonia in 40 years will affect not only its future role there but its acceptance as a resident Pacific, and Indo-Pacific, power. The violence of indigenous independence supporters, many of them very young, signals that the inconclusiveness of earlier peace agreements risks taking New Caledonia back to the bloodshed of the 1980s. The unrest is targeting the capital, Noumea, and its population of Europeans, who mostly support staying French. The wounds are deep. The peace agreements that ended violence in the 1980s largely succeeded because of difficult and constant compromises by the French state, loyalist parties and independence parties. Mutual trust in the promises of those agreements to work towards self-determination underpinned the French state conducting three referendums in New Caledonia from 2018 to 2021. The first two were impeccably organised and showed, respectively, that 56.7 percent and 53.3 percent opposed independence. But the state dropped the ball in a third referendum in 2021, sticking with an intended voting date despite indigenous requests for postponement. At the time, hundreds of Kanaks had died from Covid-19. Their leaders said they could not ask their people to campaign or vote when their traditions required lengthy mourning rituals. The resulting indigenous boycott saw the count of opposition to independence soar to 96.5 percent. Since then, divisions have deepened. Loyalists, backed by the government in Paris, say all three votes were valid and want to cement the territory as part of France. Independence groups reject the third vote and seek another; some refuse to participate in discussion about the future. They rejected Macron’s offer of a chemin de pardon (path of forgiveness) when he visited in July 2023. They did not attend a meeting he convened, and their supporters did not turn out for his major speech there, sending a strong message of discontent. Macron then threatened unilateral action unless local parties came to an agreement. Informal discussions between some parties from each side in December ended with wide divergences, including over a further independence vote and voter eligibility. To set a deadline, Macron introduced legislation postponing local elections from April 2024 to December 2025, and he put forward another bill that would amend the French constitution, imposing broader voter eligibility and thereby diluting the Kanak voting share, unless locals reached agreement before the end of June. Demonstrations erupted into violence on 13 May, the day France’s National Assembly debated imposing from Paris the enlargement of voter eligibility. The destruction perpetrated by young Kanaks signalled not only to France and loyalist parties who were their targets but also to Kanak leaders and neighbouring countries the depth of distress of a new generation who felt disrespected and excluded from determining the future of their homeland. How France responds will be decisive for its sustainable future in New Caledonia. New Caledonia’s population is about 270,000. In the census of 2019, indigenous Kanaks were 41 percent, Europeans 29 percent and other Pacific islanders and ‘others’ composed the remaining 30 percent. Another census is due this year. Kanaks may now exceed 45 percent, since there have been net departures of about 2000 people a year since 2015, almost all presumably non-indigenous. Moreover, some people in the ‘others’ category, which includes the sub-categories of ‘mixed’ and ‘Caldeonian’, would also be Kanaks. And the Kanak share of the population will rise, especially since recent developments may contribute to an increase in non-Kanak departures. While New Caledonia’s neighbours have quietly supported the peace agreements, they remain concerned about the interests of the islanders in the non-self-governing French territory. Some of them took New Caledonia to the United Nations Decolonisation Committee in 1986, ensuring annual UN scrutiny of the territory and France’s dealings with it since then. The Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) has regularly sent missions monitoring implementation of the Noumea Accord and observed each referendum, expressing serious reservations on the third. The Melanesian Spearhead Group (Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands and New Caledonia’s FLNKS independence coalition) was formed in the mid-1980s specifically to support Kanak independence claims. With the eruption of violence, their silence has broken. Making Australia’s highest-level statement in decades, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Australia was closely monitoring the situation and encouraged all parties to work together constructively to shape the institutional future of New Caledonia. PIF Secretary-General Henry Puna said he was not surprised by the riots, noting it was unfortunate that the third referendum had been allowed to go ahead amid the pandemic. PIF chair and Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown said New Caledonia and French Polynesia had been included in the forum ‘in recognition of their calls for greater autonomy coming from their people’, and supported providing help to prevent conflict. Vanuatu Prime Minister and Melanesian Spearhead Group Chair Charlot Salwai publicly opposed France’s constitutional change and urged a return to the spirit of the peace agreements and the sending of a dialogue mission led by a mutually respected person. France has done much to regain the acceptance and trust of the region in recent decades. Responding to island governments’ visceral opposition to its policies in the 1980s, France abandoned nuclear testing in the region and gave greater autonomy to its Pacific territories. It did so by respecting local governments and people. Macron has articulated an Indo-Pacific vision for France that’s firmly based on its sovereignty in the Pacific. But, to maintain France’s claims as an Indo-Pacific power, he must listen to the large and growing indigenous minority in its pre-eminent Pacific territory, New Caledonia. And he must listen to the appeals of Pacific island governments, so they and France can move forward together with humility and respect.

한국어로 읽기Leer en españolIn Deutsch lesen Gap اقرأ بالعربيةLire en françaisЧитать на русском The local population invariably pays the price for financial punishment of the regime. So better for the world to directly support communities instead. The decision by Australia in February last year to impose sanctions on 16 members of Myanmar’s ruling junta, as well as two military holding companies, received rare praise from a wide range of Myanmar resistance groups, international activists, and trade unions who had long been dissatisfied with Australia’s Myanmar policy. A year later, in February this year, when two Myanmar government banks and three private companies supplying jet fuel to the military were added to the sanctions list, there were almost standing applause. This is symptomatic of a world where many activists see sanctions on the military regime as the primary measure of “good policy”. Unfortunately, the obsession with sanctions draws attention away from other important issues, notably the nature and quality of international aid to the Myanmar people. Don’t get me wrong. There are strong normative reasons for imposing sanctions on Myanmar’s military rulers. Sanctions signal support for international law and lend weight to the broader policy of ostracising the military regime, which is deeply illegitimate and guilty of mass atrocities. They also provide a measure of symbolic support for the resistance, which has called for sanctions to support their cause. With so many people believing that sanctions are simply the right thing to do, not imposing them also have significant reputational costs for Australia. But as a strategic tool, sanctions are overrated. No Myanmar general is going to be shamed by Western criticism into changing their behaviour or induced by a travel ban to surrender their power and privileges as the resistance demands. In theory, by targeting the flows of arms and finance to the regime, sanctions may weaken the junta’s military capabilities and help tip the balance of power on the battlefield. But the main sources of military revenue are simply out of reach. As the de facto government of the rump state of Myanmar, the junta has inherited the state’s money printing press, as well as its sovereign borrowing rights, and the ability to set foreign exchange rates. Moreover, it is skimming hundreds of millions of dollars annually off the drugs trade and other illicit economic activity through a combination of protection payments and official “whitewashing” of private profits of unknown origin. Sure, sanctions bite. But any pain the military regime feels will invariably be transferred to other groups. Indeed, given the military’s control of key levers of the economy, the term “targeted sanctions” employed by governments such as Australia’s is really a misnomer. Whatever the generals lose in one area, they can take somewhere else. Anyone who thinks sanctions are the solution should take a closer look at daily life in Myanmar. While the population is suffering from run-amok inflation and shortages of vital goods such as medicine, there are no indications that the junta has had to reduce its arms spending. On the contrary, the number of air strikes on resistance forces and local communities continues to rise month by month. But if sanctions aren’t the solution, what is? To answer that question, we need to take step back and look at what is happening on the ground in Myanmar. With the military suffering defeat after defeat on the battlefield and gradually retreating from large parts of the country, resistance groups have started building parallel state structures and providing public services in “liberated areas” outside of central state control. Across Myanmar, new political authorities are claiming jurisdiction to govern significant territories and populations. They are establishing new government institutions; pronouncing better laws and policies; and providing security, health, and education for millions of people. While much of this is still rudimentary, they are effectively building mini states. At the grassroots level, thousands of community-based organisations are delivering humanitarian assistance to conflict-affected populations, while local communities are building their own roads and schools, and hiring their own teachers and nurses. This fragmentation of authority may seem confusing – and even threatening – to many outsiders who see it as a symptom of state failure. But it can also be viewed as the basis for a new kind of state, better suited to unifying and serving Myanmar’s diverse ethnic communities who have suffered greatly from decades of overcentralisation and continuous civil war. When asked, senior Australian government officials invariably say their primary goal in Myanmar is to help its long-suffering population. And many of their critics presumably would agree. By supporting these emerging local governance structures, Australia could help the resistance by increasing its relevance to the daily struggles of local people. It could also help vulnerable communities by expanding humanitarian assistance and basic social services. And it could help the country by supporting longer-term institution-building and establishing the basis for a new federal democratic union. All of this would help the Myanmar people in ways that sanctions never will.

한국어로 읽기Leer en españolIn Deutsch lesen Gap اقرأ بالعربيةLire en françaisЧитать на русском According to the EU, Russia had set several red lines, but then allowed them to be crossed without reacting. Therefore, gradually increasing the temperature can be a good strategy... Whereas, throughout the first two years of NATO's war against Russia in Ukraine, the record of warmongering was almost equally shared between the US and the UK, more recently it has been attributed to Macron. The reasons are diverse, ranging from the great difficulty France is currently facing to the illusion of being able to take advantage of the German crisis to assume European leadership, including the political dwarfism of its president. But the underlying reason is that European leaders, almost unanimously, have essentially resigned themselves to carrying out the task left by the US: taking on the burden of the conflict in the East, supporting Kiev even beyond the last Ukrainian, if necessary. Also in this case, the reasons why Europeans have convinced themselves that they cannot escape this task are multiple. What matters is understanding how they believe they will do it, when they believe they will do it, and, obviously, if they really believe they can do it. Judging by how interventionist statements are intensifying, it seems that the timeline is not so distant; probably, in the European offices, they envision initiating an operational phase at least after the US elections, also to have a clearer idea of the White House's orientations and the timing of their public announcements. At the same time, the evolution on the battlefield does not seem very compatible with these optimistic forecasts: the arrival of good weather has already revitalized the Russian initiative along the entire front line, and the structural deficiencies of the Ukrainian army are evident. Events, therefore, could accelerate. Regarding the how, it seems quite clear that the idea is to boil the Russian bear like the proverbial frog. Step by step, counting on Moscow wanting to avoid an escalation, they will end up letting things happen without a strong response. In conclusion, it is believed that Russia had set several red lines, but then allowed them to be crossed without reacting. Therefore, gradually increasing the temperature can be a good strategy. Furthermore, the public discourse (the narrative used to prepare public opinion) is a mix of nonsense and half-truths, but reading them carefully, the design becomes clear. Macron puffs up his chest and makes aggressive statements, but then between Ukrainian requests and European readiness, the scheme emerges: start by training the Ukrainians in Ukraine (150,000 men...) so they are closer (and prepared) to the front [1]. After all, NATO countries have been training them for years, only the location changes... One imagines that such a debut would be more acceptable to European citizens, and that after all Moscow would not react beyond "strong protests." Then we'll see from there. Clearly, the weak point is the actual possibility of creating the design according to your own scheme. Firstly, the premise is that Russia behaves exactly as expected in Brussels, which, however, is not at all a fact. As always, caught up in their autism, European leaders do not listen, and even if they do, they do not understand. Here, in fact, we are beyond the light statements of Medvedev; when a diplomat like Lavrov clearly says that if Europeans want war they are prepared, it should not be taken lightly. Moreover, when Monti in turn says that "to build Europe" blood must be shed, he is simply more sincere and pragmatic than Macron. The problem, of course, is that a small-step scheme simply runs the risk of resulting in a series of useless steps. The critical problems of the Ukrainian army are basically three: lack of artillery ammunition, lack of personnel, lack of anti-missile and anti-aircraft systems. For the first one, Europeans are unable to remedy it. Even if the Russian industrial relative production did not grow (as it is happening) and remained at current levels, Europeans would take years and years to match it. As for the second one, the difficulties to solve it would be at least the same. Sending even 20-30,000 men would not have a decisive impact. Firstly, we would be talking about men with no real combat experience, let alone in a war of attrition like the one being fought. The logistic support would be very complicated, as the rear would have to be located in Poland and/or Romania, a thousand kilometers from the front. And anyway, even such a figure would amount to 5,000-6,000 men in combat. Irrelevant. It would be necessary to send at least 200 or 300 thousand men, practically the entire European NATO force, to have any impact. The Europeans could transfer almost all of their missile/anti-aircraft defense systems, leaving their respective countries almost defenseless, but this would also have a limited impact over time: the Russians would exploit the large quantities they have to saturate the defenses and destroy the batteries one after another (as Iran did with Israel). The only thing that could introduce an element of discontinuity would be the intervention of the air force. European fighter-bombers taking off from airfields outside of Ukraine, striking Russian rear areas. But this would inevitably bring the war to European soil, as it is clear that at that point the Russians would strike the departure air bases with their ballistic and hypersonic missiles. The same would happen if missile defense batteries from neighboring countries were used. Furthermore, if this level of intervention were to create problems for the Russian armed forces, it is virtually certain that at that point Moscow would resort to tactical nuclear weapons. Because for Russia, the risk of defeat in this war equates to an existential threat. And here Macron comes into play again, boldly promising the coverage of the French nuclear umbrella, the 'force de frappe'. Unfortunately, the comparison with the Russian Federation is ruthless, and the quantity of French nuclear weapons (as well as the aircraft carriers to deliver them to the target) is ridiculously smaller: At most, France can offer the shelter of a cocktail umbrella, and Moscow would turn Paris into a milkshake. Therefore, the European strategy of boiling the Russian bear slowly – though as stupid as a frog - cannot work. Gradualness simply runs the risk of exacting a very high price (in terms of casualties, wounded, destroyed weapon systems, etc.) without achieving any noteworthy result. On the other hand, an acceleration, by promptly engaging a significant force in combat, is practically equivalent to plunging Europe into a prolonged conflict, without equally managing to change the terms of the equation. Without direct intervention from the US, European countries alone are absolutely incapable of significantly engaging Russia [2]. But direct engagement is exactly what Washington shies away from, and they are very aware that once you put boots on the ground, there's no turning back, and the logic of war drags you deeper and deeper. Something they learned well from Vietnam, and they have never forgotten. Therefore, combat continues to present itself as a gamble. It's like having far fewer chips than your opponent and still betting everything without even holding a pair of twos in your hand. In all of this, of course, we have not taken into account at all the fact that there is no unified point of view - beyond the facade - among the different European capitals. Likely, there are countries - not only Hungary, or Slovakia, but also Germany and Italy... - that secretly hope for an immediate collapse of the Ukrainian army, to render any hypothesis of deploying their own forces useless. Although the scenario briefly described is very realistic, it is clear that there are those who believe that Europeans would have an excellent opportunity in a confrontation with Russia. That this is believed possible among political leaders, although dangerously disheartening, is also plausible; much worse is when it is supported by senior NATO military commanders, whose opinion cannot fail to influence political decisions. And quite a few generals, French, German, and from other countries, seem convinced that they can win the game (or perhaps just dream of a moment of glory, after a lifetime behind a desk or playing war games). [3] Certainly, what happens on the European chessboard also depends on what happens elsewhere, because this is a global game where everything is interconnected. The problem is that European leaders not only lack decision-making power, not even marginally, regarding this dimension, but they also completely lack global vision. The real one, of course, not the one that appears in the news. The coming months, therefore, will be full of consequences for the Europeans, but they will also be largely played as pawns, with their movements directed largely from outside, while the effects will be almost entirely at our expense. And it is clear that the interest of the US is to push the Europeans, but not NATO, to assume the risks and burdens of the conflict, which Washington would like to prolong indefinitely. [4] The inadequacy of leadership is another risk factor, in addition to the objectives. In this context, as we see, these leaders tend to curl up like a hedgehog; aware of their own weakness, both against the enemy they are confronting and their own citizens who do not wish to die for Kiev (not even for Washington), they are increasingly moving towards the militarization of public space, the restriction of democratic spaces, and an authoritarian shift. They wage war on the dissent of their citizens today so that they can wage war on Russia tomorrow. And if the European peoples lose this war, they will be dragged into another one, in which defeat could coincide with the extinction of European civilization as we have known it. Notes [1] According to The New York Times, due to the shortage of troops, the Kiev government has asked the US and NATO to "contribute to the training of 150,000 new recruits" within Ukraine so that they can be deployed to the front lines quicker. Obviously, this is a gigantic absurdity. However, these training camps should be located as far away from the front lines as possible to minimize the risk of being targeted (large troop concentrations are obviously an attractive target), and they would require adequate protection against air attacks; the risks and logistical efforts would far outweigh the minimal benefit of having recruits in training a little closer to the battle line. This is blatantly a ploy to bring NATO military personnel onto the ground. [2] A research done by the British newspaper 'The Daily Mail' established that in the event of an open conflict between NATO and Russia, NATO forces would not be sufficient. Although the strength of the Atlantic Alliance appears superior in numerical terms, this superiority is essentially due to the armed forces of the US, without which it significantly deteriorates. Additionally, the research does not consider, even marginally, factors such as industrial production, experience, combat capability, etc. [3] According to the commander of the combined armed forces of the Alliance in Europe, General Christopher Cavoli (USA), the Russian armed forces "lack the skills and capabilities to operate on the scale necessary to exploit any advances to gain a strategic advantage." [4] In this regard, a reputable American magazine like 'Foreign Affairs' has explicitly indicated this direction, and certainly not by chance. According to the FA, which is obviously closely aligned with the State Department, "European countries must do more [...] They should seriously consider deploying troops in Ukraine to provide logistical support and training, to protect Ukraine's borders and critical infrastructure, or even to defend Ukrainian cities. They must make it clear to Russia that Europe is willing to protect Ukraine's territorial sovereignty". After dismissing the idea that this could lead to World War III, the authors cunningly suggest that "a strictly non-combat mission would be easier to sell in most European capitals". However, they immediately stress that "Europe should consider a direct combat mission to help protect Ukrainian territory". In fact, "since European forces would operate outside the framework and territory of NATO, any losses would not trigger a response under Article 5 and would not involve the United States". And to reassure European leaders - to whom the message is clearly directed - they add: "At a certain point, European leaders must ignore Putin's threats, as they are nothing more than propaganda." The article was translated and licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 ES (Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 3.0 España).

한국어로 읽기Leer en españolIn Deutsch lesen Gap اقرأ بالعربيةLire en françaisЧитать на русском New Caledonia’s capital city, Noumea, has endured widespread violent rioting over the past 48 hours. This crisis intensified rapidly, taking local authorities by surprise. Peaceful protests had been occurring across the country in the preceding weeks as the French National Assembly in Paris deliberated on a constitutional amendment that would increase the territory’s electoral roll. As the date for the vote grew closer, however, protests became more obstructive and by Monday night had spiralled into uncontrolled violence. Since then, countless public buildings, business locations and private dwellings have been subjected to arson. Blockades erected by protesters prevent movement around greater Noumea. Four people have died. Security reinforcements have been deployed, the city is under nightly curfew, and a state of emergency has been declared. Citizens in many areas of Noumea are now also establishing their own neighbourhood protection militias. To understand how this situation has spiralled so quickly, it’s important to consider the complex currents of political and socioeconomic alienation at play. The political dispute At one level, the crisis is political, reflecting contention over a constitutional vote taken in Paris that will expand citizens’ voting rights. The change adds roughly 25,000 voters to the electoral role in New Caledonia by extending voting rights to French people who’ve lived on the island for ten years. This reform makes clear the political power that France continues to exercise over the territory. The current changes have proven divisive because they undo provisions in the 1998 Noumea Accord, particularly the restriction of voting rights. The accord was designed to “rebalance” political inequalities so the interests of Indigenous Kanaks and the descendants of French settlers would be equally recognised. This helped to consolidate peace between these groups after a long period of conflict in the 1980s, known locally as “the evenements”. A loyalist group of elected representatives in New Caledonia’s parliament reject the contemporary significance of “rebalancing” (in French “rééquilibrage”) with regard to the electoral status of Kanak people. They argue after three referendums on the question of New Caledonian independence, held between 2018 and 2021, all of which produced a majority no vote, the time for electoral reform is well overdue. This position is made clear by Nicolas Metzdorf. A key loyalist, he defined the constitutional amendment, which was passed by the National Assembly in Paris on Tuesday, as a vote for democracy and “universalism”. Yet this view is roundly rejected by Kanak pro-independence leaders who say these amendments undermine the political status of Indigenous Kanak people, who constitute a minority of the voting population. These leaders also refuse to accept that the decolonisation agenda has been concluded, as loyalists assert. Instead, they dispute the outcome of the final 2021 referendum which, they argue, was forced on the territory by French authorities too soon after the outbreak of the COVID pandemic. This disregarded the fact that Kanak communities bore disproportionate impacts of the pandemic and were unable able to fully mobilise before the vote. Demands that the referendum be delayed were rejected, and many Kanak people abstained as a result. In this context, the disputed electoral reforms decided in Paris this week are seen by pro-independence camps as yet another political prescription imposed on Kanak people. A leading figure of one Indigenous Kanak women’s organisation described the vote to me as a solution that pushes “Kanak people into the gutter”, one that would have “us living on our knees”. Beyond the politics Many political commentators are likening the violence observed in recent days to the political violence of les événements of the 1980s, which exacted a heavy toll on the country. Yet this is disputed by local women leaders with whom I am in conversation, who have encouraged me to look beyond the central political factors in analysing this crisis. Some female leaders reject the view this violence is simply an echo of past political grievances. They point to the highly visible wealth disparities in the country. These fuel resentment and the profound racial inequalities that deprive Kanak youths of opportunity and contribute to their alienation. Women have also told me they’re concerned about the unpredictability of the current situation. In the 1980s, violent campaigns were coordinated by Kanak leaders, they tell me. They were organised. They were controlled. In contrast, today it is the youth taking the lead and using violence because they feel they have no other choice. There is no coordination. They are acting through frustration and because they feel they have “no other means” to be recognised. There’s also frustration with political leaders on all sides. Late on Wednesday, Kanak pro-independence political leaders held a press conference. They echoed their loyalist political opponents in condemning the violence and issuing calls for dialogue. The leaders made specific calls to the “youths” engaged in the violence to respect the importance of a political process and warned against a logic of vengeance. The women civil society leaders I have been speaking to were frustrated by the weakness of this messaging. The women say political leaders on all sides have failed to address the realities faced by Kanak youths. They argue if dialogue remains simply focused on the political roots of the dispute, and only involves the same elites that have dominated the debate so far, little will be understood and little will be resolved. Likewise, they lament the heaviness of the current “command and control” state security response. It contradicts the calls for dialogue and makes little room for civil society participation of any sort. These approaches put a lid on grievances, but they do not resolve them. Women leaders observing the current situation are anguished and heartbroken for their country and its people. They say if the crisis is to be resolved sustainably, the solutions cannot be imposed and the words cannot be empty. Instead, they call for the space to be heard and to contribute to a resolution. Until that time they live with anxiety and uncertainty, waiting for the fires to subside, and the smoke currently hanging over a wounded Noumea to clear.

한국어로 읽기Leer en españolIn Deutsch lesen Gap اقرأ بالعربيةLire en françaisЧитать на русском U.S. Marines joined Filipino counterparts on May 5, 2024, for a mock battle at a telling location: a small, remote territory just 100 miles off the southern tip of the contested island of Taiwan. The combat drill is part of the weekslong Exercise Balikatan that has brought together naval, air and ground forces of the Philippines and the United States, with Australia and France also joining some maneuvers. With a planned “maritime strike” on May 8 in which a decommissioned ship will be sunk and exercises at repelling an advancing foreign army, the aim is to display a united front against China, which Washington and Manila perceive as a threat to the region. Balikatan is Tagalog for “shoulder to shoulder.” Joint Philippines-U.S. naval drills have become an annual event. But as an expert in international relations, I believe this year’s drills mark an inflection point in the regional politics of the South China Sea. For the first time, warships taking part in the exercise ventured outside the 12-mile boundary that demarcates the territorial waters of the Philippines. This extends military operations into the gray area where the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone rubs up against the territory claimed by China and designated by its “nine-dash line.”    Also for the first time, the U.S. deployed an advanced mobile launcher for medium-range ballistic and cruise missiles of a type that had been banned under the now-defunct Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. In addition, the Philippine navy is showing off its newest acquisition, a South Korean-built missile frigate. The South China Sea has long been the source of maritime disputes between China, which claims the vast majority of its waters, and nations including Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia. In addition, heightened tensions over the status of Taiwan – a territory that the Biden administration has pledged to defend militarily in the event of a Chinese invasion – have made the South China Sea even more strategically important. Containment at sea The latest joint maneuvers come amid two developments that could go some way to influence the future trajectory of tensions in the South China Sea. First, the Philippines has grown increasingly assertive in countering China’s claims in the region; and second, the U.S. is increasingly intent on building up regional alliances as part of a strategy to contain China. The Philippines-U.S. alignment is more robust than ever. After a brief interval during the 2016-22 presidency of Rodrigo Duterte, U.S. warships and military aircraft once again operate out of bases in the Philippines. Joint naval patrols resumed in early 2023. At the same time, Manila granted U.S. troops unprecedented access to facilities on the northern Batanes islands, which have become the focus of current joint operations. Meanwhile, Washington has become more vocal in condemning challenges to the Philippines from China. U.S. officials had carefully avoided promising to protect the far-flung islands, atolls and reefs claimed by Manila for seven decades following the signing of the Mutual Defense Treaty with the Philippines in 1951. Only in March 2019 did then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo assert that the treaty covers all of the geographical area over which the Philippines asserts sovereignty. In February 2023, Presidents Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and Joe Biden doubled the number of bases in the Philippines open to the U.S. military. That May, the two leaders affirmed that the Mutual Defense Treaty applies to armed attacks that take place “anywhere in the South China Sea.” Causing waves, rocking the boat Firmer ties to the U.S. have been accompanied by more combative behavior on the part of the Philippines. In May 2023, the Philippines coast guard introduced demarcation buoys around Whitsun Reef – the site of an intense confrontation with China’s maritime militia a year earlier. Reports circulated three months later that Philippine marines planned to construct permanent outposts in the vicinity of the hotly contested Scarborough Shoal. And a Philippine coast guard ship, with the commander of the country’s armed forces aboard, approached Scarborough Shoal in November, before being forced to retreat by Chinese maritime militia vessels. Then in January 2024, the Philippines broke with its adherence to a prohibition on erecting structures on disputed territory, which was part of the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, by installing electronic surveillance equipment on Thitu Island, which sits beyond Scarborough Shoal in the heart of a cluster of disputed formations. This was followed by announced plans to put water desalination plants on Thitu, Nanshan Island and Second Thomas Shoal, making it possible to maintain permanent garrisons on these isolated outposts. Manila has continued to assert its maritime rights by announcing that armed forces would escort exploration and mining activities in the exclusive economic zone. Further acts that could be seen as provocative in Beijing followed, including the stationing of a Philippine navy corvette at nearby Palawan Island and a joint flyover by Philippine warplanes and a U.S. Air Force B-52 heavy bomber. A raft of Chinese responses It is clear that the deepening of Philippines-U.S. ties has given Manila the confidence to undertake a variety of combative acts toward China. The question is, to what ends? A more assertive Philippines may end up contributing to the U.S. strategy to deter Beijing from extending its presence in the South China Sea and launching what many in Washington fear: an invasion of Taiwan. But it is possible that heightened truculence on the part of the Philippines will goad Beijing into being more aggressive, diminishing the prospects for regional stability. As the Philippines-U.S. alignment has strengthened, Beijing has boosted the number of warships it deploys in the South China Sea and escalated maritime operations around Thitu Island, Second Thomas Shoal and Iroquois Reef – all of which the Philippines considers its sovereign territory. In early March 2024, two Chinese research ships moved into Benham Rise, a resource-rich shelf situated on the eastern coast of the Philippines, outside the South China Sea. Weeks later, a Philippines coast guard cutter surveying a sandbar near Thitu was harassed not only by Chinese coast guard and maritime militia ships but also by a missile frigate of the People’s Liberation Army Navy, which for the first time launched a helicopter to shadow the cutter. Washington has taken no public steps to dampen tensions between Manila and Beijing. Rather, Secretary of State Antony Blinken expressed full-throated support for “our ironclad defense commitments” during a mid-March 2024 stopover in Manila. Reassured of U.S. backing, Marcos has amped up the rhetoric, proclaiming that Manila would respond to any troublemaking on Beijing’s part by implementing a “countermeasure package that is proportionate, deliberate and reasonable.” “Filipinos,” he added, “do not yield.” Such an approach, according to Marcos, was now feasible due to the U.S. and its regional allies offering “to help us on what the Philippines requires to protect and secure our sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction.” The danger is that as the Philippines grows more assured by U.S. support, it may grow reckless in dealing with China. Rather than deterring China from further expansion, the deepening Philippines-U.S. alignment and associated Filipino assertiveness may only ramp up Beijing’s apprehensiveness over its continued access to the South China Sea – through which virtually all of its energy imports and most of its exports flow. And there is little reason to expect that Washington will be able to prevent an emboldened Manila from continuing down the path of confronting China in the South China Sea. To Beijing, the prospect of an emboldened Philippines forging active strategic partnerships with Australia, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam and – most troublesome of all – Taiwan makes the situation all the more perilous.

한국어로 읽기Leer en españolIn Deutsch lesen Gap اقرأ بالعربيةLire en françaisЧитать на русском This analysis is part of the Geopolitical Conflict Overview 2023. Abstract The security crisis in Sahel is spreading to the northern regions of the Gulf of Guinea coastal countries: Benin, Togo, Côte d’Ivoire, and Ghana. Until recently, counterterrorism experts were wary of the jihadists' ability to expand along the West African coastline because these states, unlike their Sahelian neighbors, are more politically stable and have greater control over their borders. However, while the coastal countries are not as fragile as those in the Sahel, they have structural vulnerabilities, perpetuated by a north-south division in terms of development and economic opportunities. There is a religious factor also: unlike the Sahel, the Gulf of Guinea countries have a large Christian population and elites that sometimes have tended to marginalize Muslims. Thus, jihadist groups are being effective in exploiting this resentment against the state among the communities of the northern border regions of these countries, and they are succeeding in recruiting young Muslims with socio-ethnic links to the Sahel. Introduction The security crisis affecting the central Sahel is spreading to the northern regions of the coastal countries of the Gulf of Guinea: Benin, Togo, Ivory Coast, and Ghana. Thus, violent incidents and terrorist attacks are crossing the porous borders from Burkina Faso into the coastal states. Between January 2021 and July 2023, 459 incidents — 171 social disturbances and 288 episodes of violence — have been recorded in the northern regions of Benin, Togo, Ghana, and Ivory Coast (Reliefweb, 2023).    Source: https://reliefweb.int/report/benin/outil-de-veille-multirisques-pour-les-pays-cotiers-dafrique-de-louest-benin-cotedivoire-ghana-togo-granit-au-30-septembre-2023 The network of protected forest areas in the region facilitates jihadist expansion. Ivory Coast, Ghana, Togo, and Benin host approximately 588 forest reserves covering around 142,000 km2. 188 of these reserves, including four of the five largest ones, are located within ten kilometers of an international border. In Ivory Coast alone, there are 249 reserves. None of them are separated by more than twenty-six kilometers from a border, and over a quarter of them border another reserve. These protected areas are crucial for preserving the remaining wildlife in the region but are at the center of an unprecedented security problem. As hideouts and routes for acting unnoticed, the reserves are a resource that favors the expansion plans of terrorist groups (Brottem, 2022a). The jihadist[1] group linked to both the Islamic State in the Greater Sahara (ISGS) and the regional franchise of Al Qaeda, Jama'at Nasr al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM), has been operating with impunity in these forest reserves for years. This movement was first observed along the transhumance corridors extending from southern Algeria to these forests on the borders of the coastal states shortly after France began its anti-terrorism operations in Mali in 2013. The local jihadists, familiar with these corridors, moved south in search of safe resting spaces in the forests during the French operations in the Sahel. These forest reserves hinder aerial surveillance, provide access to food and fuel supplies, and facilitate discreet recruitment of young people to join the jihadist cause among marginalized communities (Bernard, 2021). So, groups like JNIM and ISGS have demonstrated their effectiveness in transforming a range of armed actors — bandits, rebels, militants, smugglers, local militias, and poachers — into allied and auxiliary groups, establishing a unity of purpose to undermine state control and facilitate illicit activities (Nsaibia, 2020). The maritime outlets of these four countries and their strategic position favor the establishment of organized crime in their territories, operating in their ports and coasts as logistical and distribution centers. Thus, the Gulf of Guinea and specifically Ivory Coast, Ghana, Togo, Benin, and Nigeria constitute entry and transit points in the routes of arms trafficking and cocaine and other narcotics. Other significant criminal activities include tobacco smuggling, motorcycles, and motor vehicle trafficking. This illicit trafficking directly fosters terrorist activity since, apart from the link between terrorist groups and criminal networks for the acquisition of weapons, a relationship can be established between the illegal flow of certain products and the ‘modus operandi’ of jihadist organizations. The illicit trafficking of fertilizers is an example, as they are introduced as contraband products from Ghana to Burkina Faso and used for the creation of improvised explosive devices (Collado, 2021). Thus, in the northern regions of the coastal countries, there has been a growing presence of jihadist groups that, before committing attacks, undergo a process of local approach and establishment. The arrival of this type of violence in the coastal countries of the Gulf of Guinea is a source of particular concern for the governments of these four countries, as well as for the international community, which fears that the destabilization in the region may lead to new humanitarian crises or exacerbate pre-existing problems. Benin, Togo, Ivory Coast, and Ghana are economically stronger than their northern Sahel neighbors, but they also have weaknesses: factors such as the lack of economic and educational opportunities among youth, ethnic disputes, differences in living conditions between northern and southern populations, or conflicts over land ownership facilitate the potential establishment of terrorist groups (Summers, 2022). Until recently, counterterrorism experts were skeptical of the jihadists' ability to expand along the West African coast because these states, unlike their Sahelian neighbors, are more politically stable and have greater control over their borders. According to this logic, stronger security forces and government structures made jihadism unwelcome. However, while coastal countries are not as fragile as those in the Sahel, they have structural vulnerabilities perpetuated by a north-south division in terms of development and economic opportunities. Underdevelopment prevails in the north due to the distance from economically booming cities near the ports. The north-south gap is exacerbated by poor infrastructure and lack of roads. Northern populations are often deprived of resources — such as access to employment and education — which are available in the more industrialized southern regions (Bernard, 2021). In addition to these socioeconomic and intercommunity differences, a religious factor comes into play: unlike the Sahel, countries in the Gulf of Guinea have a significant Christian population and elites that sometimes tend to marginalize Muslims (Guiffard, 2023). Benin The activity of jihadist groups in Benin has significantly increased since 2019. The most affected areas are in the northern regions, where the population shares many geographic and ethnic similarities with the neighboring states. In recent years, several jihadist groups have taken advantage of Benin's forests to seek refuge and escape the pressure of regional counterterrorism efforts. A key area is the complex formed by the W-Arly-Pendjari National Parks (WAP), a UNESCO World Heritage site region divided between Benin, Burkina Faso, and Niger. The national parks have often allowed these non-state armed groups to operate undetected, turning the region into a launching pad for their expansion into the West African savanna.    Source: United Nations Environment Programme Until recently, jihadist groups had used the area of the W National Park in Benin mainly as a rear base for operations in Burkina Faso and Niger. However, between 2019 and 2023, attacks by terrorist groups were repeated, most of the time against state security forces. The main jihadist groups operating in northern Benin are JNIM, its Burkinabe allied group Ansaroul Islam, as well as ISGS (Cristiani, 2023). The presence of these armed groups in the W National Park is disrupting conservation efforts and local livelihoods, fueling conflicts between farmers and nomadic herders over land and water. These jihadist groups are being effective in recruiting young Muslim herders from Benin, mostly Fulani, with socio-ethnic ties to the Sahel (Brottem, 2022b). This is a peripheral region where its inhabitants have been routinely overlooked by central governments and they lack social services, making these populations particularly vulnerable to infiltration and recruitment by Islamist groups. Over the past three years, there has been a growing influx of radical Islamic preachers facilitating the integration of jihadists into local communities through their preaching and infiltration into local Islamic schools (Lepidi, 2023). The next step is to impose the Sharia law, especially on women, and in some cases, they have already forced underage girls into marriage. Additionally, jihadists are engaging in smuggling activities of various goods such as gold, weapons, or money, and they trade with herds (International Crisis Group, 2023a). As has occurred in neighboring countries, jihadist groups exploit resentment against the state among communities in the border regions of northern Benin, where there is widespread discontent with central authorities. Authorities and official institutions in Benin are often seen as incapable of providing solutions to local problems and are criticized as opaque, discriminatory, and corrupt (Lepidi, 2023). For jihadists, Benin's geographical position is crucial. Its location as an intermediate stop for travelers moving from Mali or Burkina Faso to Nigeria makes it an important stronghold for facilitating the expansion of terrorist groups between Nigeria and the Sahel. Additionally, the fact that Hausa is the common language in northern Nigeria and is widely used in some areas of northern Benin contributes to facilitating cross-border operations of Nigerian bandits and jihadists (Zenn, 2023). The jihadists in northern Benin are taking control during the night. They move in motorcycle caravans with only one headlight on and descend upon villages to attack or engage in illicit activities. Locals note that these unpredictable nocturnal movements allow members of these groups to be intermittently present in many areas, making it difficult for state security forces to respond. The vast dimensions of the national parks on the border between Benin, Burkina Faso, and Niger make monitoring them and providing security in adjacent communities a challenging task. The jihadists operating in this area have displaced civilian authorities and eliminated security agents through threats and attacks. This vacuum leaves local communities even more exposed to kidnappings and extortions (Brottem, 2022a). Government authorities in Benin assure they are taking terrorist threats seriously and claim to have detained seven hundred suspects, most of them from Benin, Nigeria, Niger, and Burkina Faso. The first alarm signal, confirming Benin was in the jihadists' sights, occurred in May 2019 when two French tourists were kidnapped near Pendjari National Park, in Benin territory, by a jihadist group from Burkina Faso. The two were released after the French army intervened, but their Beninese guide was killed (Vidjingninou, 2022). Less than two years later, in February 2021, JNIM carried out its first attack also in the northern part of the country. Among other actions, in September 2022, the jihadists killed two customs officers and kidnapped three government-affiliated individuals, signaling an alarming resurgence of jihadist violence in northern Benin. Meanwhile, in June 2022, JNIM carried out an attack in neighboring Togo, highlighting that the expansion of jihadism towards the West African coast had gained momentum (Zenn, 2023). Togo On April 7, 2023, the Togolese National Assembly voted to extend the state of emergency in the Savanes region, in the north of the country, by twelve months. The measure was first approved in June 2022 and has been extended since then. The state of emergency reflects the Togolese government's concern about the growing threat of non-state armed groups along the Togo-Burkina Faso border (Agence France Presse, 2023). This extension followed the jihadist attack in February 2023 that claimed the lives of thirty-one civilians in the town of Kpendjal, in the Savanes region (Crisis24, 2023). It is the deadliest attack by terrorist groups in the country's history. Although the attack remains unclaimed, reports by local media suggest that JNIM militants are behind it. Togo recorded its first attack in early November 2021 when jihadists from Burkina Faso clashed with Togolese military forces at a security post in Sanloaga, in the Savanes region (Zenn, 20212). In May 2022, another attack resulted in the deaths of eight soldiers in Kpendjal, on the border with Burkina Faso (Reuters, 2022). Most of the militants' activity in Togo has targeted security forces at rural outposts, although civilians in villages in the region have also been subject to attacks. The northern region of Savanes, with a population of 860,000 inhabitants in an area of 8,600 km2, harbors significant economic, social, and political issues that have facilitated the penetration of jihadist groups from the Sahel: massive unemployment, lack of infrastructure, distance from the central power, a sense of marginalization of rural and northern populations compared to urban elites in the south, and stigmatization and underrepresentation of minority Fulani nomadic communities in local governments. Additionally, it should be noted that the smuggling of light weapons and drugs has become an outlet to alleviate unemployment among the population in the border region with Burkina Faso. In fact, control of the underground economy in this area has become one of the driving forces behind the expansion of jihadist groups into northern Togo (Merz, 2022). Ivory Coast In June 2020, on the border with Burkina Faso, JNIM terrorists carried out the first jihadist attack to hit Ivory Coast since the 2016 shootings at the Grand-Bassam tourist resort by Al Qaeda in the Maghreb. Although the 2020 attack was a rare occurrence in Ivory Coast, it was not surprising, as jihadist militants operating between Burkina Faso and Ivory Coast had been able to grow and develop their capabilities largely due to the limited coordination, up to that point, between the two governments. JNIM militants established their presence in the border region between Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, and Mali in 2015. Even though organized political violence was sporadic and the network was presumably dismantled by security forces, remnants of these groups maintained their presence in the area (Nsaibia, 2020). In May 2020, Ivory Coast and Burkina Faso decided to join forces to confront the common threat and launched a large-scale joint operation on both sides of the border against JNIM fighters, dubbed as Operation Comoé. The result of the operation was the dismantling of a base of jihadist militants near the village of Alidougou, the death of eight fighters, and the arrest of twenty-four suspects in Burkina Faso and fourteen in Ivory Coast. Weapons, ammunition, USB drives, and mobile phones were also seized in the operation (Jeune Afrique, 2020) A short time after the end of Operation Comoé, on June 11, 2020, JNIM fighters attacked a military post in the border village of Kafolo, killing fourteen Ivorian soldiers. This event demonstrated that, even after a large-scale joint operation, the jihadists were able to regroup and launch, in a matter of days, a devastating attack with a significant number of casualties, in a process much faster compared to the lengthy coordination process between Ivorian and Burkinabe authorities (Nsaibia, 2020). The attack served as a wake-up call for the Ivorian government, which retaliated with airstrikes and soon announced that it had located and arrested the alleged mastermind behind the Kafolo attack. In response to the attack and the persistent insecurity along the northern borders of the country, the government also authorized the creation of an operational military zone in the north to enhance border surveillance and prevent the infiltration of jihadist militants. Ivorian authorities have also established a community police force that works in collaboration with local citizens to relay information to security forces and have undertaken awareness campaigns in the northern regions (Le Figaro, 2020). However, in response to the terrorism problem, Ivory Coast has combined military action with a socio-economic approach by investing in programs aimed at providing social welfare and livelihood opportunities, especially to youth and women living in villages directly threatened by jihadism. Additionally, the government is aware that the country is the largest economy in the Francophone West Africa and maintains close ties with the former colonial power. Thus, Ivory Coast is a showcase of the West, and for jihadists, destabilizing the country would have significant propagandistic value (International Crisis Group, 2023b). Ghana Although in Ghana the jihadist threat may not be as perceptible as among its coastal neighbors, the penetration of jihadists from Burkina Faso into the northern provinces is also a concern. Thus, in the northern part of the country, favorable conditions for recruitment exist: a significant Muslim population and economic difficulties within the community. Ghana is exposed to jihadist activity within its territory due to its proximity to the Cascades region in Burkina Faso and northern region of Ivory Coast. In fact, the growing presence of jihadist fighting groups in the Cascades region, as well as the intensification of a strategy of attacks against neighboring Ivory Coast, make northern Ghana an ideal cross-border region for retreat and control for armed groups, especially because these areas offer access to highly attractive illegal activities such as clandestine gold mining or cattle theft (Merz, 2022). The fact that jihadist activity in Ghana is apparently lower could be related to several factors. The first is that it is the only Anglophone country in the region, which may be hindering (though not preventing) cross-border recruitment by the Francophone jihadists of JNIM (Moody, 2022). Another factor is that the government has taken the threat very seriously and has made significant efforts to improve security. Thus, military presence has been significantly strengthened in the north, where the army strives to involve the local population and encourage citizens to report suspicious incidents near their homes. This was demonstrated especially with the campaign 'If you see something, say something,' which encouraged the local population to call an anti-terrorism hotline if they saw anything suspicious (Africa Defense Forum, 2022a). Despite the anti-terrorism prevention measures, there is evidence that jihadist groups are established in the northern part of the country. Thus, after the military operation Otapuanu in southeastern Burkina Faso in March 2019, in which Burkinabe military forces attempted to dismantle JNIM and ISGS groups, authorities in that country reported that extremist elements had been discovered in northern Ghana. There is also evidence that in the Sahel, there is a considerable number of Ghanaian jihadist fighters. It is estimated that up to two hundred Ghanaian youths have left the country to join jihadist groups in Burkina Faso or Mali and that, in the future, they may return to their home villages to engage in religious proselytism activities. Additionally, everything indicates that JNIM uses Ghana as a resource stockpile area, particularly motorcycles, which suggests that jihadists are likely already familiar with the terrain of the country (Moody, 2022). In November 2019, military forces from Ghana and Togo detained one hundred and seventy suspected jihadist militants on Ghanaian territory near the border between both countries. This was part of a joint security operation, called Koudanlgou III, which objective was to thwart terrorist plans and other criminal activities that the detainees were allegedly involved in (Ghana Web, 2019). In October 2022, Ghanaian security forces detained an Islamic cleric and twelve of his followers for alleged terrorist activities in the town of Nangun, in the Karaga district. Apparently, the individuals had ties to a jihadist group in Burkina Faso (Geopolitical Report, 2022). In April 2023, one thousand special forces troops from the Ghanaian army were deployed to Bawku in the Upper East region after three immigration officials were shot, one of whom was killed (My Info Gh, 2023). Response to the terrorist threat Following the kidnapping of two French citizens and their guide in Benin in May 2019, the country's authorities questioned whether they had done everything in their power to confront the terrorist threat. Despite warnings, the Beninese government had not strengthened security in the border area. Regarding Pendjari National Park, it was only monitored by forest guards from African Parks, a South African NGO. State security forces were not present, even though this forest reserve borders the Arly Forest and the Pama department in Burkina Faso, known to be hotspots for criminal groups and jihadists (Barry, 2019). In response to the increasing threat, the coastal states of West Africa have been adopting a military approach in the fight against terrorism by enhancing cross-border security. Thus, over the past two years, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Togo, and Benin have expanded troop deployments in their northern regions. These coastal states have relatively small armies ranging from ten thousand to sixteen thousand personnel and are generally not sufficiently trained and equipped. The governments of these countries have shown particular interest in acquiring drones for border surveillance and conducting targeted attacks. Additionally, they are seeking to strengthen regional bilateral relations to carry out joint operations and share information (Stratfor, 2022). In the realm of international organizations in West Africa, multilateral institutions and initiatives face two problems: insufficient funding and disputes and rivalries among their members, which limit effective cooperation and coordination in the fight against terrorism. The main initiatives comprising the regional security architecture are the G5 Sahel Joint Force (which is expected to disappear following the new security pact signed in September 2023 by Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, consolidating the shift towards Russia and the expulsion of France) (Al Jazeera, 2023); the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Standby Force; the Multinational Joint Task Force combating Islamic State in West Africa (ISWAP) and Boko Haram in the Lake Chad Basin; and the Accra Initiative, a multilateral security cooperation mechanism established by Benin, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Ghana, and Togo in 2017, which also includes Mali and Niger as observer members. Five years after its creation, the Accra Initiative has agreed to assemble a multinational military force to help curb the spread of jihadism. This operational force will consist of ten thousand soldiers, the majority of whom will be stationed in Tamale (Ghana), with an intelligence component in the Burkinabe capital, Ouagadougou. Despite the recent withdrawal of European forces from the Sahel, the Accra Initiative has received €135 million from the European Union. It is estimated that the joint multinational force requires $550 million to operate effectively, and member states hope that, in addition to the European Union, funding can be provided by the African Union, ECOWAS, and Britain. Nigeria has agreed to join this initiative as an observer and provide air and logistical support (Africa Defense Forum, 2022b). Additionally, according to a German newspaper published last August, EU foreign ministers have already reached an agreement to launch a civilian-military mission in the coming months in Ivory Coast, Ghana, Togo, and Benin. The number of police officers and soldiers to be deployed in the Gulf of Guinea has not yet been defined, as the mission is pending official approval by the community institutions. According to the source cited by the German newspaper, there is concern among European countries that jihadist groups will expand their activities in the region and destabilize the coastal countries of the Gulf of Guinea. The governments of Benin and Ghana have already issued the necessary invitation for the European mission to establish itself in their territory (Schiltz, 2023). Future perspectives of the conflict The political instability and coups d'état in the Sahel countries, which have led to the withdrawal of French military presence from Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, offer new opportunities for jihadist groups to expand their positions, spread across the territory, and thereby increase their ability to threaten the coastal countries of the Gulf of Guinea. On the other hand, the trajectory of the Wagner Group mercenaries’ presence in the Sahel is uncertain following Prigozhin's death, but in any case, Russian paramilitaries do not appear to be the solution to the region's security crisis. The political fragility of the coup governments in the Sahel and regional insecurity will mutually reinforce each other, and it is to be expected that the jihadist threat to Benin, Togo, Ivory Coast, and Ghana will continue to grow. However, several factors could hinder the progression of jihadist groups further south, starting with the need to forge local alliances. Jihadist groups are numerically small, which makes it difficult for them to hold territory. One of their main strengths lies in the alliances they can establish locally, through persuasion or threat, with local leaders and marginalized communities. However, as jihadist groups move southward, they will find it difficult to establish lasting bases and gain support from inhabitants of predominantly Christian regions. Additionally, they will lose much of their ability to move undetected among the local population. Nevertheless, the recent wave of coups d'état in the Sahel has demonstrated that it is not necessary for jihadists to spread throughout the entire territory of a country to create a crisis that leads to a failed state and chaos (Walther, 2023). From what is highlighted in this chapter, it is evident that preventing the terrorist threat depends on military decisions and actions, but also on better political and social integration of the populations living in the peripheral regions of the north. Although there may not be a deliberate policy of discrimination, the sense of marginalization seems to be one of the reasons why young people from these regions decide to collaborate with or join the cause of jihadist groups. The counterterrorism response should involve strengthening the social and investment presence of the state in the northern regions of these countries with the aim of improving access to basic services or employment opportunities, and also by enhancing dialogue between security forces and the population. In this conflict, nothing is yet decided, and it will be crucial, to prevent jihadist expansion in the region, for the cooperation of West African countries in regional organizations such as the Accra Initiative and ECOWAS. Likewise, military collaboration with the European Union will be of great assistance, as many of its countries are currently concerned (and would be affected tomorrow) by the expansion of the jihadist threat in the Gulf of Guinea. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [1] Jihadism is a type of ideology characterized by the frequent use of terrorism with the aim of restoring the original greatness of Islam both spiritually and politically. This restoration involves the re-Islamization of Muslim societies from the strictest orthodoxy and the aspiration to create political structures that uphold and promote the realization of these principles. The scope of action may be solely regional, but all lines coincide in the desire to achieve the unity of all Muslims, and the willingness to spread Islam throughout the world. (https://www.wikiwand.com/es/Yihadismo).  References · Africa Defense Forum (2022a). Dans sa lutte contre l’extrémisme, le Ghana exhorte ses citoyens à dire quelque chose s’ils voient quelque chose. Africa Defense Forum. Disponible en: https://adf-magazine.com/fr/2022/06/dans-salutte-contre-lextremisme-le-ghana-exhorte-ses-citoyens-a-dire-quelque-chosesils-voient-quelque-chose/ (2022b). Accra Initiative Takes Aim at Extremism’s Spread. Africa Defense Forum. Disponible en: https://adf-magazine.com/2022/12/accra-initiative-takes-aim-atextremisms-spread/ · Agence France Presse (2023). Togo Extends Northern 'State of Emergency. Agence France-Presse. Disponible en: https://www.voaafrica.com/a/togoextends-northern-state-of-emergency-/7040918.html · Al Jazeera (2023). Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso establish Sahel security Alliance. Al Jazeera. Disponible en: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/16/mali-nigerand-burkina-faso-establish-sahel-security-alliance · Barry, Diawo (2019). Menace jihadiste: Bénin, Togo et Ghana à l’heure de la mobilisation générale. Jeune Afrique. Disponible en: https://www.jeuneafrique.com/mag/776657/politique/menace-jihadiste-benintogo-et-ghana-a-lheure-de-la-mobilisation-generale/ · Bernard, Aneliese (2021). Jihadism is spreading to the gulf of guinea littoral states, and a new approach to countering it is needed. Modern War Institute. Disponible en: https://mwi.westpoint.edu/jihadism-is-spreading-to-the-gulf-of-guinea-littoralstates-and-a-new-approach-to-countering-it-is-needed/ · Brottem, Leif (2022a). Jihad Takes Root in Northern Benin. The Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project. Disponible en: https://acleddata.com/2022/09/23/jihad-takes-root-in-northern-benin/ (2022b). The Growing Threat of Violent Extremism in Coastal West Africa. Africa Center. Disponible en: https://africacenter.org/spotlight/the-growing-threat-ofviolent-extremism-in-coastal-west-africa/ · Collado, Carolina (2021). Evaluación de la amenaza yihadista y sus posibilidades de expansión en el golfo de Guinea. Revista Internacional de Estudios sobre Terrorismo. Disponible en: https://observatorioterrorismo.com/eedyckaz/2021/08/5-Evaluacion-de-laamenaza-yihadista-y-sus-posibilidades-de-expansio%CC%81n-en-el-Golfo-deGuinea-Carolina-Collado.pdf · Crisis 24 (2023). Togo: Attack in Kpendjal Prefecture, Savanes Region, Feb. 10. Crisis 24. Disponible en: https://crisis24.garda.com/alerts/2023/02/togo-attack-inkpendjal-prefecture-savanes-region-feb-10 · Cristiani, Dario (2022). Jihadist Violence Grows in Benin. The Jamestown Foundation. Disponible en: https://jamestown.org/program/jihadist-violencegrows-in-benin/ · Geopolitical Report (2022). Islamic cleric, 12 others arrested on suspected terrorism charges. Geopolitical Report. Disponible en: https://www.geopolitical.report/islamic-cleric-12-others-arrested-on-suspectedterrorism-charges/ · Ghana Web (2019). 170 persons arrested at Ghana-Togo border over suspected terrorism, illegal mining activities. Ghana Web. Disponible en: https://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/170-personsarrested-at-Ghana-Togo-border-over-suspected-terrorism-illegal-miningactivities-800980 · Guiffard, Jonathan (2023). Gulf of Guinea: Can the Sahel Trap Be Avoided? Institut Montaigne. Disponible en: https://www.institutmontaigne.org/en/expressions/gulfguinea-can-sahel-trap-be-avoided · International Crisis Group (2023a). Containing Militancy in West Africa’s Park W. Crisis Group Africa Report, 310. Disponible en: https://www.crisisgroup.org/africa/sahel/burkina-faso-niger-benin/310-containingmilitancy-west-africas-park-w (2023b). Keeping Jihadists Out of Northern Côte d’Ivoire. Crisis Group Briefing, 192. Disponible en: https://www.crisisgroup.org/africa/west-africa/cotedivoire/b192-keeping-jihadists-out-northern-cote-divoire · Jeune Afrique (2020). Opération antijihadiste conjointe Côte d’Ivoire-Burkina: Abidjan salue d’excellents résultats. Jeune Afrique. Disponible en: https://www.jeuneafrique.com/987353/politique/operation-antijihadiste-conjointecote-divoire-burkina-abidjan-salue-d-excellents-resultats/ · Le Figaro (2020). Attaque djihadiste: la Côte d'Ivoire crée une zone opérationnelle militaire dans le Nord. Le Figaro. Disponible en: https://www.lefigaro.fr/flashactu/atttaque-jihadiste-la-cote-d-ivoire-cree-une-zone-operationnelle-militairedans-le-nord-20200713 · Lepidi, Pierre (2023). Au Bénin, la lutte antidjihadiste fait craindre une stigmatisation accrue des Peuls. Le monde. Disponible en: https://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2023/01/27/au-benin-la-lutte-antidjihadistefait-craindre-une-stigmatisation-accrue-des-peuls_6159588_3212.html · Merz, Rafael (2022). The jihadist threat in northern Ghana and Togo. KonradAdenauer-Stiftung. Disponible en: https://www.kas.de/en/web/westafrika/laenderberichte/detail/-/content/thejihadist-threat-in-northern-ghana-and-togo-2 · Moody, Jessica (2022). Jihadist Attack on Togo Highlights Threats to Neighboring Ghana. The Jamestown Foundation. Disponible en: https://jamestown.org/program/jihadist-attack-on-togo-highlights-threats-toneighboring-ghana/ · My info Gh (2023). Government deploys 1,000 Special Forces to Bawku following deadly attack on immigration officers. My Info Gh. Disponible en: https://myinfo.com.gh/2023/04/government-deploys-1000-special-forces-tobawku-following-deadly-attack-on-immigration-officers/ · Nsaibia, Héni (2020). In Light of the Kafolo Attack: The Jihadi Militant Threat in the Burkina Faso and Ivory Coast. The Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project. Disponible en: https://acleddata.com/2020/08/24/in-light-of-the-kafolo-attack-thejihadi-militant-threat-in-the-burkina-faso-and-ivory-coast-borderlands/ · Reliefweb (2023). Outil de veille multirisques pour les pays côtiers d’Afrique de l’Ouest. Reliefweb. Disponible en: https://reliefweb.int/report/benin/outil-de-veillemultirisques-pour-les-pays-cotiers-dafrique-de-louest-benin-cote-divoire-ghanatogo-granit-au-31-juillet-2023 · Reuters (2022). Eight soldiers killed in Togo, raising spectre of first deadly Islamist attack. Reuters. Disponible en: https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/eightsoldiers-killed-attack-north-togo-government-says-state-tv-2022-05-11/ · Schiltz, Christoph (2023). EU plant zivil-militärische Mission in Westafrika. Welt. Disponible en: https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article247127834/Golf-vonGuinea-EU-plant-zivil-militaerische-Mission-in-Westafrika.html · Stratfor (2022). How Coastal West Africa Is Responding to an Expanding Jihadist Threat. Stratfor Worldview. Disponible en: https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/how-coastal-west-africa-respondingexpanding-jihadist-threat · Summers, Marta (2022). Actividad yihadista en el Magreb y en el Sahel occidental. Anuario del Terrorismo Yihadista 2022. Disponible en: https://observatorioterrorismo.com/eedyckaz/2023/07/ESPANOL-ANUARIO2022_final.pdf · Vidjingninou, Fiacre (2022). Bénin: l’étau terroriste se resserre au Nord. Jeune Afrique. Disponible en: https://www.jeuneafrique.com/1292906/politique/beninletau-terroriste-se-resserre-au-nord/ · Walther, Olivier (2023). Sahelian jihadists go? Mapping Territorial Transformations in Africa. Disponible en: https://mapping-africa-transformations.org/how-far-southwill-the-sahelian-jihadists-go/#MAPTA · Zenn, Jacob (2021). Togo Suffers First Al-Qaeda Affiliated Jihadist Attack». The Jamestown Foundation. Disponible en: https://jamestown.org/wpcontent/uploads/2021/11/TM-pdf-Draft-1.pdf (2023). Benin Becomes Bulwark Against Terrorism in West Africa. The Jamestown Foundation. Disponible en: https://jamestown.org/program/brief-benin-becomesbulwark-against-terrorism-in-west-africa/ Appendix  Table: Demographic, Economic, and Social Indicators. Source: https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/

한국어로 읽기Leer en españolIn Deutsch lesen Gap اقرأ بالعربيةLire en françaisЧитать на русском In the last 48 hours, a series of events and situations have significantly contributed to redefining the military and diplomatic scenario in Gaza. It all began on the night of May 5, when Hamas launched several rockets that hit Israel, causing some civilian casualties. At the same time, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) responded to the act with massive artillery bombardments against several Hamas positions in the al-Zahraa, al-Mughraqa, and Nuseirat camps (in the central-northern areas of the Gaza Strip) and took control of the Kerem Shalom crossing, which separates the enclave from Israeli territory. However, the IDF's actions went further with the announcement on May 6 of the expansion of the humanitarian area of al-Mawasi (in the coastal south of the Strip). This choice seems to be driven by the political will to regain control of the southern strip of Palestinian territory through the forced evacuation of Palestinian refugees from Rafah and Khan Younis towards al-Mawasi (where it is estimated that over 100,000 people will arrive shortly), also guaranteed by the Israeli resumption of the Gaza side of the Rafah crossing. All these actions seem to suggest a green light from the war cabinet for the launch of the repeatedly announced Israeli ground operation in the area. Simultaneously with the war preparations, just a few hours later, came the unexpected announcement from Hamas that it had accepted a proposal for a ceasefire in Gaza. The terms of the ceasefire – admittedly still very unclear given the often-unreliable media reports – were reportedly mediated by Egypt and Qatar, with U.S. approval, which reportedly infuriated representatives of Tel Aviv. Based on the details announced by Hamas officials, the proposal is expected to outline a three-phase plan. The first phase involves a 42-day ceasefire period during which Hamas would release 33 hostages in exchange for the release of some Palestinian militants detained in Israeli prisons. In the second phase, Tel Aviv would partially withdraw its troops from Gaza and allow the free movement of Palestinians from the south to the north of the Strip. After this preliminary phase, another 42-day period would be activated only if it clearly emerged that both parties were willing to restore a climate of "sustainable calm" in Gaza, which would also favor the complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from the area and the final release of the reservists and IDF soldiers held by Hamas. To crown this prolonged "silence of arms," the final step would be reached: the establishment of a true ceasefire and the start, among other things, of a reconstruction phase, including the end of the total Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip, according to a plan supervised and shared by Qatar, Egypt, the USA, and the United Nations. Based on leaks and fragmented information, it is very difficult to make precise assessments, but it is plausible to imagine that if the terms of the agreement were as presented here, it would be very difficult – almost impossible – for Israel to accept the Egyptian-Qatari proposal. It would be much more satisfying for their expectations to continue with a military operation in Rafah. In the preceding days, the Israeli war cabinet had also explained the necessity of maintaining its action in Gaza unchanged, with or without an agreement with Hamas, as it was fundamental and strategic to achieve its primary objective: the destruction and eradication of the Islamist organization from the Palestinian enclave. Given this evidence, both the nature and complete terms of the diplomatic proposal accepted by Hamas, as well as the Israeli willingness to follow through on the agreement, are fundamental to creating a positive development in the current dynamics. However, no actor (regional or international) involved in the negotiations is under the illusion that a turning point has been reached, given both the opposing positions of the contenders and the operation in Rafah, which is now about to enter the heart of the action. This latter element is crucial to understanding the behavior and calculated risk taken by Hamas. In fact, at least until late afternoon on May 6, the organization had shown no interest in the Egyptian-Qatari proposal. The change of pace would suggest that the Islamist organization may have wanted to take advantage of the situation to put the ball back in the opponent's court, shifting all responsibility to Israel in the event of its refusal to follow through with the ceasefire, preferring instead military action in Rafah. In this regard, it could be argued that Hamas's twist of events was as clever as it was politically significant in contributing to weakening Tel Aviv's position. Not surprisingly, the movement led by Ismail Haniyeh understands that Israeli mediators cannot accept any negotiation that involves the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza, the end of the total blockade of the enclave's borders, but above all, the continuation in power of the organization towards, which Benjamin Netanyahu himself has declared, their destruction as an undeniable objective. A position that, regardless of whether Israel accepts the agreement already approved by Hamas in whole or in part, as well as its rejection, would expose Israel to a difficult condition of internal contention and to some strategic considerations that the Islamist movement knows well and has already exploited precisely to launch that tremendous attack on the heart of the country on October 7, 2023. In the perspective of Tel Aviv, the acceptance or rejection of the proposal by Egypt and Qatar, as well as the start of the operation in Rafah, raise a series of questions on multiple fronts, in which Netanyahu plays his usual game of political survival. If his government were to follow through with the agreement and stop/postpone the operation in Rafah, it would undoubtedly benefit diplomatically, enjoying a resurgence of credit after the storms of recent months. However, this would also mean opening an internal front, especially within his government, with extremist ministers threatening the fall of the executive. Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich have clearly stated that without the destruction of Hamas and the conquest of Rafah (and the entire Strip), the government would have no reason to exist. At the same time, even more moderate figures in the war cabinet, such as Defense Minister Yoav Gallant or Ministers Benny Gantz and Gady Eisenkot, have not taken a clear position, wavering between the possibility of a more contained humanitarian ceasefire and the wavering political opportunism on the military operation in Rafah in a challenge that seems more oriented towards the country's future and the conquest of the conservative electorate and the national right, the current Prime Minister's target audience. However, it is equally true that even in the face of a rejection of the international proposal, some clear repercussions would emerge: Israel would worsen its position and reputation, although it could keep that government in place that is now pushing relentlessly on Rafah. Such a situation would not avoid, either, domestic social protests by the families of the hostages, who demand guarantees from the government not to endanger the lives of their loved ones. In both cases, Tel Aviv would be called into question and would risk losing internal and external credibility, along with the political and security dilemma (mainly supported by the military establishment) linked to the failure to eradicate Hamas. Such a fluid and unpredictable scenario with potential repercussions even on different levels of the regional and international context. In fact, a resumption of hostilities in Rafah would have the opportunity to activate the Lebanese scenario in a different way than what has happened so far (where violent exchanges of fire have been occurring along the Blue Line border areas for days) and lead to a worsening of security conditions in the West Bank (especially in the triangle between Tulkarem-Nablus-Jenin, where IDF raids have become more pressing). A similar situation could open the door to external actions by other actors interested in instability, such as Iran, which would benefit from the role played by its proxies in Syria and Iraq, as well as the potential and renewed threat from the Yemeni Houthi militias to exert pressure on Israel, but also on other regional players involved in the ongoing dynamics - the thought in these cases essentially revolves around Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, which for different reasons have so much, and perhaps even too much, to lose from an escalation of the Gaza scenario. No less decisive must be considered the international impact of Tel Aviv's rejection of the Egyptian-Qatari proposal, especially considering how the United States has been engaged in recent weeks in trying to convince its ally to reconsider its positions on Iran and advocate for particular attention to the humanitarian situation in Gaza. In this sense, Washington has clearly expressed its warning to its ally about the risks associated with a possible miscalculation that could open up various considerations. Not surprisingly, the White House can always leverage the issue of military supplies as a tool of pressure. Just last week, the United States suspended a shipment of ammunition to Israel without providing details on the reasons. It could have been a simple bureaucratic error or a signal, but it's evident that considering such a scenario would provide new space and considerations for both internal and external detractors of the Biden Administration. Conversely, such a development could give new impetus to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, who has never hidden his strained relationship with almost all US administrations he has collaborated with during his 15 years in office. With the sole exception of the Trump Administration, which in the post-election American context could see the New York tycoon returning as the new occupant of the White House and Israel's key partner in the Middle East. Therefore, the assessments remain complex and highly susceptible to changes due to the volatility of the local scenario. However, it is undeniable that from this initiative, Israel has much to lose, and the concrete risk is that Hamas has carefully assessed this "trap" with the intention of further weakening Tel Aviv. License under Creative Commons Attribution – ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0).