top of page


Gaza, Ukraine, and NATO

Strategy Central

April 29 – May 5, 2024

Escalating Tensions:
Russia's Multifaceted Strategy Against Europe

Bottom Line: Russia's escalating adversarial relationship with Europe is characterized by a multifaceted strategy that combines traditional espionage, disinformation campaigns, and direct threats of military aggression. The central causes of this tension include geopolitical disputes, Russia's opposition to NATO expansion, and issues surrounding energy security and sanctions.

  • Russia has intensified its adversarial stance towards Europe, utilizing a blend of traditional espionage, disinformation campaigns, and direct military threats. In recent years, Moscow has expanded its tactics to include sabotage and nuclear threats, reflecting a strategy to deter Western military support for Ukraine and to impact Europe's political stability.

  • Russian analysts and propagandists advocate for bringing the war to Europe through severe repercussions for European nations' involvement in Ukraine.

  • Russia has been actively conducting disinformation operations to influence public opinion and destabilize political conditions across Europe. A significant instance was the uncovering of a pro-Russian disinformation network in Czechia, designed to affect the outcomes of European Parliament elections by spreading propaganda across several EU countries to weaken unity and fuel political divisions.

  • Despite facing international sanctions, some European countries paradoxically supply Russia with materials that can be utilized in weapon production, a situation influenced by economic benefits or complex diplomatic relations, hindering a unified stance against Russian aggression.


Strategic Evasion:
How Rosatom Helps Russia Circumvent International Sanctions

Bottom Line: Russia is effectively circumventing sanctions through its state-owned nuclear corporation, Rosatom, leveraging its expansive corporate network and integrating into critical unsanctioned sectors. This maneuver is part of a broader Russian strategy to maintain and expand its geopolitical influence and continue its military activities despite international sanctions.

·      Rosatom is pivotal in the global nuclear industry, supplying about 20% of the enriched uranium used by U.S. nuclear power plants. This creates dependencies that complicate the imposition of sanctions by Western countries.

·      Rosatom has expanded its influence in developing countries in Asia and Africa by offering affordable nuclear technologies, which enhances Russia's political influence and builds further international dependencies. The corporation is also a key player in the Russian military-industrial complex, providing crucial components and materials for military hardware production, such as aluminum oxide for rocket fuel and lithium-ion batteries for military applications. These military-related activities are conducted under the guise of Rosatom’s unsanctioned entities, enabling Russia to acquire the necessary technology and components to bolster its military capabilities.

·      Rosatom’s acquisition of Fesco, one of Russia's largest shipping companies, exemplifies Russia's methods to skirt sanctions. The integration of Fesco allows Rosatom to use alternative currencies like the Chinese yuan, avoiding restrictions associated with the U.S. dollar and euro. This strategic acquisition enhances Rosatom's ability to maintain a logistical network that supports both its economic and military endeavors, further complicating the application of effective sanctions.

·      Rosatom’s strategic role in circumventing sanctions is integral to Russia's broader objectives of sustaining military operations and expanding geopolitical influence. By embedding military supply chains within its unsanctioned corporate structure and forging global nuclear deals, Rosatom not only reinforces Russia's strategic position but also highlights the challenges and limitations of current sanctions, making it difficult for the international community to restrict Russia's aggressive activities without affecting global nuclear energy supplies.


The Facade of Stability:
Unveiling the Vulnerabilities of Putin's Russia

Bottom Line: Russia under President Vladimir Putin is often perceived as a strong and stable regime due to its aggressive foreign policy and tight domestic controls. However, this appearance of strength masks an underlying brittleness similar to that of the Soviet Union before its collapse. Putin's regime, characterized by highly personalized and centralized decision-making, reveals significant vulnerabilities that compromise its stability and effectiveness. Despite projecting an image of robust control, the system's inherent weaknesses could lead to its abrupt unraveling under certain pressures.

·      At the heart of the regime's vulnerability is Putin's personalized and paranoid decision-making style. This centralization results in a lack of quality control, with decisions only being as good as the directives from the top. The suppression of political dissent and the absence of institutional checks exacerbate these issues, making the government prone to policy failures and abrupt breakdowns. This approach has left Russia's political system fragile, lacking the resilience needed to adapt and innovate effectively.

·      Domestically and internationally, Putin's governance has structural deficiencies. Economically, the regime's heavy-handed control and focus on short-term political gains hinder long-term stability and innovation despite apparent resilience to sanctions. Regarding security, the focus has shifted from comprehensive strategies to politically driven objectives, particularly with resources being diverted to the conflict in Ukraine. This misallocation weakens Russia's capacity to manage other critical security challenges effectively.

·      In managing these systemic vulnerabilities, Putin relies on repression, propaganda, and a cultivated cult of personality. His governance maintains power through a patronage system, rewarding loyalty while eliminating opposition. Although this may ensure short-term stability, it fails to remedy the fundamental inefficiencies and vulnerabilities within the system, further entrenching them and making the regime susceptible to crises. The result is a paradoxical situation where Russia, under the guise of strength, faces significant risks of instability that could have profound implications for its future and international security.


Bolstering Ukraine:
The Strategic Implications of the U.S. $61 Billion Aid Package

Bottom Line: The recently passed U.S. aid package for Ukraine, valued at $61 billion, represents a significant bolstering of Ukraine's military capabilities and a substantial commitment from the United States to support Ukraine in its ongoing conflict with Russia. This aid package aims to supply Ukraine with much-needed ammunition and weaponry, including long-range ATACMS missiles, which are expected to significantly enhance Ukraine's ability to target and deter Russian military assets, particularly in occupied Crimea. This move is seen as a critical step in enhancing the security of the Black Sea region. It is part of a broader U.S. strategy to support Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity against Russian aggression.

·      The U.S. strategy toward Russia and Ukraine is multifaceted. It combines military support for Ukraine with diplomatic efforts and economic sanctions aimed at penalizing Russia for its invasion and deterring further aggression. The overarching intent of U.S. policy in this region is to uphold international law and order, support democratic governance, and prevent the spread of authoritarianism, which the U.S. perceives as a significant threat to global stability and peace.

Overall, the aid package and the broader U.S. strategy underscore a commitment to defending the post-World War II international order against unilateral attempts to alter national boundaries by force. The U.S. actions are designed to send a strong message to Russia and other potential aggressors that international aggression will meet a coordinated and robust response.

While the immediate focus is on military and logistical support to Ukraine, the long-term goals involve a stable and secure Europe, where democratic values and international laws are upheld. This strategy also highlights the necessity for a

unified and strong NATO alliance in dealing with global security threats, emphasizing the need for collective action in the face of unilateral aggression.


Europe Without America:
The Security Challenges and Uncertain Future

Bottom Line: The geopolitical landscape in Europe is profoundly shaped by the security order established post-World War II and expanded post-Cold War, heavily reliant on U.S. involvement. This long-standing arrangement, characterized by American military and economic predominance, is now facing potential upheaval due to shifts in U.S. policy and attention, particularly with the rising focus on East Asia and the threat of a changing U.S. political landscape. This dependency on American power highlights Europe's vulnerability in maintaining security and stability independently, especially as U.S. priorities evolve.

·      During the Cold War and after, Europe served as a strategic 'chessboard' for global superpowers, with peace maintained largely through American military presence and the threat of NATO's collective security. However, internal European security mechanisms have remained underdeveloped, relying instead on the U.S. to deter external threats and maintain internal stability. The potential diminishment or withdrawal of U.S. forces and support, speculated under administrations like that of Donald Trump, poses a significant risk to the traditional security framework that Europe has depended on for over seven decades.

·      The re-emergence of aggressive Russian actions, such as the invasion and attempted annexation of Ukraine, has rekindled security threats at Europe's borders. This situation is exacerbated by the internal discord within Europe itself, where varying political, economic, and military capabilities challenge the continent's ability to form a unified security stance. The ongoing war in Ukraine and the potential for broader conflict underscore the urgent need for a robust European defense mechanism independent of American intervention.

·      As Europe contemplates a future potentially devoid of the American security umbrella, the continent faces the daunting task of redefining its security strategy. This includes possibly enhancing its military capabilities, developing a more integrated European defense posture, and navigating the delicate balance of maintaining liberty and unity while securing itself against external threats like Russia and non-European influences. The concept of a wholly independent European security framework remains complex and fraught with challenges, reflecting a deep-seated dilemma about Europe's ability to safeguard its future amidst shifting global dynamics.


Xi Jinping's
Strategic European Visit Amidst Rising Tensions

Bottom Line Chinese President Xi Jinping is set to embark on his first European tour since 2019, aiming for damage control amid growing tensions over China’s economic strategies and its stance on the Ukraine conflict. Since his last visit, the geopolitical landscape has shifted dramatically; Europe's attitude towards China has cooled due to deepening trade disagreements and Beijing's increased cooperation with Moscow following its invasion of Ukraine. Xi's tour will include stops in France, Serbia, and Hungary—countries viewed as relatively pro-China within Europe. His visit comes as European authorities intensify crackdowns on espionage and as the EU considers new tariffs against Chinese trade practices, particularly concerning subsidized Chinese exports in green technologies.

·      During his visit, Xi seeks to mend the strained ties caused by China's position in the Russia-Ukraine war and address the European push to de-risk from Chinese economic dependence. This visit is critical as it coincides with significant anniversaries of diplomatic relations between China and France and China and Hungary, adding a symbolic weight to his engagements. Moreover, this tour follows recent U.S. diplomatic missions to China, possibly indicating strategic timing amidst global diplomatic recalibrations. The EU has recently adopted a more confrontational trade stance towards China, initiating investigations into Chinese subsidies for electric vehicles and other sectors, which has heightened tensions.

·      Chinese state media portray Xi's trip as an opportunity to foster new chapters of solidarity and cooperation with Europe. However, European leaders remain wary of the deep economic integration that has characterized their historical relationship with China. This skepticism is growing as the EU and its member states reassess their economic and strategic alignments in response to China's aggressive trade practices and geopolitical maneuvers. Italy's recent reversal of the Belt and Road Initiative underscores a broader European realignment and skepticism towards Chinese global strategies.

·      The broader context of Xi's visit is the significant divergence in interests between European nations and Washington's more hawkish stance towards China, especially regarding security concerns in Ukraine. Analysts suggest that one of Xi's goals is to undermine the united front that Europe and the United States have been building, particularly in response to the Ukraine crisis. This visit will test China's ability to navigate these complex geopolitical waters, where Europe's growing concerns about trade imbalances and security issues clash with Beijing's diplomatic and economic ambitions.


Diplomatic Dilemmas:
Chancellor Scholz's Economic Focus and Its Impact on German Foreign Policy

Bottom Line: German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s approach to international relations and national security has been characterized by perceived diplomatic weakness, particularly evident in his dealings with China and the broader geopolitical landscape involving the United States, NATO, Russia, and Ukraine. This perception arises from strategic decisions prioritizing short-term economic interests over long-term security and diplomatic objectives, potentially undermining Western unity and Europe's strategic posture. Scholz’s foreign policy prioritizes Germany’s immediate economic interests, potentially at the expense of broader security and diplomatic imperatives, raising concerns about Germany’s long-term geopolitical position and the effectiveness of collective Western responses to global security challenges.

·      Scholz’s recent diplomatic activities, particularly his conciliatory trip to China, highlight a significant divergence from more assertive stances taken by other Western leaders. While the Biden administration in the United States has been reinforcing its competitive stance against China, Scholz has opted for a softer approach that prioritizes economic cooperation. His delegation, dominated by business leaders and ministers focused on agriculture and trade rather than strategic figures like Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck or Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, indicates a preference for economic engagement over strategic confrontation.

·      The underlying strategy of Scholz’s approach is driven by Germany’s significant economic ties with China, especially in the automotive sector, which is crucial for Germany’s economic health as it transitions to electric vehicles (EVs). This dependency appears to steer Germany’s cautious stance on contentious issues such as human rights and China’s support for Russia in the Ukraine conflict, reflecting a delicate balance to maintain access to the Chinese market while managing competitive threats.

Regarding relations with the United States and NATO, Scholz’s policy has sparked concerns about misalignment with broader Western objectives, particularly against the backdrop of geopolitical challenges posed by Russia and China. This approach risks contributing to the fragmentation of the transatlantic alliance, which is crucial for countering Russian aggression and Chinese strategic ambitions. Furthermore, Germany’s economically focused diplomacy may limit the EU’s ability to form credible partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region with nations like India and Japan, who view China’s rise as a direct threat. Scholz’s handling of the Ukraine crisis also illustrates a cautious approach, preferring private diplomacy over public condemnation of China’s support for Russia, contrasting sharply with the more vocal responses of other Western nations.


Growing Anger:
Crackdowns in the Arab World Over Gaza Conflict

Bottom Line: The recent intensification of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has spurred a wave of pro-Palestinian protests across the Arab world, highlighting deep-seated tensions between the public and governments over relations with Israel and the U.S. Despite state-sponsored denunciations of Israel and displays of aid sent to Gaza, governments like Egypt's are quickly suppressing public dissent when it threatens to criticize their own policies. In April 2024, Egyptian security detained protesters in Cairo who voiced opposition, reflecting a regional pattern where expressions of solidarity with Palestine can result in government retaliation.

·      This crackdown is particularly severe in Morocco and Jordan, where recent demonstrations have also led to numerous arrests. In Morocco, the authorities have detained individuals for anti-Israeli protests and social media criticism of the government’s diplomatic moves towards Israel. Jordan has experienced similar unrest, with Amnesty International reporting the arrest of about 1,500 people since October 2023 related to pro-Palestinian protests. The Jordanian government insists these measures are to prevent discord, yet they highlight the broader regional discomfort with the Palestinian cause being linked to calls for greater domestic freedoms.

·      In countries pursuing or maintaining normalized relations with Israel, such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE, the repression is even more pronounced. The sensitivity to any dissent has stifled open discussion of their diplomatic policies towards Israel, driven by both historical ties and contemporary strategic interests, including security collaborations against perceived threats like Iran. The use of Israeli surveillance tools by some Gulf states to monitor dissent has only further cemented public perception of the autocratic nature of these regimes.

·      The tension between public sentiment and governmental policy indicates a significant political divide. Many Arabs view the Palestinian struggle as a broader fight against oppression, paralleling their own desires for justice and political freedom. Governments, meanwhile, justify their relationships with Israel as strategic necessities or steps towards regional stability. This dissonance suggests that without more representative governance, normalization agreements with Israel might not achieve the desired stability, as they do not reflect the will of most of their populations.


U.S. and Saudi Arabia:
Nearing a Historic Security and Diplomatic Agreement

Bottom Line: The United States and Saudi Arabia are on the brink of finalizing a historic agreement that promises to significantly reshape the political landscape of the Middle East. This pact, expected to be finalized soon due to accelerated negotiations in recent weeks, aims to provide Saudi Arabia with security guarantees and establish a potential pathway for diplomatic relations with Israel. Originally intended as a trilateral agreement to isolate Iran, the revised pact focuses equally on pressuring Israel while bolstering the security frameworks of both the US and Saudi Arabia against common regional threats, particularly from Iran and, indirectly, China.

·      The US sees This development as a strategic maneuver to reinforce its influence in the Middle East amidst complex geopolitical shifts, including growing tensions with China. By securing a deal with Saudi Arabia, the US not only strengthens its geopolitical stance but also ensures that one of its key regional allies has enhanced security assurances. This agreement could also pave the way for more stable diplomatic relations across the Middle East, especially concerning Israel, potentially leading to a new era of cooperation and security alignment.

·      The pact comes at a critical time when global and regional dynamics are increasingly volatile, with the US administration under President Joe Biden looking to solidify its foreign policy achievements. The agreement notably differs from its initial version, which focused on forming a united front against Iran. Now, the revised agreement includes mechanisms that could moderate Israel's regional policies, which may be necessary to gain broader acceptance for the pact within the region.

·      In addition to geopolitical implications, the agreement reflects a broader strategy by both countries to address multiple challenges, including security concerns, economic relations, and the need for technological cooperation in defense. This pact, if successful, could lead to a more interconnected and diplomatically engaged Middle East, aligning closer with US interests while potentially bringing stability to one of the most turbulent regions in the world.










133 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


White and Blue Minimalist Modern Real Estate Property Business Card (10).png
bottom of page