Eine gute Frage ist, ob der SA-Irandeal.unter chinesischer Vermittlung nun nachhaltig sein wird, zur Befriedung der Region und vielleicht wirtschaftlicher Entwicklung führen wird, wie dies China mit seiner Global Security Initiative, Global Development Initiative mit Schwerpunkt BRI und Global Xivilization Initiative unter den Xi Jinping-Gedanken erhofft. Die Frage ist dabei auch, inwieweit Saudiarabiens Erfahrungen mit den USA dabei eine Rolle spielen. Oft wird gesagt ,dass Biden SA verloren hatte, da er dieses wegen des Khashoggimords und der mangelnden Unterstützung des Yemenkriegs  sowie Festhalten am Irandeal entfremdet habe. Doch die Wurzeln der Entfremdung gehen weiter zurück: Namentlich zum Irakkrieg 2003.SA sprach sich vehement gegen einen Krieg gegen Saddam Hussein aus, da dieser „in the box(Albright) war, keine Gefahr nach dem ersten Golfkrieg Bush sen. mehr darstellte ,ja SA eine Destabilisierung des gesamten Greater Middle East und den Aufstieg des Irans befürchtete, was ja dann genauso eintrat.SA erwartete von den USA, dass sie anstatt den Irak mit boots on the ground,den Iran und dessen noch in Kinderschuhen steckendes Atomwaffenprogramm wie die Israelis in Osirak mittels Luftschlage und ohne Boots on the ground nachhaltig ausschalten würden ,d.h. die realen Massenvernichtungsgefahr und nicht eine offensichtlich herbeigelogene und damit die Option eines nuklearen Irans beseitigten. Doch dies geschah nicht trotz aller großtönenden Sprüche von der Axis of Evil. So schnell wie die USA gekommen waren, so schnell zogen sie unter Obama auch wieder ab und stürzten die gesamte Region ins nächste Chaos, samt Aufstieg des Irans und des, Islamischen Staates.Trump war da die Hoffnung ,aber in den USA wechseln halt noch vorerst ihre Regierung und unter Biden sah es dann anders aus., auch nun bei Netanjahu. Die Zeiten Trumps, der Teddy Roosevelts Spruch bezüglich US-gestützter Diktatoren „SIe sind Gangster, aber sie sind unsere Gangster“ auch in Bezug auf MBS und Bibi kopierte, hofft man sich zurück, zumal selbst Netanjahu nun wie Erdogan Biden bezichtigt seinen Sturz und eine farbene Revolution gegen seine Diktatorpläne zu betreiben. Die Erfahrung mit dem Irakkrieg und die Erfahrung wechselnder Regierung und Aussenpolitik ,d.h. fehlender Kontinuität und Verlässlichkeit, wie auch die gegenseitige Ausblutung SAs und Irans durch die Stellvertreterkriege durften die wesentlichen Gründe sein ,dass MBS nun vorerst umgeschwenkt ist. nach Jahren des Krieges will. man scheinbar nun friedliche wirtschaftliche Entwicklung, vor allem auch die ambitionierte Vision 2030 voranbringen, zudem China eine strategische und kontinuierliche friedliche  Aussenpolitik ohne Werteliberalismus mit Diversität statt Kampf der Kulturen und Neuer Seidenstraße, die am liebsten alle Staaten des Greater Middle East von Pakistan/Afghanistan, Iran, SA, Israel bis zur MENA- Region hofft verbinden zu können,  als Gegenmodell zu der vor allem militärisch orientierten ,wechselhaften und chaotischen US-Außenpolitik verspricht. Die Frage ist also ,ob SA wieder davon abspringen wird, wenn Trump wiedergewählt werden sollte ,wie dies ein evangelikaler Fundamentalist ankündigt:

“Mega pastor: If Trump re-elected, Saudis will normalize Israel ties

Pastor Robert Jeffress is a recipient of the Friends of Zion Award.”

https://m.jpost.com/middle-east/article-742128

Unter Trump ist es sehr wahrscheinlich, dass dieser den SA-Irandeal. vor allem auch Ausdruck des sinoamerikanischen Konflikts sieht, weswegen dieser dann doppelt zu bekämpfen ist, den Abrahams Accord auch zwischen SA und Israel ausdehnen würde. die Frage eines nuklearen Irans wieder auf die Tagesordnung setzt, wie auch auch bei der gegenseitigen Eskalation um die Palästinenserfrage und Jerusalem einseitig auf die Seite Israels stellen würde. Umgekehrt ist aber die Frage, ob SA wieder auf Trump setzen wird, kann es auch sein, dass dieser nicht gewählt wird oder eben dann auch wieder nur eine Amtszeit verbleibt. Die Frage ist auch, was er in dieser Zeit, außer neuen Chaos anrichten wird und inwieweit Irans Eskalation nur den Preis für einen  Nahostdeal in die Höhe treiben will oder Iran wirklich jetzt in die Offensive gehen will, zumal Iran nun de Front gegen Israel nicht nur seitens Syriens, Libanon und Gaza vorantreibt , sondern auch durch einen Hamassieg im Westjordanland und eine Islamisierung des Sudans zu erweitern zu gedenkt, zumal die Hackergruppe Anonymus Sudan inzwischen die israelische Raketenabwehr und den Iron Dome hackt und dabei scheinbar laut Jerusalem Post einige Erfolge erzielt hat, kurz: da er meint ,dass Israel geschwächt und vor dem Kollaps steht und man die USA aus dem Nahen Osten rausdrängen zu können meint. Die Frage ist auch, ob der Iran eine Anerkennung Israels durch Saudiarabien hinnehmen würde und die Chinesen ihn dazu bringen könnten, an dem SA- Irandeal weiter festzuhalten oder ob diese dann der Bruch wäre. Die Frage umgekehrt ist aber, ob SA auch unter Trump den Abraham Accord unterzeichnen würde. Und dass die Chinesen nicht nur eine Aussöhnung zwischen SA und Iran hinbrächten, sondern auch eine zeitenwendenmässige Aussöhnung zwischen Iran und Israel scheint da doch noch geradezu utopisch, selbst wenn die KPCh denken könnte, dass man, wenn man das Schisma zwischen Schiiten und Sunniten, auch in ihrer extremistischen Form wie Khomeinismus und Wahhabismus, versöhnen kann, auch Iran und Israel, Schiiten und Juden versöhnen könnte und der homo economicus des win- win und die kulturelle Diversität der Xivilisation obsiegen würde und Khameini und Netanjahu die neuen Nobelfriedenspreisträger wie Sadat und Begin oder Rabin und Arafat werden könnten. Zudem eben auch die Frage eines nuklearen Irans weiterhin der Elefant im Raum bleibt.

Ein ehemaliger deutscher Botschafter glaubt an einen grundlegenden und nachhaltigen Vertrauensverlust SAs bezüglich der USA und kommentierte das derfolgt:

„Auch bei einer Wiederwahl von Trump bleibt es dauerhaft bei dem Vertrauensverlust und dem Autoritätsverfall der USA in Westasien.

Aus folgenden Gründen:

MSB und die Personen seiner Umgebung mussten für den Schwertertanz mit Trump teuer bezahlen, angeblich einen dreistelligen Milliardenbetrag. Das Geld dafür sollen sie unter anderem von den im Ritz-Carlton in Riad festgehaltenen saudischen Milliardären erpresst haben.

Umso größer dann die Ernüchterung über das politische System der USA, das es erlaubt, dass MSB vom politischen Konkurrenten Trumps „mir nichts, Dir nichts“ zum Paria erklärt werden kann. Nach dieser Erfahrung gilt die Devise: Lieber mit Peking, denn die Leute dort sind berechenbar! Das sagen sich auch die Iraner, nicht nur wegen der Erfahrung mit der Aufkündigung des JCPOA, sondern z.B. auch wegen der Einordnung in die „axis of evil“ Anfang 2002, obwohl sie unter Chatami einen Ausgleich mit Washington suchten und die USA nach dem 11. September 2001 gegen die Taliban unterstützten. 

Und in der gesamten Region denken Herrschende und Beherrschte mit Schaudern an den angeblichen „Arab spring“ zurück.“

Die Frage ist, ob das Vertrauen, das SA i die USA verloren hat jetzt nachhaltiges Vertrauen in China, aber vor allem den Iran nach sich zieht. Chinas Megaprojekt setzt zwar nicht auf Werteliberalismus , aber auf Realpolitik, den homo economicus und die Diversität der Kulturen und Zivilisationen, konkret: Die Chinesen glauben da selbst die extremsten Formen von Schiitentum und Sunnitentum, die Khomeiniisten und Wahhabiten zusammenzubringen in einer Art Westfälischen Frieden, wobei ja unter MBS SA sich religiös etwas liberalisiert hat, im Gegensatz zum Iran. China kann aber als militärische Macht und gegebenenfalls Schutz  bisher nichts Bedeutendes im Greater Middle East beitragen. Mag zwar das Vertrauen der Saudis in die USA ernsthaft erschüttert worden sein, so wissen sie doch, dass diese momentan die einzige Militärmacht ist, die sie schützen könnte,  es sei denn China stellt SA unter seinen Atomschutz oder bringt es fertig den Iran von Atomwaffen glaubwürdig abzuhalten, denn der Aufbau eigener Militärstrukturen  und regionaler Bündnisse scheint utopisch. Theoretuisch könnte ein chiensicher Atomdeal dann auch Möglichkeiten schaffen, dass sich nicht ur SA, sondern auch Israel nicht mehr nuklear von dem Iran bedroht fühlen würde, was ein game changer sein könnte, zumal dann auch eventuell nur unter chinesischiiranischem Deal statt Irandeal der USA , der EU und Russlands, der dann wieder unter Trump gekündigt wurde. Mag SA zwar mehr Vertrauen in China haben, so wohl noch nicht in den Iran. Ebenso kanalisiert Iran jetzt alle Aggression gegen Israel und da bleibt die Frage, ob die Saudis da mitziehen oder sich abwartend zurücklehnen, zudem China ja auch nicht daran gelegen ist, die Konfrontation zwischen Iran und Israel eskalieren zu lassen, es sei denn es setzt bei seiner BRI auf einen Korridor, der vor allem exklusiv der schiitische Halbmond ist ,obwohl die Neue Seidenstraße ja eigentlich alle Länder der Region umfassen soll, auch Israel und SA. Ob China die Versöhnung Iran/Israel gelingen würde wie damals zwischen Sadat und Begin und Rabin und Arafat, nun zwischen Khameini und Netanjahu ist noch utopisch ,ja das wäre allerdings dann auch einen Friedensnobelpreis würdig .Aber jetzt überschätzen wir Mal nicht die KP China als Superdiplomat, der alles bewirken kann. GDI und GCI ist zwar nett, aber ohne glaubwürdige militärische Untermauerung ,die die GSI bisher außer ihren Initiativen nichts an hard power  liefern kann, bleibt das alles fragil und könnte das sich als voluntaristische wishful thinking- Hybris erweisen, der die hard power fehlt, die die USA immer noch ausreichend haben, zumal sich eben noch zeigen muss, inwieweit der Iran funktionaler Rationalität zugeneigt ist und nicht religiösem Fanatismus und Ideologie. Aber Chinas Glauben an funktionale Rationalität ist ja realpolitisch sehr groß und es hofft ja selbst die Taliban überzeugen zu können.

Mal eine noch sehr hypothetische Frage und ein Gedankenspiel:

Kann es sein, dass Israel auch mal das Vertrauen in die USA verliert und sich China zuwendet, insofern sich die USA nicht in eine autoritäre Diiktatur mit verfestigter harter Israellobby der klerikalfaschistischen Evangelikalen und religiösen Rechten , die in Israel den Kreuzritter und den Wächter der Heiligen Stätten und des gelobten Landes samt Christentum sieht,  und republikanischen Trumpisten transformiert, die keine Bedenken in Sachen Menschenrechte, Demokratie hätte und auch eine autoritäre Diktatur in Israel bedingungslos unterstützen würden? Was wenn Israels Rechte auch von den USA und den Meinungsumschwüngen genug hätte, zumal Netanjahu ja Biden beschuldigt seinen Sturz und eine farbige Revolution mit israelischen Frühling zu betreiben? Immer die Meinungsumschwünge in der US- Politik abwarten oder vielelicht doch mal auf ein stabiles China, zudem mit Seidenstrasse und Riesenmarkt zu setzen? Anders als SA hat Israel ja eigene Nuklearwaffen, braucht keinen amerikanischen oder gar chineischen Atomschutz, will sich in einem sinoamerikanischen Konflikt vielleicht auch nicht entscheiden müssen, ja ist vielleicht der Idee der Neuen Seidenstraße ganz zugeneigt,  und falls es China gelänge, die Konfrontation zwischen Israel und dem Iran einzugrenzen oder gar zu beseitigen, da eine ganz andere Konstellation entstehen könnte. Klingt bisher irgendwie verrückt, zumal die Frage ist, ob das Israel ohne explizite Anerkennung seines Existenzrechts durch den Iran samt einhergehender struktureller Deeskalationsmechanismen und Sicherheitsgarantien überhaupt machen würde oder dies nicht die zwei wesentlichen ideologischen Existenzsäulen des Mullahregimes: Kopftuch und Kampf gegen Israel, ja dessen erklärte Beseitigung zusammenbrechen lassen würde, zumal der Iran gerade nach innen wie nach außen eskaliert und auch die 3 Nein-Politik der Arabischen Liga gegen den Abrahams Accord in Stellung bringt? Geht das mit der jetzigen Elite im Iran, zumal die grüne Revolution und der Reformislamsimus ja gescheitert ist und eine Diktatur der Iranischen Revolutionsgarden ja auch eher eine Eskalation bringen würde.  Wäre ein chinesischer Abrahams Accord denkbar? Ist denn so eine Art Westfälischer Frieden im Greater Middle East nach einer Art 30-jährigem Krieg in Nahost überhaupt vorstellbar? Vielleicht noch mit einer dieser früheren Ideen einer Nahost-OSZE? Scheinbar glauben die Chinesen dran, auch scheinbar an die funktionale Rationalität, speziell des Homo economicus, aber ist das nicht sehr säkular gedacht und euro- oder eben sinozentrisch? Oder ist das nur Tarnung der KP China, um SA und Israel und andere muslimische Staaten aus ihrer Kooperation mit den USA rauszuholen, um dann de schiitische Hauptachse zu stärken und die USA und Israel zusammen mit Russland, Iran, Irak, das wieder in die Arabische Liga aufzunehmende Syrien und die Hisbollah im Libanon aus dem Nahen Osten herauszudrängen, wenn sich die Kräfteverhältnisse ändern sollten? Da ist eben die Frage, ob Biden soviel Vertrauen in die USA in Israel zertrümmern kann, wie er das bezüglich SA getan hat und ob sich da Vertrauen in China und Iran so einstellen könnte? Von daher bleibt dies noch Zukunftsmusik. Ja, eher der feuchte Traum all jener Orientalisten und Diplomaten in europäischen und deutschen Außenministerien, die immerzu nach Deeskalation um jeden Preis krächzen und nun in China da ihren scheinbar besseren Ansprechpartner seit Macrons Kotau sehen.

Katars Staatssender Al Jazeera sieht das auch noch nicht als so endgültig und differenziert das Ganze etwas:

“Can China replace the US in the Middle East?

As the Saudi-Iran deal shows, Beijing’s clout in the region is growing. But it can’t substitute US security presence — and might not want to.”

https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/4/25/can-china-replace-the-us-in-the-middle-east

Kurz: Trotz partiellem Rückzug der USA aus dem Greater Middle East und mehr Konzentration auf den Asian Pivot und den Ukrainekrieg, werden die USA weiterhin eine gewisse Rolle in der MENA-Region und dem Persischen Golf spielen, nicht zuletzt auch schon wegen ihres CENTCOM-Hauptquartiers in Al Udaid in Katar. Zudem sei der SA- Irandeal ja noch nichts Fertiges, noch Endgültiges, denn die eigentlich harte Arbeit beginne erst jetzt und die Erfolgsaussichten seien auch nicht garantiert. Zudem stelle sich auch die Frage, ob China die USA im Greater Middle East ersetzen könnten oder auch wollte, vor allem auch militärisch.

Auch sollte man die USA im Greater Middle East noch nicht so schnell abschreiben, wenn man etwa folgenden Beitrag in der „Jerusalem Post“ liest:

“Israel has freedom to act against Iran nuclear threat – US

“Sturm und drang” over Netanyahu’s White House snub is overblown, US national security adviser says.

By LAHAV HARKOV

Published: MAY 5, 2023 17:02

Updated: MAY 5, 2023 18:03

Washington allows Israel freedom of action against the Iran nuclear threat, US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said.

“We have made clear to Iran that it can never be permitted to obtain a nuclear weapon,” Sullivan said in an address to the Washington Institute think tank on Thursday. “As President [Joe] Biden has repeatedly reaffirmed, he will take the actions necessary to stand by this statement, including by recognizing Israel’s freedom of action.”

“This is an issue that occupies the president’s attention, my attention, on a daily basis,” he said. “Iran’s program has advanced considerably. It is a genuine danger to regional security and to global security, and, indeed, to the United States of America. And we are going to continue to take action to, yes, deter Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and then to seek a diplomatic solution that puts this on a long-term pathway of stability.”

The national security adviser said the US continues to use diplomatic channels regarding Iran’s nuclear program.

“The best way to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon is an effective agreement,” he stated. “I regard the decision to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal, the JCPOA, without anything to replace it or any strategy to deal with it other than the imposition of sanctions—which we have continued and added to actually—is not necessarily a pathway to a clear and straightforward [deterrence].”

Iran’s nuclear program is advancing

Sullivan argued that without a deal, Iran’s nuclear program is advancing, while an agreement would scale it back.

“We will continue to send a clear message about the costs and consequences of going too far, while at the same time continuing to seek the possibility of a diplomatically brokered outcome that puts Iran’s nuclear program back in the box,” he said.

Sullivan said the US is cooperating with partners in the Middle East to deter Iran, such as holding the largest joint military exercise ever between the US and Israel this year, and one of the largest naval military exercises in the history of the Middle East with over 50 countries, including Israel and Gulf states working together.

“There can be no doubt that we are walking the walk and not just talking the talk when we say that our commitment to Israel’s security is ironclad,” he said.

He also participated in meetings with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, National Security Adviser Tzachi Hanegbi, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant on deterring Iran.

Also on Thursday, Foreign Ministry  Deputy Director-General for Strategic Affairs Joshua Zarka and Deputy Director-General for Euro-Asia Simona Halperin met with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, primarily to discuss the Iranian nuclear threat and diplomacy related to the currently-defunct Iran nuclear deal, the Russian Foreign Ministry stated. 

Asked when Netanyahu could expect to be invited to the White House, after Biden publicly spoke out against the government’s judicial reform plan, Sullivan said: “The president has had a very long relationship with Prime Minister Netanyahu, and we remain deeply engaged with the Israeli government day by day, so a lot of the sturm und drang in the media I think has been very much overblown.”

“When the time is right, and when we have a visit to announce, we’ll announce it. And until then, I think kind of speculating or describing or trying to set any conditions around it just doesn’t comport with the way Joe Biden does business, and never has done business anywhere, especially with a country he loves like Israel,” he said.

Sullivan spoke at length about the Abraham Accords, the agreements forged in 2020 between Israel, the UAE, Bahran and Morocco, in its various aspects, as well as American efforts to get Saudi Arabia to normalize ties with Israel.

“We are working to strengthen and expand the Abraham Accords, supporting Israel’s ultimate, final, complete integration into the Middle East region and the world,” Sullivan said.

The Biden administration has “the interest and the bandwidth to promote normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia…Getting to full normalization is a declared national security interest of the United States, we have been clear about that.”

The opening of Saudi airspace to Israeli flights is “one step along the road toward what we hope will become a full normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia,” he said. 

The I2U2 forum of Israel, India, UAE and US is one “you will be hearing more about,” Sullivan predicted. 

“The fundamental notion is to connect South Asia to the Middle East to the US in ways that advance our economic technology and diplomacy,” he said. 

Sullivan also touted the Negev Forum, which brings together the Abraham Accords countries plus Egypt and the US to cooperate in a variety of areas.

https://www.jpost.com/international/article-742190

Zudem scheint man auch in der MENA- Region nicht alles China überlassen zu wollen, wofür der Afrikabesuch vdes japanischen Ministerpräsidenten Kishida zeugt, der nun auch versucht Ägyptens Al Sissi für Firedensverhandlungen im Sudan zu gewinnen, während der deutsche Bundeskanzler Scholz nach Äthiopien resit, um den äthiopischen Waffnstillstand mittels weiterer Vemrittlung zu stablisieren und Friednesverhandlungen in Äthiopien und im Sudan zu unterstützen. Zudem schlug Scholz vor, dass die AU in die G 20 aufgenommen wird. Al Sissi will wiederum nach eigenen Angaben nicht militärisch im Sudan intervenieren, um die Lage nicht noch weiter zu komplizieren. Er hofft auf Friedensverhandlungen, zumal Ägypten jetzt schon 8 Millionen afrikanische Flüchtlinge beherbergt und die neue Flüchtlingswelle aus dem Sudan bald nicht mehr Schultern kann. Interessant, dass Japan da jetzt auch eine Rolle spielen will, zumal als Gastgeber des nächsten G7 in Hiroshima und Kishida sich gerade auf Afrikatour befindet.

“INTERVIEW/ Egypt president willing to work with Japan for Sudan cease-fire

THE ASAHI SHIMBUN“

https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14898341

Interessant auch ein Artikel der japanischen Asahi Shimbum, dass selbst die japanischen Eliten für die Zukunft eine „leaderless era“ befürchten aufgrund der inneren Polarisierung. Also so endgültig wie das der Newsweek Artikel „The end of the American Century „in Grabesstimmung beschreibt ist das alles noch nicht, zumal eben auch fragwürdig ist, inwieweit das überhaupt The Beginning of the Chinese Century“ wäre, was Parag Khana in seinem „The Future is Asian“ auch infrage stellt, allein schon wegen unterschiedlicher Interessen und die durch Chinas aggressives Verhalten in Asien ausgelösten Gegenblockbildung.Zudem es zu einer zunehmenden Verzshnung zwischen NATO und asiatischen Staaten, allen voran mit Japan, Autsralien, Südkorea und Indien kommt. Man scheint Ian Brzezinski Vorschlägen beim Atlantic Councils zu folgen, der eine engere Verzahnung der NATO mit Asien vorschlug-wenngleich unterhalb der Schwelle von Ivo Daalders Global NATO. Wenngleich die KP China das misstrauisch beäugt und ab und zu mal das Schreckgespenst einer „Asian NATO“ beschwört. Ob das dann eine Militärallianz China-Russland(Nordkorea) nach sich ziehen würde, bleibt offen. Nun meldet die DDP- nahe Taipeh Times stolz die geplante Eröffnung des  ersten Verbindungsbüro der NATO in Japan.

NATO planning to open Japan office to deepen relations

https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2023/05/04/2003799104

Mal sehen, ob eines in Australien( oder gibt es das schon?)  und Südkorea, vielleicht auch Indien folgen wird . Mal sehen, ob die Chinesen morgen darüber in der Global Times berichten. Der Brzezinskisohn schlug zudem damals noch einen NATO-China Council vor. Ganz klar wurde aber nicht, was er sich damit erhoffte. So eine Art NATO-Russland-Rat für Asien? Aber ist das überhaupt unter den gegebenen Konstellationen überhaupt realistisch, zumal man nicht mal hotlines zwischen US- und chinesischen Militärs einrichten wollte.

Doch auch in Japan ist wie in SA das Vertrauen in die USA begrenzt, wie die Asahsi Shimbum mit Bezug auf den Berater des Premierministers berichtet, der schon 2020 eine „führungslose Ära“ befürchtete, da sich die USA zunehmend nach Iinnen kehren würden. Darauf müsse sich Japan einstellen.

“Japan should brace for ‘leaderless era’ as U.S. turns inward, adviser to PM say”

https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/13918082

Derweil dämpft Generalstabschef Milley die Ängste vor einem sinoamerikanischen Krieg um Taiwan, zumal China noch gar nicht genug Kampferfahrung, militärische Kapazitäten habe, schlechte Koordinierung und Integration der Waffensysteme und Truppen, wie eine solche Operation auch viel risikoreicher und umfassender als die damalige Landung der Alliierten in der Normandie im Zweiten Weltkrieg sei, wo man den 30 km breiten Ärmelkanal überqueren musste, China aber die mehr als 100 km breite Taiwanstraße. Dennoch fällt auf, dass die USA nie in Betracht ziehen, ob im Kriegs- oder Konfliktfalle die Taiwanesen auch so einheitlich sich verteidigen würden, dass KMT und DDP da recht unterschiedliche Ansichten haben und die taiwanesische Gesellschaft darüber recht gespalten ist. Die Frage, ob eine 5. Kolonne beim taiwanesischen Militär, und der KMT vielleicht alles paralysieren und sabotieren würde, um ohne Krieg zu kapitulieren und Peking die Stadttore zu öffnen ist nie auf dem Radar und wird aufgrund der Demokratisierung Taiwans und seines Militärs kategorisch ausgeschlossen.

“Podcast

How to Avoid a Great-Power War

A Conversation With General Mark Milley

May 2, 2023”

U.S. Army General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at Ramstein U.S. Air Base, Germany, April 2023

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/how-to-avoid-great-power-war-mark-milley

Die KP China sieht desweiteren die Internationalserung des Yuan auf dem Vormarsch, ja einige westliche Kapitulanten und Kulturpessimisten sehen da schon den digital yuan die Hegemonie des US- Dollars und des amerikanischen Zeitalters ablösen, wie nette in den sozialen Medien kursierende Graphik verdeutlicht:

Auch die Asashi Shimbum berichtet Reuters zitierend:

“China’s small steps on offshore use of yuan are starting to add up

REUTERS

April 28, 2023 at 15:40 JST

SINGAPORE–China’s yuan currency is slowly but surely being adopted for more international payments, which analysts say could lay foundations for a trade system running parallel to the dominant U.S. dollar.”

https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14896273

Dennoch handele es sich um kleine Schritte und sei das Ende der Dollarhegemonie noch ferne Zukunft.

Dennoch könnte solch eine Entwicklung schon schneller eintreten als erwartet, zumal nach der Pleite der Silicon Valley Bank und der First Republic Bank, die nun von der JP Morgan Chase gekauft wurde, weitere Ängste wegen der Zinssteigerungen bestehen, neben dem Hitech- Startupsektor auch eine neue Finanzkrise, die aus dem Gewerbeimmobilien- und noch immer nicht regulierten Schattenbankensektor aufziehen würde, zumal US- Finanzministerin Yellen vor dem Reißen der Schuldenobergrenze im Juni warnt. Zwar wurde im US- Kongreß bisher noch immer im letzten Moment ein Kompromiss erzielt, doch befürchtet die KP China aufgrund der Trumpisten und Fundamentalopposition vieler Republikaner sowie der Wahlkampfstimmung, dass es auch mal anders kommen könnte, und der Schuldenausfall eine globale Finanzkrise auslösen könnte, die die Weltwirtschaft und die chinesische Wirtschaft in den Strudel reißen könnte. Wenngleich dies auch die Hegemonie des Dollars ernsthaft gefährden könnte. Ein dramatischer Juni 2023 könnte also eher das Ende vom amerikanischen Jahrhundert einleiten als alle SA- Iran- Deals. Alle Seiten hoffen jedoch, dass die Bedrohung durch China und der Homo Oeconomicus – das geldgetriebene US-Cash-Gen – siegen wird und die Amerikaner vereinen und sie wieder groß werden lässt.

Intereesant ist  nun auch, dass umgekehrt bei dem in den USA angesichts des sinoameriknaischen Konflikts herrschenden Indienhype, der Indien als weltgrößte Demokratie als Partner für die Alliance of Democracies ,angesichts derisking, decoupling und diversification schon als neue globale Werkbank, die China ersetzen soll und als Militärverbündeter sieht, nun erstmals auch Zweifel an diesen Wunschprojektionen in der Foreign Affairs geäußert werden:

“America’s Bad Bet on India

New Delhi Won’t Side With Washington Against Beijing

By Ashley J. Tellis

May 1, 2023

For the past two decades, Washington has made an enormous bet in the Indo-Pacific—that treating India as a key partner will help the United States in its geopolitical rivalry with China. From George W. Bush onward, successive U.S. presidents have bolstered India’s capabilities on the assumption that doing so automatically strengthens the forces that favor freedom in Asia.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/india/americas-bad-bet-india-modi?utm_source=ctw&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=buttonlink&mkt_tok=ODEzLVhZVS00MjIAAAGLh9zg83L2b1K3692Kt9L19XsKH-fRiGZntDybCHDJelLhIKvy5WknJbNi2UftM3sdsY8oxIelYUM2AzjtPX-0AJKm3LOqlQO1WL0XXCg

Richtig ist, dass kräftige geopolitische Verschiebungen in Gang sind, zumal auch in Richtung Asian Pivot. Ob das dann aber ein chinesisches, ein indisches, ein pazifisches , ein asiatisches Jahrhundert, zumal ohne die USA werden wird, bleibt bisher offen, wobei letzteres auch nicht anzunehmen ist.

Jedenfalls wird es kein europäisches Jahrhundert werden und war auch noch nie eines- trotz Green New Deal und Fraeser´s LQBTIQ – Regenbogengenderamrbinde in Katar. Aber nun Greenbashing und mal nicht Greenwashing zu betreiben und Annalena Baerbock und ihre Followers wegen ihres Werteliberalismus allein für den Abstieg Europas verantwortlich zu machen, würde bedeuten, dass man die Verantwortung „unserer Gangster“ Schröder und Merkel , die sogenannte Realpolitik und Neoliberalismus jahrzehntelang betrieben als ungeschehen erklären würde.

Noch eine letzte Breaking News:

„China erkennt „Russlands Aggression gegenüber der Ukraine“ an – weicht aber nicht von Putins Seite“

https://www.merkur.de/politik/resolution-china-russland-ukraine-krieg-xi-jinping-wolodymyr-selenskyj-wladimir-putin-un-92254204.html

Das ist gut. Was für ein Heuchler Kriegstreiber Xi doch ist: Erst gibt er Putin bei der Olympiade in Peking grünes Licht, den Ukrainekrieg zu beginnen, um ihn als Rammbock für eine multipolare Weltordnung unter russisch-chinesischer Hegemonie zu nutzen, damit er freie Hand im Indo- Pazifik hat und als es vorerst schief geht und der Westen sich einiger als angenommen zeigt, ist nur Russland der Aggressor und plustert sich Xi als die Weltfriedenstaube auf. China legt mit seinem GSI, GDI und GCI samt einhergehender Initiatven nur einen taktischen Zwischenschritt ein, um sich international in Stellung zu bringen und sich im Gegensatz zu den USA, der NATO und Russland als die Friedensmacht auf der Welt zu gebärden, um dann wieder in die Offensive zu gehen beim Kampf um die multipolare Weltordnung unter Chinas Gusto. Deswegen hält Xi auch noch an Putin weiter fest.

China und Russland wollen Zusammenarbeit „auf höhere Ebene heben“ – trotz Krieg in der Ukraine

Sie bleiben enge Verbündete: China und Russland wollen trotz des Kriegs in der Ukraine verstärkt zusammenarbeiten. Das betonten die Außenminister beider Länder nun in Indien.

https://www.fr.de/politik/china-ukraine-krieg-russland-aussenminister-treffen-indien-lawrow-qin-gang-92256703.html

Derweil viel Umgruppierunge an der ukrainischen Front in Vorbereitung der ukrainischen Offensive. Wagnerchef kündigt Abzug aus Bachmuth für Mai an, falls er keine Munition bekommt, Schoigu besucht die Truppe und sagt Abhilfe zu, ein hochrangiger Militär,„der Schlächter von Mariupol“ wechselt auf  Pirgoschins Seite, Kadyrow meldet sich aus der Funkstille und will Wagner ersetzen, während dessen Diskussion in Russland, ob man wegen des Drohnenanschlags auf Putin den Krieg nicht eskalieren sollte und Selensky umbringen. Die Ukraine hält das Wagnermanöver nur für einen taktischen Trick und bereitet sich dessen ungeachtet auf ihre Offensive vor.

Interessant ist aber, wenn man die Äußerungen US- Generalstabschef Milleys, Selenskys Unterstützung der chinesischen Ukraineinitiative, zumal China erstmals in einer UN-Resolution vom Aggressor Russland spricht hört, inzwischen die meisten unausgesprochen mit Verhandlungen und einem wie immer gearteten Waffenstillstand rechnen. Vielleicht mit Milleys Korealösung.

Sichtbarster Ausdruck der neuen Stimmung war gestern die Phönixrunde, in der schon nicht mehr über den Krieg, sondern die Nachkriegszeit das Thema war .Tenor war; Selensky werde das Schicksal Churchills durchlaufen. Gefeierter Kriegspräsident, aber nicht mehr gewählter Friedenspräsident. Bisher hatte man ihn und sein Umfeld geschont, aber die Ukrainer wurden schnell wieder nach dem Krieg in ihre Mentalität zurückfallen, Parteienstreit und gegen die jeweilige Regierung zu sein. Das wurde noch einige Probleme mit sich bringen und die begännen eigentlich erst nach dem Krieg. Zumal wenn der Friedensschluss nicht so wie erhofft ausfällt ,eine Wirtschaftskrise folge und es mit dem Wiederaufbau nicht so recht voranginge. In einer anderen Talkshow meine Trittin auch noch den ehemaligen NATO- Generalsekretär Rasmusen zitierend, dass die Hauptaufgabe nach dem Krieg sei, die Ukraine so immun gegen weiteren Hybridkrieg Russlands zu machen, dass Investitionen getätigt und der Aufbau erfolgreich sein könne, zumal Putin und Russland gelegen sein könnte einen blühenden slawischen Tigerstaat ala Südkorea nach dem Koreakrieg als westliches Vorbild zu sabotieren und zu verhindern. Desweiteren stellt sich dann auch die Frage einer europäischen Nachkriegsordnung, Neuer Eiserner Vorhang und Sperrriegel gegen Russland, Europa ohne oder gar gegen Russland oder falls mit, in welchen Bereichen und unter welchen Bedingungen

---

Originalquellen:

——————————————————————————————————————————————————

“Can China replace the US in the Middle East?

As the Saudi-Iran deal shows, Beijing’s clout in the region is growing. But it can’t substitute US security presence — and might not want to.

By Erin Hale

Published On 25 Apr 202325 Apr 2023

On April 6, the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia and Iran met for the first time in seven years. A month earlier, top national security officials of the two countries had stunned the world, re-establishing diplomatic relations after years of hostility that had raised tensions across their shared neighbourhood.

But the meetings that led to the dramatic breakthrough were not held in the Middle East. They were hosted and mediated by China, after years of unsuccessful attempts by Oman and Iraq.

In the West, China’s central role in keeping Russia’s economy afloat despite sanctions, and Beijing’s unwillingness to even question Moscow over its invasion of Ukraine have drawn sharp criticism.

Yet experts say its newfound success as a peacemaker in the Middle East signals a shift for China, which has traditionally hesitated from involving itself too deeply in efforts to resolve global conflicts.

And it seems to be dreaming big. In February, shortly before the Iran-Saudi talks concluded, Beijing launched its Global Security Initiative, with the aim of “peacefully resolving differences and disputes between countries through dialogue and consultation”.

Then last week, China’s new foreign minister, Qin Gang, said Beijing was ready to mediate peace talks between Israel and Palestine.

The Saudi-Iran deal could serve as China’s “launchpad to future initiatives”, said Julia Gurol-Haller, an associate fellow at the Arnold-Bergstraesser-Institut Freiburg in Germany. It is a declaration that China is ready to play a bigger role than it previously has in mediating conflicts, she said.

All of this comes at a time when the influence of the United States — traditionally the biggest power broker in the Middle East — has waned, according to many analysts. The US decision to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal, its blow-hot-blow-cold relationship with Saudi Arabia, and its long occupation and chaotic withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan have hurt its credibility. Domestic politics have also kept the US distracted, as has a growing wariness among the American public about the country’s decades-long role as a global policeman.

But can China offer the Middle East everything that the US — for all of its failings — has over the years?

The short answer: Despite its fast-rising clout, China still does not have the ability to replace the US in the Middle East, where Washington has dozens of military bases and allies it has committed to defending. But Beijing might not want to take on that responsibility yet in any case, experts say. For now, China can benefit from expanded diplomatic and economic influence while letting the US continue leading on the region’s security concerns.

Advantage China

Well before the Saudi Arabia-Iran deal, China had already established itself as a vital partner to countries in the Middle East.

Formularende

China is the top trading partner of Saudi Arabia and Iran and is the biggest buyer of oil from the two nations. In recent years, it has further cemented these relationships, signing a 25-year cooperation deal with Iran in 2021 and a comprehensive strategic partnership agreement with Saudi Arabia in 2022.

But that goodwill extends beyond Saudi Arabia and Iran, thanks in no small part to the massive Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) launched in 2013, with the aim of connecting Asia, Europe and Africa through a China-backed network of ports, railways, highways and other infrastructure projects.

China invested more than $273bn in the region between 2005 and 2022. It is the largest investor in the Middle East. It also buys oil from Iraq, gas from Qatar, and exports weapons to Algeria, Morocco, Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. It is helping Egypt build its new capital outside Cairo, and has constructed the metro rail network in Mecca.

In December 2022, Chinese President Xi Jinping visited Saudi Arabia for three days, during which he also held Beijing’s first-ever summits with the Arab League and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman described the visit as marking “a new historical era” in ties between China and his country.

Meanwhile, China’s rapid advances in cutting-edge tech in recent years mean that Beijing can offer access to services like 5G connectivity through companies like Huawei.

All of this gives China automatic clout in the region, said Trita Parsi, the co-founder and executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, a Washington-based think tank. This influence has enabled Beijing to succeed with Saudi Arabia and Iran where past negotiators had failed, he said. Countries across the region want to stay in China’s good graces for economic reasons.

Even better, Beijing is viewed as an ideologically neutral trading partner, which has long maintained a policy of non-interference in the domestic issues of Middle Eastern countries, from politics to human rights, making it a less controversial mediator than countries like the US.

It is also not associated with a particular cause like the US’s close relationship with Israel, and has no history of punitive action — whether through military action or sanctions — in the region.

“At the end of the day, a key reason as to why many of these countries have a benign view of China is not just because China doesn’t interfere in their affairs, it’s because they have not seen China conduct itself in a way that would be threatening to them, or that has the potential of being threatening,” Parsi told Al Jazeera.

The US does not enjoy that reputation, even among some of its traditional partners — and the sanctions against Russia over the war in Ukraine have added to the unease in the region’s capitals, he suggested.

“With the United States, they see [it] has the ability to cut Russia off of the international financial system within five days. That is an immensely powerful tool, and the United States has not conducted itself particularly responsibly for the last 20 years,” Parsi said. “So it’s a very powerful tool in the hands of an at-times reckless player. That’s threatening.”

A different kind of power

At the same time that it is setting itself up as a potential alternative to the US in the Middle East, Beijing is not really trying to usurp the position Washington has long held, said Fan Hongda, a professor at the Middle East Studies Institute of Shanghai International Studies University.

China’s power primarily lies in its economic influence and projects like the BRI – and this is something it would be happy to maintain for now in the region, he said.

“China never intended to control the Middle East,” Fan told Al Jazeera. “I don’t think Beijing has any plans to displace the US in the Middle East. Because many actions of the United States in the Middle East are not what China likes. In short, China has its own way of cooperating with Middle Eastern countries.”

China and the US have found themselves on opposite ends of conflicts like the Syrian civil war. Beijing has used its veto at the United Nations Security Council to keep Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad in power. But it has otherwise kept a much lower profile on major conflicts than Washington, DC, and it does not have the same historic track record of carrying out regime change and helping to topple democratically elected leaders. The US has more than three dozen military bases in the Middle East.

To be sure, despite the image it likes to promote of itself as a benign power compared with the US, China has in recent years moved to dramatically upgrade and expand its military capabilities, which it often showcases in its own neighbourhood. In 2017, the People’s Liberation Army built its first overseas military base in Djibouti, near the Strait of Hormuz.

Four years later, the Wall Street Journal reported that China was possibly building a naval base in the United Arab Emirates, a project that was grounded after the US intervened with UAE authorities. Some China watchers say Beijing follows a policy of “first civilian, then military” as it builds up infrastructure like ports, railways, and airports, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Still, Zakiyeh Yazdanshenas, director of the China-Middle East Project at Tehran’s Center for Middle East Strategic Studies, said China’s track record so far showed little appetite for US-style involvement in the region.

“Beijing has neither the ability nor the desire to have a military presence like that of the US in the region, but it does try to expand its influence in the Middle East and especially in the Persian Gulf,” she told Al Jazeera.

Yazdanshenas described China’s aims as threefold: “Ensuring the security of the free flow of energy while imposing the lowest cost on China and at the same time raising its prestige as a responsible international player.”

Limits to influence

But while this can get China quite far, its reluctance to take on the role of “policeman” or security provider could limit its negotiating toolkit in the long run, said Mark Fitzpatrick, an associate fellow for strategy, technology and arms control at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies.

It also remains to be seen whether China can enforce deals it has mediated with economic guarantees alone, or if it can replicate its recent success beyond Iran and Saudi Arabia – both of which are deeply tied to China through energy sales.

“One issue is whether the Saudi-Iran rapprochement will hold and whether China will be able to enforce it. I think a lot of people have had some doubts about how stable it will be,” Fitzpatrick told Al Jazeera. “There could be something that happens that unravels it again, and China’s economic leverage might not be enough to really enforce it. That’s not saying it’s going to unravel, but it may be that all aspects of the deal may not play out as it hoped.”

For now, China has to walk down a “very long and bumpy” road to peace and avoid becoming embroiled in protracted conflicts, like the US has done many times, Gurol-Haller at the Arnold-Bergstraesser-Institut Freiburg said.

“It’s not clear how China will accompany Iran and Saudi Arabia in walking down the road,” she told Al Jazeera. “The joint statement that was issued after this deal was made does not clarify how the signing parties or China will respond to violation.

“So what happens if Iran breaks its part of the deal? Or what happens if Saudi Arabia does not comply with what it had promised? It’s really not clear how China can react to that and what are the carrots and what are the sticks.”

What is clear, Gurol-Haller said, is that for China in the Middle East, the hard work starts now.

https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/4/25/can-china-replace-the-us-in-the-middle-east

“Mega pastor: If Trump re-elected, Saudis will normalize Israel ties

Pastor Robert Jeffress is a recipient of the Friends of Zion Award.

By MAAYAN JAFFE-HOFFMAN

Published: MAY 4, 2023 20:43

Updated: MAY 5, 2023 05:56

Saudi Arabia and Israel will sign a normalization agreement if Donald Trump is re-elected to the White House, according to one of the former president’s faith advisors, Pastor Robert Jeffress.

“I was in the East Room of the White House when President Trump and Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu introduced the Abraham Accords,” said the Baptist leader, the senior pastor of the 16,000-member First Baptist Church in Dallas, and a Fox News contributor.

“It was amazing to see people from all nations standing up and applauding the president for what he had done,” recalled Jeffress, who also served as an informal advisor to the previous president on faith-based issues and was one of the speakers at the opening of the US Embassy in Jerusalem in 2018.

“I thought only Donald J. Trump could have pulled this off. Of course, if he is re-elected, you will see similar arrangements.

“Trump is a transactional resident,” Jeffress continued. “He aims to get things done, which made him a successful president.”

What is Jeffress‘ relationship with Israel?

Jeffress was in Israel with 500 viewers of his “Pathway to Victory” Bible TV program. The show reaches around three million people every week. The tour was built around his receiving the Friends of Zion Award on Thursday in Jerusalem.

The award was commissioned by the late President Shimon Peres, who also served as international chairman of Friends of Zion.

Jeffress, who has supported Trump since 2015, told The Jerusalem Post that he was “the most pro-Israel, pro-life, pro-religious liberty president in the history of the United States. And he has done more for Israel than any other president.”

The pastor expressed confidence that the former president would be the Republican nominee and “be elevated” as the 47th president on January 20, 2025.

The Republican primaries are in February 2024.

In all Real Clear Politics polls, Trump is winning significantly. The most recent poll, taken on May 3 by Vanderbilt University and evaluating the 2024 Tennessee Republican Presidential Primary, showed Trump with a 34-point lead over his closest contender, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. The last YouGov poll, taken the day before, showed Trump having a 36-point lead in the general primary.

Since leaving office, Trump has drawn criticism for complaining that American Jews don’t appreciate his efforts for Israel. He also came under fire for hosting white supremacist Nick Fuentes and open antisemite rapper Kanye West at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.

Jeffress did not believe these challenges would stop Trump from supporting the Jewish state.

“He is perplexed as to why the American Jewish community seems not to care as much about Israel as perhaps they should,” Jeffress said. “I don’t think that will keep him from doing the right thing. President Trump understands that to be on the right side of Israel is to be on the right side of history – and I might add the right side of God.”

He said that Israel is experiencing existential threats from various sources, and “I think America needs a president who is ready to defend Israel if it should have to deal with the Iranian threat or any other threat to their security.”Jeffress has been called out in the past for making negative comments about people of other faiths.

“Not only do religions like Mormonism, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism – not only do they lead people away from God, they lead people to an eternity of separation from God in hell,” he said during a 2010 lecture, according to Mother Jones.

However, Jeffress told the Post today that “if you believe the Bible as God’s word, then you will be pro-Israel.

“My prayer is that the USA will continue to be on the side of Israel,” he concluded.

https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-742128

“The End of the American Century Begins in the Middle East

By Tom O’Connor On 05/03/23 at 5:00 AM EDT

hinese official communications often echo a phrase of President Xi Jinping’s about „great changes unseen in a century.“ Increasingly that line seems less like propaganda and more like a simple statement of a vast transformation in the world order.

This overhaul, years in the making, is taking the clearest shape right now in the Middle East, a region where the U.S. has devoted many resources in the 21st century. In March, China helped arrange a peace deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia, taking the kind of broker role in the region long held by the U.S. Washington currently has no diplomatic ties with Tehran and relations with Riyadh have grown strained.

„We bluster, we threaten, we menace, we sanction, we send the Marines, we bomb,“ says Chas Freeman, a veteran U.S. diplomat, „but we don’t ever use the arts of persuasion.“

Freeman was principal interpreter for President Richard Nixon on his visit to China in 1972. The trip ultimately resulted in the U.S. recognizing the People’s Republic over Taiwan and the opening of an embassy in Beijing, where Freeman served as deputy chief of mission. Now he tells Newsweek, Washington’s „moment of diplomatic glory“ is long over. „What has happened is that the American ability to coerce is declining,“ he says. „We seem to be approaching the world as though we still have an unchallenged authority that we imagined we did at the end of the Cold War.“

Many nations are pursuing their own paths, sometimes called „strategic autonomy.“ The concept remains a hallmark of India’s non-aligned foreign policy, even as it improves relations with the U.S. It is also gaining traction with once-close U.S. friends such as Saudi Arabia, and has appeared in comments by French President Emmanuel Macron following his April visit to Beijing.

Formularbeginn

Get the best of Newsweek via email

Formularende

Freeman, who once served as U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, says, „The world is changing; the kaleidoscope is in motion. We’re trying to put all the pieces in place,“ he says. „The basic aim of our foreign policy is retention of primacy, which is impossible. Nothing is forever. No great power is always supreme forever.“

„It’s not just that the Pax Americana, the American Century, which turned out to be about 50 years long, is over,“ he adds, „but the 500 years of Euro-Atlantic global ascendancy are over.“

A Non-Hostile Takeover

China has long been positioning itself to take advantage of the shift. „Since the reform and opening up in the late 1970s, China has been developing and deepening relations with other countries on the basis of mutual benefit and respect for each other,“ Hongda Fan, a leading Chinese expert and professor at Shanghai International Studies University’s Middle East Studies Institute, tells Newsweek.

„China has not actively provoked conflicts with other countries for decades,“ Fan adds. „This leaves China with few enemies in the world, and also enables China to obtain a good external development environment.“

Although China has several territorial disputes with key neighbors, the People’s Republic has emerged as the top trading partner of nearly 130 countries. It has promoted its economic and diplomatic clout across the Global South, including Africa and Latin America, through ventures such as Xi’s Belt and Road Initiative, a network of infrastructure projects spanning nearly 150 countries.

Courting the Middle East has proven to be particularly valuable for China, the world’s number one oil importer. Iran and Saudi Arabia both want spots in trade and security blocs BRICS Plus and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Their membership could give Beijing the ability to withstand a potential U.S. sanctions campaign like the one levied against Russia over its war in Ukraine.

Oil was at the heart of the post-World War II strategic partnership forged by the U.S. with Saudi Arabia. The pact outlasted Arab-Israeli wars, an ensuing 1970s OPEC boycott and 9/11, in which 11 of 15 Al-Qaeda hijackers were Saudi nationals. The U.S. was also willing to overlook alleged human rights abuses by Saudi Arabia. But President Joe Biden’s branding of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman as a „pariah,“ together with reduced U.S. aid to a Saudi-led war effort in Yemen and attempts to revive a nuclear deal with Iran, have opened a substantial rift with Riyadh.

Meanwhile, few Middle Eastern and Muslim countries have joined the U.S. in condemning China’s treatment of its mostly Muslim Uyghur minority. And as the U.S. has moved to end its „forever wars“ to focus on the challenge posed by China, a Middle East left divided and in disarray continues to seek assistance.

„The United States has indeed ignored the urgent needs of the Middle East countries for development,“ Fan says, „or did not pay enough attention to it.“

„Washington needs to understand that such challenges come not only from China, but also from many other countries,“ Fan adds. „More and more countries, including China, hope to control their own destiny and hope to see a multipolar world.“

‚The World Has Changed‘

In Saudi Arabia’s case, this means translating energy influence into geopolitical capital. This shift has been met with wariness by Washington, where Biden warned of „consequences“ after Riyadh defied U.S. calls to increase oil production and instead joined fellow OPEC Plus states, including Iran and Russia, in cutting output last October.

Mohammad al-Sabban, former senior adviser to the Saudi energy minister, tells Newsweek, „The United States continues to think that it is the only pole in the world, and that is untrue.“

„The world has become multipolar. There is China, there is Russia, there is the United States, there is the European Union and also there is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.“

It’s not just oil that fuels Saudi clout. Saudi Arabia has unique status across the Muslim world as custodian of Islam’s two holiest sites, and the Kingdom, the fastest growing of the world’s major economies, is a leading member of the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

Meanwhile the Kingdom is also undergoing an internal transformation. While Riyadh long clung to tradition and embraced fundamentalist Islamism, Crown Prince Mohammed has tied his legacy as the country’s future king to modernization, cultivating a national identity beyond religion. The U.S. once approved of this metamorphosis but has grown increasingly suspicious.

Sabban says the U.S.‘ „pursuit of commanding and unilateral policies“ will „not pass with any nation, any nation that respects its sovereignty and that respects itself.“ He adds, „The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia makes its decisions according to its interests, especially economic and political. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia does not care about any other opinions or the opinions that are imposed on it.“

Sabban links the country’s economic and geopolitical „diversification“ directly to Crown Prince Mohammed’s „Vision 2030“ strategy and argues, „Everyone must respect the interests of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, just as we respect the interests of others.“ He warns, „No country should interfere in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia making its decisions in the international arena.“

‚A Profound Reassessment‘

Some diplomats worry that recent events in the Middle East and elsewhere, 30 years after the fall of the Soviet Union, show the U.S., for all its military, financial and cultural power, has lost its appeal to much of the world. Jack Matlock, the last U.S. ambassador to the USSR, says, „The example we are offering the world today is not as attractive as it might have been in 1991.“

Matlock, who began his tenure in the Foreign Service in 1956, tells Newsweek China’s success asserting itself around the world, „should inspire a profound reassessment leading to a change of course“ in Washington.

Today, U.S. communication with top adversaries has reached an all-time low. Meanwhile, China pursues a growing list of geopolitical goals, Russia wages war in Ukraine with no end in sight, Iran rebuilds ties with rivals and North Korea accelerates nuclear weapons development. Sanctions, the mainstay of U.S. diplomatic action, have so far done little to dissuade foes.

While Washington has portrayed the world as a struggle between democracies and authoritarians (in which vital partners such as Saudi Arabia do not fit comfortably), Matlock says „ideology and form of government should not matter.“

„To have a peaceful, prosperous world able to cope with unprecedented challenges such as environmental degradation, terrorism and violence of all types, massive flows of population, the threat of pandemics and the avoidance of nuclear war or use of other weapons of mass destruction, we need to deal with all countries with respect,“ he says.

He warns that, much like the doomed Soviet Union, the U.S. approach relies on the outdated belief „that the U.S. had the knowledge and power to transform the world if only it used its military and economic dominance to change other societies.“

This line of thinking, Matlock argues, propagates the notion „that ‚we won the Cold War,‘ that the break-up of the USSR marked the end of the Cold War and Russia was the defeated party, and that the collapse of the Communist system proved that capitalism and ‚democracy‘ were the inevitable future of mankind, that nuclear weapons made us invincible, and therefore our leadership was necessary for transforming the world.“

„These were false assumptions,“ he argues, „and impossible goals.“

https://www.newsweek.com/2023/05/12/end-american-century-begins-middle-east-1797669.html

§Thu, May 04, 2023 page1

NATO planning to open Japan office to deepen relations

• The Guardian

NATO is reportedly planning to open a liaison office in Japan to coordinate with close partners across the Indo-Pacific region including Australia, South Korea and New Zealand.

The plans are likely to attract criticism from the Chinese government, which has previously warned the Western alliance against extending “its tentacles to the Asia-Pacific.”

Nikkei Asia yesterday reported that NATO and Japan plan to upgrade their cooperation on tackling cyberthreats, disinformation, and emerging and disruptive technologies.

NATO’s planned new liaison office in Tokyo — to open next year — would be the first of its kind in Asia and would allow the military alliance to conduct periodic consultations with Japan and key partners, such as Australia, Nikkei Asia reported.

The move would be consistent with NATO’s increasing interest in developments in the Indo-Pacific. In its “strategic concept,” unveiled last year, NATO said that China posed “systemic challenges” to Euro-Atlantic security, even though Russia remained “the most significant and direct threat to allies’ security.”

NATO vowed to “strengthen dialogue and cooperation with new and existing partners in the Indo-Pacific to tackle cross-regional challenges and shared security interests.”

NATO accused China of carrying out “malicious hybrid and cyberoperations” and “remaining opaque about its strategy, intentions and military buildup.”

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has accepted an invitation to travel to the next NATO summit in Vilnius in July.

“Australia shares with NATO members a commitment to supporting democracy, peace and security, and upholding the rule of law,” a spokesperson for Albanese said last month.

https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2023/05/04/2003799104

“Japan should brace for ‘leaderless era’ as U.S. turns inward, adviser to PM says

REUTERS

November 10, 2020 at 17:22 JST

A prominent economic adviser to Japan’s prime minister says Tokyo should prepare for a “leaderless era” as U.S. global leadership gradually withers and expand other strategic ties while bolstering its security alliance with Washington.

The prime minister, Yoshihide Suga, wasted little time in congratulating presumptive U.S. President-elect Joe Biden, despite President Donald Trump’s refusal to concede, saying he wanted to strengthen the alliance and ensure peace and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region.

But concerns about America’s inward turn have simmered in Japan for years, intensifying in the face of China’s growing military and economic assertiveness and persisting during the Trump presidency despite comparatively warm ties between the outgoing U.S. leader and Suga’s predecessor, Shinzo Abe.

For Suga adviser Takeshi Niinami, chief executive of drinks giant Suntory Holdings Ltd and a well-known regular on the international business circuit, Biden’s promises to restore U.S. ties with international institutions and allies are welcome.

But Niinami expects U.S. influence to keep waning relative to China, as Biden faces deep domestic divisions in America after the election, so Japan must widen its push for multiple partnerships.

“We have to put a footprint in ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) countries and India,” he told Reuters in an interview, while at the same time “we must explore further relations with the United States in the security space.”

In a separate statement issued soon after Biden’s election victory, Niinami said, “I believe it is inevitable that U.S. global leadership will wither in the long term.

“Japan must continue deepening the U.S.-Japan alliance but at the same time establish its relationship with the world in order to ready itself for a leaderless era,” said Niinami.

‘LIKE-MINDED NATIONS’

Worries about declining U.S. global influence are not new, but former diplomat Kunihiko Miyake, a foreign policy adviser to Suga, agreed Biden could not “run away” from a trend toward U.S. “neo-isolationism.”

“Orthodoxy is back in Washington and we welcome that, but everything is relative and we need more like-minded nations, not only the United States but also other neighbors in the Indo-Pacific region,” Miyake said.

In a clear sign of Japan’s aim to expand its network of strategic ties, Suga’s first overseas trip after taking office in September was to Vietnam and Indonesia, where he reached agreements to bolster defense ties.

That followed Tokyo’s hosting of the Quad grouping of the United States, Australia, Japan and India, which proponents see as a bulwark against Beijing’s influence. China has denounced the Quad group as a “mini-NATO” aimed at its containment.

Japan must balance its deep economic ties with China with its concerns about Beijing’s military assertiveness and worries about such matters as cybersecurity and intellectual property protection that it shares with Washington.

Hawks in Suga’s Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) want a tougher line on China, but a government source said Suga, a relative novice on foreign policy, was still feeling his way.

Some conservatives in Japan worry Biden may adopt a softer line toward Beijing than Trump, but others expect little substantive change.

“The way the U.S. describes China (under Biden) might change but the general direction is the same–to make China a responsible partner and competitor,” said a Japanese government source, speaking on condition of anonymity.

https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/13918082

China’s small steps on offshore use of yuan are starting to add up

REUTERS

April 28, 2023 at 15:40 JST

SINGAPORE–China’s yuan currency is slowly but surely being adopted for more international payments, which analysts say could lay foundations for a trade system running parallel to the dominant U.S. dollar.

In the past day alone, data showed that more cross-border transactions with China were settled in yuan in March than in dollars for the first time, and that Argentina said it aims to regularly pay for Chinese goods in yuan and not dollars.

While the dollar dominates world trade settlements, the news comes amid a steady drumbeat of more and more bilateral deals arranging yuan payments with China–from Chinese oil purchases in the Middle East to trade with partners from Brazil to Russia.

True global yuan adoption is unlikely, given expectations that Beijing will want to keep a tight grip on the currency. But incremental progress is already fashioning a new trade architecture and is gaining pace, particularly as Russia’s expulsion from much of the West’s payment systems has accelerated the development of alternatives.

“The world’s largest commodity exporters and importers–China, Russia and Brazil–are now working together on using renminbi for cross-border payments,” said Chi Lo, senior investment strategist at BNP Paribas Asset Management in Hong Kong.

“Their cooperation could draw other countries to renminbi payments over time and cumulatively, this group could lift the renminbi at the expense of the dollar,” he said.

China has long sought to increase the yuan’s undersized 2.2% share of global payments, but seemingly without being willing to open its capital accounts and allow the sort of free-flowing movement that makes dollars, euros and yen so convenient.

Russia’s war on Ukraine, and the resulting Western sanctions, has given substance to the push. Suddenly, Russia has come from virtually nowhere to become the fourth-largest yuan-trading hub outside China.

The yuan’s share of Russia’s currency market has leapt to 40% to 45%, from less than 1% at the start of last year. Its share of world trade financing, according to SWIFT, has increased to 4.5% in February from 1.3% two years ago. The dollar’s is 84%.

“It will not replace the U.S. dollar globally, but it is already starting to replace the dollar in some of China’s trade relationships,” said Gerard DiPippo and Andrea Leonard Palazzi, economists at Washington’s Center for Strategic and International Studies, in an article last week.

“This kind of renminbi internationalization may achieve Beijing’s goals, including reducing China’s exposure to exchange rate fluctuations and mitigating China’s vulnerabilities to U.S. financial sanctions.”

SLOW MOVING

World trade flows are dominated by dollars, euros, sterling and yen because those currencies are freely available and connected to open economies in ways the capital-controlled yuan is not. To be sure, there are no signs that is changing.

“In most trades, importers have a comparative advantage in determining the terms of trades, such as pricing and settlement currency,” says Zhang Yu, chief macro analyst at Huachuang Securities in Beijing.

“Therefore, if exporters want to use yuan to settle trades, they must persuade foreign importers to pay in yuan, which often takes a long time.”

China itself needs time to create depth in a limited pool of yuan outside its shores, which is less easy for Beijing to control.

“For yuan usage to grow in scale it may take 10 years or longer,” says Andre Wheeler, chief executive of supply chain, trade risk consultancy Wheeler Management Consulting based in Australia.

“If they were to try to change Australia iron ore trades to be settled in yuan, I don’t think China would be able to cope with that scale.”

Yet the yuan offers other attractions to China’s trading partners. In Argentina’s case, buying goods in yuan saves draining dwindling dollar reserves. More broadly, each new adopter adds to a currency system’s depth and usefulness.

“One of the many reasons for using the dollar is what we call network effects,” said Michael Pettis, senior fellow at Carnegie China.

“The more of us that use it, the cheaper it becomes to use and the more efficient it becomes to use,” he said.

“By trying to force more and more of its trade into renminbi, Beijing is trying to create network effects that will make use of the renminbi for trade that much easier and with lower frictional costs.”

https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14896273

“INTERVIEW/ Egypt president willing to work with Japan for Sudan cease-fire

THE ASAHI SHIMBUN

May 2, 2023 at 14:12 JST

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi responds to questions from Yoshiaki Kasuga, left, The Asahi Shimbun foreign news editor. (Provided by Egyptian presidential office)

CAIRO–Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi wants to work with Japan to bring about a cease-fire in neighboring conflict-ridden Sudan but said his nation would not intervene. 

Sisi made the comments in an exclusive 70-minute interview with The Asahi Shimbun here on April 29. It is rare for the Egyptian president to meet with foreign media in Egypt.

The interview took place ahead of a meeting between Sisi and Prime Minister Fumio Kishida. Egypt was the first stop on Kishida’s four-nation tour of Africa.

Regarding the fighting between warring factions in Sudan, Sisi said, “Many Sudanese are fleeing to Egypt and we are facing difficulties.”

Pointing to the fact that Japan is hosting this year’s Group of Seven summit, Sisi said he wanted to cooperate in working for a cease-fire in Sudan as well as a transition to a civilian government.

He said that Egypt had already taken in between 8 million and 9 million refugees not only from Sudan, but other war-torn nations, including Libya, Syria and Yemen.

Noting the global economic difficulties brought about by the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Sisi said, “If we were to accept even more Sudanese, Egypt will definitely feel the effects.”

Fighting broke out from April 15 between the Sudan military and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a militia group that also receives backing from the Sudan government.

Filippo Grandi, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, said on April 29 that there were more than 50,000 Sudanese refugees who have fled the fighting to Egypt, Chad and other neighboring nations.

An Egyptian foreign ministry official said that about 14,000 Sudanese refugees had entered Egypt by April 27.

“We will provide support for dialogue among the Sudanese in order to end the fighting, establish a temporary civilian government and hold elections,” Sisi said. “Since Japan is a G-7 member, our efforts should be toward those goals.”

Because Sudan was jointly controlled by Britain and Egypt before becoming independent, there had been speculation that Egypt might intervene as the fighting intensified.

But Sisi said, “We will not interfere in the domestic politics of other nations because we do not want to further complicate the situation.”

He also indicated that Egypt would continue to take a neutral stance regarding the fighting between Russia and Ukraine, adding that it would be important to pursue a peaceful solution there.

He said Egypt and many other developing nations had been affected economically by the Russian invasion through a food crisis and surging consumer prices.

Sisi also expressed strong interest in strengthening cooperation with Japan and said he wanted Japanese companies to become involved in the economic zone along the Suez Canal.

After the April 30 meeting between Kishida and Sisi, a joint news conference was held in which Kishida said he informed the Egyptian president of Japan’s willingness to provide humanitarian support to Sudanese refugees fleeing to neighboring nations.

Excerpts of the interview follow:

Question: What effects to this region are arising because of the fighting in neighboring Sudan between the military and the RSF?

Sisi: The entire region could be affected. We are making our best effort to bring about discussions between the military and the RSF. We also cannot make the issue even more complicated, so we are being careful about not interfering in their domestic matters. Our efforts are for the creation of a transitional government until elections can be held and civilian government inaugurated.

Q: What are your concerns about more refugees from Sudan?

Sisi: There are already millions of Sudanese in Egypt, but we refer to them not as refugees but guests. There are between 8 million and 9 million guests from Libya, Syria, Yemen and other African nations. Amid the economic difficulties stemming from the Russian invasion of Ukraine, many Sudanese have fled so Egypt is also facing problems. We are already experiencing high inflation and the prices of daily necessities are surging.

Q: What form of support are you looking for from the international community?

Sisi: We hope for support that will stabilize Syria, Yemen, Libya and Sudan. Once the situation stabilizes, those who fled their nations will return (home). I want to hold a frank exchange of views with Prime Minister Kishida to confirm what we can do.

Q: What are your views about the dramatic changes occurring in the Middle East, such as the normalization of relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran?

Sisi: There has been more than 10 years of instability in this region and many people have suffered as a result. We have come to believe that the only appropriate option for our foreign policy is an alleviation of tension and reconciliation. Egyptian diplomacy does not meddle in the domestic politics of other nations, but has consistently been one of strategic patience to wait for an improvement in the situation.

Q: How do you view the efforts by China to mediate the normalization of ties between Saudi Arabia and Iran?

Sisi: I believe any good intention to find a resolution to the various issues of the world is a good thing. We welcome such contributions from China, Japan and the United States. We are also hoping for an early resolution of the crisis involving Russia and Ukraine so peace can return. We will support any nation that can contribute to that resolution.

Q: Why are so many nations in the so-called Global South, including Egypt, taking a neutral stance toward the invasion of Ukraine?

Sisi: There is a need to pursue a peaceful resolution of the issue between Russia and Ukraine. I have called on the international community to find a political and diplomatic resolution to end the fighting. I will also inform Prime Minister Kishida about our intention.

Q: What are your expectations for Japan?

Sisi: I have continued with an effort to introduce Japan’s educational system to Egypt and so far that has been implemented at about 50 schools. We plan to further expand those measures. I want many Japanese companies to participate in the economic zone of the Suez Canal, a key hub of international trade.

(This article was written by Yoshiaki Kasuga and Eishiro Takeishi.

https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14898341

In einem programmatischen Artikel „NATO’s role in a transatlantic strategy on China“ vom Montag,den 1. Juni 2020 in the New Atlanticist des Atlantic Council schlug, Ian Brzezinski damals folgende Maßnahmen vor:

„When considering this issue, it is important to recognize that the foundation for a relevant NATO role in a transatlantic China strategy has long been established. For decades, the Alliance has been operating around the world. NATO has led the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan since 2003. Its naval forces have patrolled against pirates off the shores of Africa, commencing with operation OCEAN SHIELD in 2008. As a member of the Coalition to Defeat ISIS, NATO provides training to military establishments across the Middle East. And, on a daily basis the Alliance addresses terrorism, cyber-threats, disinformation, and other global issues.

„Most relevant to addressing China are the Alliance’s long-standing relationships with key democracies of the Indo-Pacific region. NATO established Global Partnerships with Korea, New Zealand, and Mongolia in 2012, Australia in 2013, and Japan in 2014. These relationships are predominantly consultative, but most of these partners have contributed to NATO missions, including in Afghanistan.

As the transatlantic community’s lead instrument for security collaboration, NATO can contribute to the former’s relationship with China in three important ways. As a multinational security forum, it can foster among NATO allies and partners a shared awareness of China’s capacities and activities that generate risk to and opportunity for the North Atlantic community. NATO has long served as an important forum through which its Allies and partners share intelligence data and assessments needed to foster and facilitate collaborative action.

Second, NATO can help develop and promulgate a transatlantic security strategy and posture regarding China. That strategy’s objectives should include the development of a cooperative relationship with China as well the dissuasion of China from undermining the interests of the transatlantic community. The latter would define the appropriate role and means for the Alliance to contribute to deterrence and when necessary defense against Chinese aggression that imperil those interests.

Third, NATO’s civilian and military capacities should be used to facilitate the defense and security component of a Western strategy addressing China—including in the tasks of engagement, deterrence, and defense.

The following are five actions NATO could undertake as part of its approach to China, none of which would require it to undertake a significant reprioritization of its current mission sets and all of which would support the aforementioned:

The Alliance should offer to establish a NATO-China Council. This would mirror the NATO-Russia Council whose roots date back to 1997. Its establishment would recognize and respond to the realty of China’s growing influence and reach. This forum would spur Alliance members to more seriously and comprehensively address in a coordinated manner the challenges posed by China. Its establishment would underscore that this dimension of great power competition is not between China and the United States but between China and the transatlantic community, one bound by shared values, interests, and history. And this forum could be used to identify and foster opportunities for constructive collaboration with China, such as counter-piracy operations.

Second, NATO should deepen its engagement with its Pacific partners, Australia, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Mongolia. The consultative dimension of these relationships should be complemented with more regular and more robust military exercises (especially air, maritime, and special forces exercises) and operations, including those designed to ensure freedom of navigation. Such events under the NATO flag would be a useful complement to US maritime and air exercisers in the Pacific that have long featured the participation of European allies. Past US RIMPAC exercise series, for example, have included military aircraft, ships and staffs from Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands Norway, and the United Kingdom. In less tense times, China even participated in RIMPAC events.

Third, the Alliance should establish in the Indo-Pacific, perhaps in one of the region’s partner countries, a Center of Excellence (COE) and integrate officers and NCOs from selected partners into the Alliance’s Command Structure. Both initiatives would help increase the Alliance’s understanding of the Indo-Pacific region, institutionalize its presence in the region, and deepen these partners’ familiarization with NATO missions, structures, and protocols.

The Alliance should also establish a small military headquarters element in the Indo-Pacific region, perhaps embedded in the COE or in United States Pacific Command to help facilitate and coordinate NATO exercises and operations. It, too, could contribute to Alliance’s awareness of developments in the region and, if the opportunity emerges, Alliance collaboration with China.

These initiatives will take effort to launch and execute. Some allies will balk at adding additional missions to NATO and their own military forces when resources are already strained. But the aforementioned will not generate onerous costs and can build upon European, US, and Canadian military operations in the Pacific that are already the norm.

Moreover, European attitudes toward China have significantly hardened. Eighteen months ago, many Europeans were content to regard China as an economic partner, notwithstanding its authoritarian political system and aggressive conduct in the Pacific. That has since changed as Europe has experienced with increasing frequency Beijing’s diplomatic and economic belligerence toward those that criticize its actions and policies. In March 2019 the European Union formally described China as a “strategic competitor,” “an economic competitor,” and “a systemic rival promoting alternative models of governance.” Beijing pugnacious conduct during the coronavirus pandemic has only reinforced this new European perspective.

Beijing will likely balk at the offer of a NATO-China council as it will oppose an increased NATO presence in the Indo-China, especially one that fosters deeper political-military collaboration among the region’s democracies. Even NATO Partners in Asia may balk at elevating their relations with NATO out of a desire to avoid further complicating relations with China.

NATO may have to initiate its China strategy on its own, leveraging the territories Allies control in the Indo-Pacific and conducting its own operations and exercises in the region. That will demonstrate the commitment and determination necessary to earn the confidence and support of its partners for a more active Alliance presence in the region. China will then also be likely to demur, realizing that having regular communication with the world’s most powerful military alliance can be important means to avoid conflict, promote peace, and facilitate mutually useful cooperation.

A NATO strategy for China alone will be not a sufficient solution to the West’s increasingly tense relationship with Beijing. A coherent and effective transatlantic strategy for China will have to be comprehensive, one that leverages the full complement of diplomatic, economic, technological, social, and military capabilities and dynamics that define geopolitical power. For it to have maximum success it will have to combine the capacities of both Europe and North America and be reinforced through collaboration with community’s democratic partners in the Indo-Pacific. „ 

Chessboard Ukraine: Wird Brzezinskis Plan einer europäischen Sicherheitsarchitektur beim NATO- Gipfel in Vilnius Realität?