From global think tanks
The analyses published here do not necessarily reflect the strategic thinking of The Global Eye
Today’s about : Australia, Belarus-Poland, China-Russia, Russia, Russia-Syria-Middle East, US, US-China, US-Israel, US-Panama Canal
Australia
(John Coyne – ASPI The Strategist)
Australia’s national resilience and social cohesion are under strain, with the most visible cracks seen in the alarming rise of antisemitism. Governments, most particularly the federal government, whose responsibility it is to lead national debates, desperately need to engage more forthrightly with the Australian public. The discovery in Dural of a caravan containing explosives and, reportedly, an antisemitic message and the addresses of a synagogue and other Jewish buildings, is the latest shock that will heighten anxiety in Australia’s Jewish community and further inflame public tension. – As antisemitism strains Australian social cohesion, the government must step forward | The Strategist
(Joseph Zeller – ASPI The Strategist)
A single missile can cripple a billion-dollar warship. Australia must explore other forms of sea power to effectively meet its immediate strategic needs. A distributed naval force comprising fast attack missile boats and aerial drones offers a cost-effective and tactically superior alternative to reliance on large vulnerable ships. Attack boats can be highly versatile, capable of being armed with anti-ship and surface-to-air missiles and using targeting data from other vessels, ground stations or aircraft. They can thereby engage targets at long distances, dealing with surface targets and providing air-defence coverage. – Distributed firepower: attack missile boats are an alternative to major warships | The Strategist
Belarus – Poland
(Janusz Bugajski – The Jamestown Foundation)
During his re-election as Belarus’s President, Alyaksandr Lukashenka warned Poland that any attempt to annex western Ukraine would precipitate a conflict with Belarus and Russia. Lukashenka’s warnings are part of a broader obsession with Poland’s regional and European influence and support for the Belarusian democratic opposition. Lukashenka’s regular attacks on Poland serve Moscow’s objectives of depicting Warsaw as a provocateur that can pull Europe into a war with Russia. – Lukashenka Touts More Anti-Poland Rhetoric Following Presidential Election – Jamestown
China – Russia
(Sergey Sukhankin, Peace Ajirotutu – The Jamestown Foundation)
Mercenaries have existed since ancient times but have evolved into modern private military and security companies (PMSCs) focusing on training, logistics, and protection, especially in Western practices. Russian private military companies (PMCs) and Chinese private security companies (PSCs), however, operate differently from both each other and Western mercenaries. Russian PMCs are designed for complex military missions and are fully state-dependent but operate illegally in Russia. In contrast, while Chinese PSCs are legal, regulated, and focused on non-combat missions, they lack operational sophistication and autonomy. Russia has used PMCs to jointly serve the state’s geoeconomic and geopolitical objectives without direct military involvement, likely to avoid Soviet mistakes, reliance on conscripts and regular armed forces, Western blunders, and exposure to media scrutiny. Russian PMCs are heavily supported by state resources and succeed due to firepower, collaboration with local forces, and tactical approaches but face challenges in unfamiliar terrains and against technologically advanced opponents. China’s PSCs support the One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative, focusing on protecting assets and infrastructure in unstable areas but lack the skills, combat experience, and autonomy for complex security missions. Political reluctance from the Chinese Communist Party to relinquish control and resistance from host nations further limit their effectiveness. Russia’s PMC industry is likely to persist despite its setbacks but the growing influence of PMCs and paramilitary groups could destabilize Russia internally, especially in a post-war scenario.
China is unlikely to adopt a similar model to Russia. Instead, Beijing might strengthen PSC professionalism and pursue a middle path, avoiding risks of paramilitarization while collaborating with local security providers in host countries. – Guns For Hire: Private Security and Mercenary Industries in China and Russia – Jamestown
Russia
(Alexander Taranov – The Jamestown Foundation)
Russia has developed a new intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM), Oreshnik, based on its RS-26 Rubezh intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). In November 2024, Russian armed forces conducted a combined missile strike on a Ukrainian military-industrial complex facility as a test for the missile. The Kremlin coordinated a media operation to amplify Oreshnik’s perceived power aimed at intimidating European nations. Russian leadership hinted at strikes on decision-making centers in Ukraine and Europe, emphasizing its invulnerability to existing air and missile defense systems deployed on NATO’s Eastern Flank and Ukrainian territory. With the Kremlin’s plans to deploy Oreshnik in Belarus, the potential of deploying the latest missile defense systems in Ukraine is becoming more relevant to protect Europe. – The Kremlin Threatens European Countries Could be Oreshnik’s Next Target – Jamestown
(Ksenia Kirillova – The Jamestown Foundation)
Pro-Kremlin analysts look upon possible negotiations with the United States about the fate of Ukraine only from a position of strength. Moscow’s demands, however, clearly do not correspond with its real capabilities. Russian military analysts push for negotiations by relying on Russia’s military strength to pressure the West despite its military limitations, including recruitment declines and stalled front-line progress. Russia’s foreign policy struggles, including strained relations with allies such as Azerbaijan and unmet expectations from BRICS and Türkiye, reveal vulnerabilities that weaken Moscow’s stance in potential peace negotiations. – Russia Promotes Stronger Negotiating Position Than Reality – Jamestown
Russia – Syria – Middle East
(The Soufan Center)
The departure of most Russian forces from post-Assad Syria has created a power vacuum benefitting Israel and Türkiye, in particular.
Moscow’s reported relocation of military assets from Syria to bases controlled by eastern Libya strongman Khalifa Haftar will enhance Russia’s influence in parts of Africa. The Kremlin will rely even more heavily on Iran as its main remaining regional partner, but doing so might jeopardize Moscow’s cooperation with Arab Gulf states on oil production decisions. Russia’s drawdown from Syria gives Israel a freer hand to operate over Syrian territory and a more secure air corridor to reach potential targets inside Iran. – Russia’s Departure from Syria Upends Regional Geopolitics – The Soufan Center
US
(Navin Girishankar, Philip Luck – Center for Strategic & International Studies)
Talk has finally turned into action and the first shots of the 2025 trade war have been fired. President Trump has used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to place 25 percent tariffs on products from Mexico and Canada (10 percent on Canadian “energy resources”) and 10 percent on all products from China. For all three countries, the rationale for these measures is to motivate action to address the fentanyl crisis in the United States—a pressing economic security priority that deserves immediate attention. However, counter to their intended goal, the tariffs on Mexico (which have since been delayed by one month) and Canada in particular risk undermining U.S. economic security by their direct economic repercussions; their inadequacy in motivating policy change by our partners, and their likelihood of degrading partnerships essential to countering global threats, in particular from China. – Tariffs Using Emergency Economic Powers Risk Undermining U.S. Economic Security
(Noam Unger – Center for Strategic & International Studies)
Over the past fortnight, the administration has prohibited all new programming and issued a broad “stop-work” order on existing U.S. foreign assistance programs. In one fell swoop it removed more than 50 career civil and foreign service leaders of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and then suspended others for allegedly trying to maintain basic rules associated with employment terminations or security related to sensitive and classified information. In a whirlwind, the clamp down included the removal of USAID’s account from X and its website from the internet. Yesterday, the administration conveyed its intent to shut down the agency as rumors also swirled that President Trump will effectively force the battered organization into the Department of State. Today, employees were informed in the wee hours of the morning not to show up at USAID’s headquarters, and later in the day, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that he is taking over as the agency’s acting administrator. In this same time period, hundreds of USAID contract employees have been laid off or furloughed. Nongovernmental organizations and other humanitarian and development enterprises that partner with the U.S. government through grants and contracts have laid off well over a thousand employees so far. While many humanitarian and development programs sputtered to a standstill, and as thousands of people working to improve lives, livelihoods, health, and freedoms internationally were separated from their jobs, vulnerable communities around the world began to feel the effects of a vanishing partner. – Trump’s USAID Purge and Foreign Aid Turmoil Spark Global Security Concerns
(Center for Strategic & International Studies)
On February 1st, President Trump invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to levy tariffs against China, Canada, and Mexico to address drug and immigration concerns at the U.S. northern and southern borders. – Unpacking President Trump’s Tariffs Action | CSIS Events
(Edward Alden – Council on Foreign Relations)
The tariffs that President Donald Trump has announced against three of the United States’ biggest trading partners—Canada, China, and Mexico—look poised to shatter the era of a rules-based order with global economic ramifications. – Trump’s Risky New Era of Broken Trade Norms | Council on Foreign Relations
(George Ingram – Brookings)
In the last few days, the media has reported the chaos—unprecedented actions without regard for the individual, national, and international consequences—resulting from the Trump administration’s preemptive actions on foreign assistance, causing serious damage at both the human level and the U.S. reputation as a reliable ally. On day one, the administration precipitously suspended new obligations and disbursement of foreign assistance. A few days later it summarily dismissed the senior career leadership and then thousands of mid-level staff from USAID, essentially preventing the agency from carrying out its legislative mandated responsibilities. These decisions impact the livelihoods of thousands of Americans who manage our critical foreign assistance programs and tens of thousands of citizens in developing countries who either implement or are the beneficiaries of U.S. assistance—in many situations, depriving individuals of lifesaving medical care. – Why merging USAID into State would undermine U.S. strategic interests
US – China
(Ryan Hass – Brookings)
When President Joe Biden entered office on January 20, 2021, America’s economy was cratering. The country was navigating its worst public health emergency in 100 years. Shards of debris were still being swept from areas where protesters had violently attacked the country’s democratic foundations just two weeks earlier in a coordinated attack on the peaceful transfer of power. Abroad, support for America’s leadership had plummeted. America’s relations with allies and partners were under strain after years of unilateralism. China, meanwhile, appeared to be on the ascent. Economists were exploring when—not if—China’s economy would surpass America’s in terms of gross domestic product. China appeared to be gaining ground militarily through a broad build-out of a wide array of advanced capabilities. Many U.S. military and intelligence officials were forming a conclusion that China could invade Taiwan by 2027. This was the strategic environment within which the Biden administration charted its initial policy moves toward China. – How will the Biden administration’s China policy be remembered?
US – Israel
(Shalom Lipner – Atlantic Council)
Monty Hall, the legendary host of television’s Let’s Make a Deal game show, was a patron of the Jewish state. But it’s US President Donald Trump—the co-author of Trump: The Art of the Deal, and a person not to be upstaged—who claims unabashedly to be the “best friend that Israel has ever had.” That title will be put to the test on February 4, when he hosts Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House. Trump’s pre-presidency was frenetic. Never a disciple of the “one president at a time” school, he injected himself aggressively into the spotlight, dispatching Steve Witkoff, his new Middle East envoy, to that region within weeks of the November election and threatening (amorphously) that there would be “ALL HELL TO PAY” unless hostages in Hamas custody were released by the time of his inauguration. Mike Waltz, Trump’s national security advisor, was quick to attribute Israel’s ceasefires with both Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza to the advent of a new administration. – Waiting on a friend: Will Netanyahu get a sweet deal—or a raw deal—from Trump? – Atlantic Council
US – Panama Canal
(Jennifer Parker – ASPI The Strategist)
Donald Trump’s foreign policy priorities are coming into sharp focus: shoring up economic security, bolstering national security and sending a clear signal to America’s allies and partners. One of those partners is Panama, a small Central American nation that happens to control one of the world’s most vital maritime passages. Of the many Trump proclamations over the past week, this is one that Australia, as a maritime nation, should pay attention too. – Trump is right to worry about China’s Panama Canal influence | The Strategist
