From global think tanks
The analyses published here do not necessarily reflect the strategic thinking of The Global Eye
Today’s about : China-Russia, Gender Equality, India, Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), Middle East, Russia’s War of Aggression on Ukraine (and beyond), Sri Lanka-India, UK, Ukraine, US-Western Balkans
China – Russia
(Brookings) The geopolitical landscape is shifting at a breakneck pace, raising urgent questions about how the China-Russia strategic relationship—both with each other and with the United States—might evolve, and what this means for the war in Ukraine and the broader global order. Four experts—Aslı Aydıntaşbaş, Angela Stent, Tara Varma, and Ali Wyne—join Patricia Kim to unpack these critical developments. They explore topics ranging from the consequences of a potential U.S.-Russia reset or a “reverse Nixon” strategy, to China’s evolving strategic calculus, the future of the China-Russia-North Korea-Iran “axis,” and Europe’s uncertain path forward. – China and Russia’s strategic relationship amid a shifting geopolitical landscape
Gender Equality
(Brookings) This year, as the world celebrates International Women’s Day on March 8 under the theme “For ALL Women and Girls: Rights. Equality. Empowerment,” we also mark the 30th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action—a landmark global commitment to gender equality. This milestone offers an invitation to reflect on progress over the past three decades and also reinforces the urgency of advancing women’s and girls’ rights, challenging systemic inequalities, and reshaping power structures to ensure a more just and equitable world. Thirty years on from Beijing, we are witnessing a growing anti-gender agenda and an alarming backlash against girls’ and women’s rights, what CNN described as a “connected, well-funded and spreading” movement, both in the U.S. and globally. – Why we need to recommit to gender equality
India
(Sreya Maitra – Observer Research Foundation) India’s northeast region (NER) features prominently in its Indo-Pacific vision and strategic calculations. The vast natural resources of NER and its geographical proximity to neighbouring countries in the Indo-Pacific region make it attractive for increased involvement of industry and the development of trade linkages. Socio-cultural affinities found across the borders of the region also carry potential for synergy in cooperation endeavours. This brief assesses the factors that can lend traction to the potential of the region. It explores the role which NER can play in furthering India’s flagship policies such as ‘Act East’ and ‘Neighbourhood First’. The brief argues for a nuanced foreign policy strategy that takes cognisance of the dynamics unique to the region. – The Northeast Region’s Place in India’s Indo-Pacific Vision
Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK)
(Winthrop M. Rodgers – Chatham House) Abdullah Ocalan, leader of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) – designated a terrorist organization by Turkey and its Western allies – has called on the group to lay down arms and dissolve. His message was delivered in a 27 February letter from Imrali Prison in Turkey where he remains incarcerated. On 3 March, the PKK announced a ceasefire. – PKK leader Ocalan’s historic call to disarm could go to waste without external guarantors | Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank
Middle East
(Ahmed Aboudouh – Chatham House) Egypt has finally presented its ‘day after’ plan to rebuild Gaza. It is deeper, more detailed, and far more realistic than President Donald Trump’s damaging proposal for a US takeover of the strip and the removal of its people. While Hamas has expressed support for the Egyptian plan, the proposal is unlikely to succeed without substantial modifications. – Egypt’s plan for Gaza may have thwarted Trump’s ‘riviera’ for now. But its loopholes need to be fixed | Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank
(Robert Satloff – The Washington Institute for Near East Policy) When President Trump announced his provocative proposal to relocate Palestinians while Gaza is cleared of hazards and rebuilt, he put the fate of the war-torn territory’s nearly two million residents on the Middle East’s front burner for the first time in recent memory. Indeed, Arab leaders met in Cairo this week and endorsed a counterproposal to begin reconstruction without moving Palestinians outside the territory. Both ideas have their faults—the Arab plan would keep Gazans in the Strip even if many of them want to leave (see below); Trump’s initial proposal seemed to envision forcing them out against their will, whether for the duration of the estimated decade-long reconstruction process or permanently. And neither idea offers clear answers on how to get from the current situation—an imperiled ceasefire on the verge of renewed warfare—to a post-conflict, Hamas-free Gaza that is ready for reconstruction. (In a stunning omission, the Arab plan does not even mention Hamas.) Still, both proposals are bigger and bolder than any previous effort to address the war’s destruction. For now, the prospects of transitioning to the reconstruction phase will be determined by ongoing discussions on phase 2 of the Hamas-Israel ceasefire agreement. The fitful nature of these talks so far and the steady stream of Hamas provocations on the hostage issue have raised concerns that Israel may return to full-scale war, this time with the goal of ending the group’s local control completely rather than just degrading its military capabilities. Either way, however, leaders will inevitably have to reconcile the clashing U.S. and Arab visions of “reconstruction-in-place” vs. relocation-based reconstruction. – Voluntary Refugee Resettlement: A Possible Solution to Clashing Visions for Gaza Reconstruction | The Washington Institute
(Chatham House) Iran and its allied groups in the Middle East form a loose coalition often collectively referred to as the ‘axis of resistance’. The axis suffered significant setbacks in 2024, amid conflict with Israel and other political turbulence, leading some observers to conclude that its members – which now, along with Iran, comprise Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen and parts of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) in Iraq – have been seriously weakened or are even on the verge of defeat. Notwithstanding the collapse of the Bashar al-Assad regime – also until recently a part of the axis – in Syria, however, our research shows that the axis has historically proven much more resilient than this view allows. Groups such as the PMF, Hezbollah or the Houthis are not mere ‘non-state actors’, but are entrenched within state structures and wield significant power in their own right. Axis members have developed economic relationships with multiple entities and states, both regionally and globally; these networks allow the axis to withstand external threats and policy interventions such as military strikes and sanctions. This research paper examines how the axis uses cross-border financial flows and energy trading to transcend the traditional institutional and geographic boundaries of the states its members operate in. The paper shows how Western policy interventions to date have been unsuccessful owing to two factors: a focus on targeting the axis’s individual components; and a limited understanding of its regional and global networks. The paper proposes a new approach, centred on mapping the axis’s full reach, careful engagement with individual ‘brokers’ within its networks, and enforcement of accountability by enabling civil society and reformists. – The shape-shifting ‘axis of resistance’ | Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank
Russia’s War of Aggression on Ukraine (and beyond)
(William Matthews – Chatham House) As the Trump administration reaches out to Russia and suspends military aid to Ukraine, Europe’s leaders have run out of good options. But what they do have is a short window of opportunity in which to demonstrate that they can adapt to a world of great power politics before Washington and Moscow force a Ukraine peace deal. European countries, including the UK, should actively counter this by engaging China in pursuit of a peace deal that gives Ukraine a seat at the table. – Europe must take the gamble and engage with China on Ukraine | Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank
(Benjamin Jensen, Mark Montgomery, Jose M. Macias III – Center for Strategic & International Studies) Air superiority remains a decisive factor in modern warfare. As Ukraine continues to defend itself against Russian aggression, policymakers and military planners are grappling with a fundamental question: How many aircraft are required to secure Ukrainian airspace sufficiently to deter Russian provocations? – How to Defend Ukraine’s Skies During Peace Negotiations
(Michael Froman – Council on Foreign Relations) With strained relations between the United States and Ukraine, Kyiv faces a tough hand at the negotiation table, struggling to secure military and economic support as Washington, Brussels, and Moscow pursue their own strategic interests. – Who Holds the Trump Cards in Ukraine? | Council on Foreign Relations
(Thomas Graham – Council on Foreign Relations) Some recent favorable White House moves toward Russia have appeared to signal a belief that Moscow is ready for constructive talks on ending the war in Ukraine. But there’s slim chance of Russian concessions. – Russia’s Peace Demands on Ukraine Have Not Budged | Council on Foreign Relations
Sri Lanka – India
(Kadira Pethiyagoda – Observer Research Foundation) While Sri Lankan President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and his National People’s Power (NPP) coalition’s win upended Sri Lankan politics, his government’s foreign policy has demonstrated consistency and predictability. Indian policymakers should note two driving forces in particular: realism and vision. The former means that New Delhi must continue to develop its understanding of Sri Lanka’s core interests and undertake calculated engagement, while the latter can provide ground for alignment between the two states. – The new Sri Lanka Government’s foreign policy: Lessons for India
UK
(Vincent Connelly – RUSI) With near-peer threats and stiff economic challenges, 2025’s Strategic Defence Review has hard balance to find if it is going to provide a credible Land force, but such a balance has been struck before. The British Army needs depth to be sustainable in war: both a second echelon to follow close behind the first, and structures to generate a third and subsequent ones. The Strategic Defence Review (SDR) and the Treasury, despite the recent increased announcement in spending, are unlikely to both fund more regular troops for a second echelon and maintain the equipment programme and extra munitions required for modernisation. Army Reserve units and formations can provide the cost-effective additional mass to expand the army in war and deliver that second echelon. – Delivering ‘Mass’ for the British Army: Defence Reviews and Second Echelon Choices | Royal United Services Institute
(Chatham House) With the UK pledging to increase defence spending to levels not seen since the Cold War, what does the future of British defence look like? A discussion on the evolving nature of warfare, the impact of technology on modern battlefields, and whether Britain is truly prepared for the next conflict. Joining Bronwen Maddox are Sir John Sawers, former head of MI6; James Heappey, former armed forces minister; and Chatham House experts Dr Samir Puri and Olivia O’Sullivan. – Independent Thinking: Is the UK military strong enough? | Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank
Ukraine
(Panorama, Anna J. Davis – The Jamestown Foundation) Ukraine holds Europe’s largest reserves of uranium and aims to become self-sufficient in domestic uranium production by 2027. Ukraine and the United States are debating how a critical minerals deal could factor into potential security guarantees or a peace settlement in Russia’s war against Ukraine. Any critical minerals deals involving uranium will require Ukraine to balance its domestic nuclear fuel needs with commitments to export uranium abroad. – Ukrainian Minerals Deal Must Balance Energy Independence with International Commitments – Jamestown
US – Western Balkans
(Agon Maliqi – Atlantic Council) Under President Donald Trump, the United States has rapidly shifted its approach toward Russia and the war in Ukraine. This has many pockets of Europe scrambling to understand the local implications of this change and to adjust their postures accordingly. The Western Balkans—a part of the continent outside the European Union (EU) where the United States has a significant security and development footprint—is already feeling the effects and is bracing for more. The Trump administration is not expected to focus intently on the Western Balkans anytime soon. Yet it is reasonable to expect that a divergence between the United States and the EU on broader questions of security and trade will be reflected in the region. This could make the Western Balkans into an area of competition rather than complementarity for Washington and Brussels. – What Trump’s approach to Europe means for the Western Balkans – Atlantic Council
