Frankfurter Rundschau vom 15.02.2020
"Jürgen Trittin: 'Manchmal bedeuten weniger Waffen mehr Sicherheit'"
https://www.fr.de/politik/juergen-trittin-gruene-manchmal-bedeuten-weniger-waffen-mehr-sicherheit-1354058
5.html
Andreas Schwarzkopf spricht am Rande der Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz mit dem Grünen-Politiker Jürgen Trittin über "militärische Irrwege und deutsche Interessen". "Drei revisionistische Kräfte versuchen derzeit die Welt umzugestalten. Das sind das aufgeblasene Russland, das aufsteigende China und die absteigenden USA. So unterschiedlich die drei Systeme sind, alle drei arbeiten derzeit an der Demontage der multilateralen Ordnung. In dieser Welt spielt die Europäische Union bisher weit unter ihren Möglichkeiten, weil die Mitgliedstaaten nicht bereit sind, die nötigen Schritte hin zu mehr Souveränität zu gehen. Europa könnte deutlich mehr mitgestalten als bisher. Schlüssel in dieser Frage ist das Zerwürfnis zwischen Deutschland und Frankreich, für das vor allem Deutschland verantwortlich ist."
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung vom 15.02.2020
"Alle Beschuldigungen gegen China sind Lügen"
https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/sicherheitskonferenz/liveblog-zur-muenchener-sicherheitskonferenz-msc
-2020-16628861.html
Die Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung berichtete im Blog über die Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz. "Amerikas Verteidigungsminister Esper warnt: China ist der Hauptgegner. Pekings Außenminister bestätigt, sein Land werde immer mächtiger. Ein Hegemon wolle sein Land aber nicht werden. Ein Schlagabtausch zum Nachlesen."
Süddeutsche Zeitung vom 15.02.2020
"Deutschland geht den Konflikten aus dem Weg"
https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/deutschland-europa-autonomie-1.4798069
Stefan Kornelius kommentiert die Rolle Deutschlands in der Welt und wie diese durch die jüngsten Ereignisse seit der Ministerpräsidentenwahl in Thüringen "Anlass zur Sorge geben" könne. "Der moralische Hochsitz ermöglicht der deutschen Außenpolitik einen wunderbaren Überblick über das Getümmel - aber von da oben mischt man nicht mit. Und Autonomie gibt es in dieser Welt für niemanden."
Council on Foreign Relations vom 13.02.2020
"The Corrosion of World Order in the Age of Donald Trump"
https://www.cfr.org/blog/corrosion-world-order-age-donald-trump
Terrence Mullan berichtet über eine Regionalkonferenz des Council of Councils (CoC), auf der Experten über die Ursachen und Hintergründe des Niedergangs der internationalen Ordnung im "Trump-Zeitalter" diskutierten. "Forty-one delegates representing twenty-two think tanks in twenty-one countries discussed the weaponization of economic interdependence, the renewed push for European strategic autonomy, and other global governance issues. The pessimistic tenor of those discussions has only been reinforced at more recent international gatherings, including last month’s World Economic Forum and the Observer Research Foundation’s Raisina Dialogue. Four sobering takeaways emerge from these international conversations: 1. The Global Economic Order is Broken (…) 2. With Friends Like Trump, Who Needs Enemies? (…) 3. The Future of EU Regulatory Power Looks Bright, but It Lacks a Common Vision (…) 4. The Corrosion of Trust Will Hamper International Cooperation (…) Given these inauspicious trends, can the world still work together to address today’s most pressing global challenges? Participants at the CoC conference struggled to be optimistic, given the collective efforts needed to meet the Paris Agreement goals, prevent economic fragmentation, and achieve so much else. Many hoped that even as Trump retreated from the world, nations in Western Europe and Asia might fill the breach, assuming a greater share of global leadership."
The Diplomat vom 12.02.2020
"The Significance of Ending the US-Philippines Visiting Forces Agreement"
https://thediplomat.com/2020/02/the-significance-of-ending-the-us-philippines-visiting-forces-agreement/
Der philippinische Präsident Duterte hat einen seit 1999 geltenden Vertrag über die militärische Zusammenarbeit mit den USA aufgekündigt. Prashanth Parameswaran erläutert, welche bilateralen und regionalen Folgen dieser Schritt haben könnte. "For the Asia-Pacific more generally, this will only increase uncertainty about the regional balance of power amid the intensification of U.S.-China competition. To be sure, the Philippines is a single country, and the U.S.-Philippine alliance may not rank as highly in terms of policy prioritization relative to Washington’s alliances with Japan or South Korea. But perception-wise, much like the closure of U.S. Philippine bases at the end of the Cold War, the fact the United States is being dealt such a blow by its own treaty ally – with potential follow-on implications for aspects such as its overall military presence in the Asia-Pacific – will only further intensify doubts that exist today about U.S. policy initiatives such as the Free and Open Indo-Pacific vision and the extent of alignment on regional issues between Washington and its allies and partners."
Defense One vom 11.02.2020
"Where Could the US Put Its Post-INF Missiles?"
https://www.defenseone.com/politics/2020/02/where-could-us-put-its-post-inf-missiles/163004/?oref=d-river
Seit dem Ende des INF-Vertrags mit Russland werden in den USA Überlegungen darüber angestellt, welche neuen atomaren Mittelstreckenraketen entwickelt und wo sie stationiert werden könnten. Samantha Bowers zufolge bezweifeln einige Experten, dass die USA in Asien entsprechende Standorte finden werden. "Steven Pifer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, noted that even missile-defense deployments are a hard sell to America’s Pacific allies; reaching any sort of hosting agreement would 'take a lot of American negotiating capital.' And even if some allies agree to host U.S. missiles, the Heritage Foundation’s Dean Cheng said, they may not be willing to involve themselves in a crisis between the United States and China or Russia. (…) U.S. allies in the region, notably Japan and South Korea, already are developing intermediate-range missile technology. The experts were more sanguine about the chances that deploying new post-INF missiles would destabilize the Asia-Pacific region. They noted that Russia and China have already been manufacturing and deploying such missiles. 'The U.S. deployment of these missiles would not introduce a new capability into the region, but rather give the U.S. more options to meet a growing military challenge from Beijing,' said Abraham Denmark, who runs the Woodrow Wilson Center’s Asia Program."
Asia Times vom 11.02.2020
"On Trump’s demand that Japan pay more for security"
https://www.asiatimes.com/2020/02/article/trumps-demand-that-japan-pay-up-for-cooperation/
Nicht nur Südkorea, auch Japan soll nach dem Willen des US-Präsidenten künftig sehr viel mehr für die Stationierung von US-Truppen auf eigenem Territorium bezahlen. Scott Foster betrachtet die Forderung vor dem Hintergrund der Bemühungen der japanischen Regierung, die eigenen Militärausgaben deutlich zu erhöhen. Er warnt davor, das Bündnis leichtfertig aufs Spiel zu setzen. "Would we really want Japan to go it alone, perhaps fueled by resentment at being abandoned by the country it has relied upon and looked up to since 1945, considering that Japan’s trade with China is greater than its trade with the US, that Japan and Russia are a natural economic fit and have a shared interest in offsetting China and that Japan has no interest in America’s fight with Iran? Would America be happy to retreat to Guam, Hawaii and the West Coast, abandoning an alliance with the world’s third largest and second most sophisticated economy? How would China, Southeast Asia and Australia react to this? Japan is America’s front line in the Western Pacific, America has Japan’s back, and together they are far more powerful than China. How valuable is that?"
Political Violence @ a Glance vom 10.02.2020
"Is the Responsibility to Protect Dead? The View From Libya"
http://politicalviolenceataglance.org/2020/02/10/is-the-responsibility-to-protect-dead-the-view-from-liby
a/
Lisa Hultman erinnert daran, dass die NATO-Intervention in Libyen im Jahr 2011 mit der UN-Doktrin der Schutzverantwortung (Responsibility to Protect) begründet wurde. Das mittlerweile offensichtliche Scheitern des westlichen Eingreifens habe auch die Legitimität des R2P-Prinzips schwer beschädigt. "Although R2P is aimed at stopping the worst kinds of atrocities, the original idea also acknowledges that, once the atrocities have ended, reducing the risk of future violence requires a commitment to rebuilding the country. There’s good reason for this. As civil war experts have demonstrated: in order to create stability and reduce the risk of a return to civil war, societies have to be transformed. (…) Research shows that civil wars that end in rebel victory or foreign-imposed regime change are less likely to relapse into renewed fighting. However, in Libya, foreign intervention did not support a strong victor who could create stability. Instead, there was only a power vacuum, which generated new competition for power. As we learned in Iraq, rebuilding a country is much harder than getting rid of a dictator. (…) For R2P to be durable, the international community must look beyond military intervention and consider other means of protection. (…) Next time leaders invoke R2P, they should make use of the whole intervention toolbox beyond military intervention, investing both diplomatic and economic resources, just as originally intended with the R2P."
New York Times vom 10.02.2020
"A Plea to Save the Last Nuclear Arms Treaty"
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/opinion/albright-ivanov-nuclear-treaty.html
Die früheren Außenminister Madeleine Albright und Igor Ivanov appellieren in diesem gemeinsamen Beitrag für die New York Times für eine Verlängerung des New-START-Abkommens zur Begrenzung der strategischen Atomwaffen der USA und Russlands. "Right now, the most important thing to do is extend New START. Russia has indicated, at the highest levels, its willingness to do so. All that President Trump needs to do is agree. Legislative approval is not required. Time is critical. Doing nothing while waiting for a 'better' agreement is a recipe for disaster: We could lose New START and fail to replace it. The treaty’s agreed limits on nuclear arsenals are too important to be put at risk in a game of nuclear chicken. Moreover, we have an opportunity to improve security and rebuild trust between the world’s two great nuclear powers. It must not be thrown away."
European Council on Foreign Relations vom 07.02.2020
"The search for freedom of action: Macron’s speech on nuclear deterrence"
https://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentary_the_search_for_freedom_of_action_macrons_speech_on_nuclear_deter
Tara Varma begrüßt die jüngste Rede von Präsident Macron zur nuklearen Abschreckung als "kühnen" Beginn eines strategischen Dialogs über die Rolle französischer Atomwaffen in der europäischen Sicherheitsarchitektur. "True to the established 'Macron method', the president’s deterrence speech presents Europeans with a bold move: an offer of a strategic dialogue on the role of French deterrence in European security with those who are willing to engage in one, holding out the possibility of association with exercises conducted by French nuclear forces. Moreover, the speech makes clear that the force de frappe (military strike force) still remains a national prerogative, but that France endorses its responsibilities in contributing to the common strategic culture Europeans need to survive in an increasingly disrupted world. (…) Macron uses the speech to remind his fellow Europeans that French decision-making independence in use of the nuclear deterrent is fully compatible with 'the unshakeable solidarity with our Europeans partners'. He reiterates that French nuclear forces play a major role in Europe through their very existence and, as a consequence, have 'a genuinely European dimension'. In all, Macron reaches out to the rest of Europe on Russia, the transatlantic relationship, and European solidarity."
The National Interest vom 07.02.2020
"Greece Is at the Nexus of the Geopolitical Crossroads"
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/greece-nexus-geopolitical-crossroads-121211
Griechenland präsentiere sich in den sicherheitspolitischen Fragen im östlichen Mittelmeer immer deutlicher als enger Verbündeter der USA, berichten Eric Edelman und Charles Wald. Die Griechen strebten offenbar an, die Türkei als regionales "NATO-Bollwerk" abzulösen. "Indeed, Athens is doing exactly what American policymakers ask of allies, namely taking on larger duties of collective defense. Greece already spends a greater share of GDP on defense than any NATO member save the United States. This reflects how, after decades of cool relations at best, there is a growing national consensus that partnership with the United States should form the bedrock of Greek security. Remarkably, this turnaround was led by Alexis Tsipras, the former prime minister and former Communist. Now his initiatives are being expanded by the center-right, traditionally more pro-American New Democracy Party."
The Moscow Times vom 05.02.2020
"'Crimea Is Lost,' Pompeo Reportedly Tells Ukraine"
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/02/05/crimea-is-lost-pompeo-reportedly-tells-ukraine-a69167
Bei seinem jüngsten Besuch in der Ukraine hat US-Außenminister Pompeo in vertraulichen Gesprächen angeblich eingestanden, dass die Krim Russland nicht mehr zu nehmen sei. "'He said that Crimea is lost,' Yelena Trehub, the head of Ukraine’s nongovernmental anti-corruption watchdog, told the NV news magazine Tuesday. 'World players are well aware that Crimea is lost,' Trehub recounted Pompeo’s words to Crimean activist Emina Dzhaparova. 'Russia is not a country from which you can take something away.' The United States and Western countries have imposed economic sanctions on Russia over Crimea, including a fresh round last week after the peninsula’s 2019 election and the introduction of direct railway service to mainland Russia. The Kremlin has maintained that the annexation of Crimea from Ukraine was a 'closed issue' for Russia."
The Moscow Times vom 05.02.2020
"Why Brexit Won’t Affect EU-Russia Relations"
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/02/05/why-brexit-wont-affect-eu-russia-relations-a69168
Oksana Antonenko bezweifelt, dass der Brexit die Beziehungen der EU zu Russland wesentlich verändern wird. "Brexit is in itself unlikely to change the current dynamic in any significant way. Although the UK’s departure will remove a strong supporter of tough sanctions against Russia from the EU decisionmaking table, many like-minded countries remain, meaning EU sanctions are likely to remain in place even after the UK’s departure. Nor will Brexit weaken the EU from within, as some in Russia have predicted, or trigger more exits by other member states. If anything, it may accelerate the process of closer political integration being championed by France and Germany. The UK’s departure will not weaken Europe’s resolve to strengthen its defense capabilities, including its deterrence to potential threats from the East. One area in which EU-UK relations are likely to remain as strong after Brexit includes security, intelligence-sharing, and police cooperation. The UK will be an even more active member of the NATO alliance, and British troops will remain stationed in the Baltics."
Al Jazeera English vom 04.02.2020
"Libya rivals show 'genuine will' to start ceasefire talks: UN"
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/02/libya-rivals-show-genuine-start-ceasefire-talks-200204103250564.ht
ml
Dem UN-Sondergesandten für Libyen, Ghassan Salamé, zufolge haben die Konfliktparteien in Libyen Interesse an ernsthaften Verhandlungen über einen Waffenstillstand gezeigt. "The United Nations envoy to Libya has said representatives of the country's rival factions attending talks in Geneva agree in principle to turning a fragile truce into a lasting ceasefire, as he decried ongoing violations of an arms embargo by both sides and their backers. (…) But the issue may take active international support to be solved, added the envoy, hinting at the major foreign players backing Haftar's manoeuvres. Arturo Varvelli, a Libya expert and head of the Rome office of the European Council for Foreign Relations said he remained sceptical that the military council would achieve any concrete results. 'The problem lies with the pressures and interference of foreign powers on the players, regardless of the Libyans’ willingness to come to an agreement,' Varvelli told Aljazeera."
Politico vom 04.02.2020
"Macron seeks to reassure Poland on Russia, but sticks to his Moscow policy"
https://www.politico.eu/article/emmanuel-macron-poland-russia-moscow-policy/
Frankreichs Präsident Macron sei auch in Polen nicht von seiner neuen Annäherungsstrategie gegenüber Russland abgewichen, berichtet Rym Momtaz. "The French president tried to thread that needle during a two-day visit to Warsaw, where he was cautious about criticizing the government on backsliding on democracy, was keen to enlist Poland as a military ally, but also stressed the need keep Russian President Vladimir Putin onside. (…) Macron (…) highlighted Russia's importance to the Continent and stressed that his outreach to Moscow has made concrete gains in calming the crisis in Ukraine through the Minsk and Normandy processes. (…) At a dinner later that evening, which POLITICO attended on the condition of not publishing direct quotes, Macron listened intently, jotting down notes on a pad, as some of Poland’s most famous Soviet-era democracy activists voiced their disagreement with his Russia policy, denounced Poland's ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party’s actions as assaults on rule of law, civil and minority rights, and pleaded for more support from the EU. But even in that intimate setting, hearing his Polish interlocutors repeatedly bring up the trauma of the Soviet years, and the continued threat they feel from Russia, Macron didn't back down. He reiterated much of the reasoning he has offered in public speeches and interviews for his Russia policy."
