Month: November 2017

On November 9th, Saudi Arabia advised its citizens in Lebanon to leave immediately, as did Kuwait (their neighbor and Gulf ally). This guidance comes on the heels of a contentious power consolidation by the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohamed Bin Salman (MBS), and an attempted missile strike by the Iranian-backed Houthis rebels on the Riyadh Airport. Iran denied supplying the munitions to the rebels and accused Saudi Arabia of trying to escalate tensions. Additionally, the calls for evacuation come five days after the unexpected resignation of the Lebanese Prime Minister, Saad Hariri. Hariri cited fear for his safety and the growing influence of Hezbollah (the extremist Shiite Muslim group with inexorable ties with Iran) as the cause for his decision. 

These developments signal the forthcoming appointment of MBS as the King of Saudi Arabia, as well as the likelihood of military action against Lebanon. Much like its proxy war fought in Yemen, Saudi Arabia will attempt to exert its military strength and undermine Iran’s influence in the region. In a statement addressing Iran’s support for Hezbollah, Saudi Arabia’s Minister of State Affairs re-affirmed that it “won’t accept Lebanon taking part in a war against Saudi Arabia. The Saudis will take all political measures and more to confront Hezbollah.” Unlike in Yemen, geography will not favor or advantage a Saudi military strike in Lebanon. Any military intervention would require if not coordination, at least acknowledgement of Lebanon’s neighbors, Jordan and Israel. Furthermore, the threat in Lebanon is a well-trained and well-equipped professional military unlike the rebel force the Saudi military faced in Yemen. MBS shocked the region with his recent internal political reformations and appears willing to go to extraordinary measures to project his vision of an adaptive and overtly bellicose Saudi Arabia. 

On Saturday, November 5^th, King Salman issued a royal decree establishing a new anti-corruption committee. He appointed his son, Crown Prince Muhammad Bin Salman (MBS), as the committee’s leader and within a few hours sweeping arrests were made. Acting without support of the senior princes, MBS arrested and detained eleven princes, senior government officials, an undisclosed number of prominent businessmen linked to the royal family, and top military officers. Among those arrested on corruption charges, were Prince al-Waleed bin Talal, the Minister of Economy, and scores of Islamic scholars, judges, and intellectuals, whose views run the gamut from ultra-conservative to liberal. With this consolidation of power, MBS now commands all three hands of the Ministry of Defense.

This power grab foreshadows, albeit not imminent, the likely abdication of King Salman and the impending appointment of MBS as King. Beyond anti-corruption goals, MBS has a vision of Saudi Arabia as a more moderate and modern Islamic society. The regional rivalry and near-constant proxy wars fought by Saudi Arabia and Iran are motivation for many of the proposed reforms. Saudi Arabia must enter the 21st century with a global economy, not exclusively reliant on oil and gas, and seeking to encourage foreign investment and subtle gender equality. Beyond the legalization of women drivers, MBS has proposed the construction of green and smart cities in the country and has hosted investment galas soliciting support and funding for his endeavors. Many of these changes will be at odds with not only the ruling establishment that the arrests seek to marginalize, but also with the views of the average Saudi citizen. These reforms make the royal family vulnerable. Despite these risks, the reliable, albeit controversial, support of the U.S. will help sustain and accelerate modernization efforts by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in the region.

As we approach President Trump’s visit to Asia over the next two weeks, global attention remains fixated on the growing strain between the United States and North Korea. Most recently, concern has concentrated on the repositioning of three American aircraft carriers. The USS Roosevelt and the USS Nimitz have found a new station operating in the western Pacific. They join the USS Reagan which maintains a permanent presence in the region conducting combined training with South Korea. While the DOD acknowledges this amassing is unusual, it should not necessarily signal alarm. This posturing is not an indicator that military operations are imminent. It is, however, a prudent move with our President in the Far East to have this “additional firepower” in close proximity. If for no other reason, at least it sends a message to the North Korean regime…“In case you forgot, we’re ready.”

A distinctive outcome of the tension between the U.S. and Pyongyang is a coordinated regional response. China, in a rare move, voted for the U.S. drafted, United Nations initiative bringing unparalleled sanctions against North Korea. Japan is making moves to have an offensive military capability again, and South Korea is lobbying to have operational control over its wartime military, undoing a 60+ year status quo. While the media focuses on North Korea, we should not overlook the rest the President’s journey and the evolving dynamic of our relationships in East Asia.

Philippines: According to police statistics, more than 3,000 suspects have been killed in anti-drug operations since Duterte became president on June 30, 2016. There has been an international condemnation of his so-called war on drugs. However, these human right’s abuses are not likely to affect a century old relationship with a dependable regional ally. The U.S. –  Philippines relationship is too significant to abandon, and the U.S. has a higher chance of influencing positive change within the framework of their existing partnership.

Vietnam: Rapid industrial growth in the 21st century has positioned Vietnam as a potentially important trading partner. Enhanced trade cooperation between the U.S. and Vietnam would prove mutually beneficial.

Japan: Given the vulnerability faced by Japan during Pyongyang’s latest missile launches, North Korea will prove to be a prominent point of discussion. Japan’s recent elections and legislative action to build their military signals a growing concern over the regional threat.

China: A surprising show of solidarity in the face of the North Korean menace might have warmed the relationship between our two nations, but recent statements regarding markets and trade prove to be chilling. President Trump has long been critical of China’s heavy-handed influence over their markets and currency manipulation. Most recently, following the refusal to classify China as a market economy, the U.S. Commerce Department said “The state’s pervasive role in markets and involvement in the private sector causes fundamental distortions in its economy,” exacerbating tension between China and the U.S. before President Trump’s visit. While escalation on the Korean Peninsula is sure to be a topic on which the two powers can find common ground, the discussion of markets and trade will most influence the efficacy of the meeting.

South Korea: Following the Secretary of Defense’s visit to South Korea, the President, the National Security Advisor and Secretary Mattis have all doubled down on the stance that there is no scenario where North Korea has nuclear weapons. This “red line” is a risky one that muddies the water for continued diplomacy. Establishing these absolutes can be precarious as we saw with President Obama concerning Syria’s use of chemical weapons. In general, it’s best to avoid these hardline approaches. Diplomacy is most successful when there are options on the table. This is especially pertinent as the intelligence community has already confirmed North Korea has nuclear weapons and ICBMs. It may impede our continued pursuit of a diplomatic resolution if we have narrowed our options. South Korea, for their part, has pivoted to maintain open dialogue channels with the North. In a nationally televised address, the president of South Korea, Moon Jae-in, stated “Our top priority is to maintain peace on the Korean Peninsula. Thus, armed conflict must be avoided under any circumstance. No military action on the Korean Peninsula shall be taken without prior consent of the Republic of Korea.” The public volatility between President Trump and North Korea’s Kim Jung-un has exacerbated the decades old sense of unease between the U.S. and South Korea. Most recently, Seoul’s first left-leaning government in a decade has asked for an accelerated transfer of the operational control over its military forces in an attempt to publicly separate South Korea and the U.S.’ methods of diplomacy. The administration must resolve this fissure — as a peaceful solution to the North Korean threat depends on a unified front.

Despite all the perceived chaos in the region, there is still plenty of opportunity in the Pacific. Consensus building and a multi-national approach to managing North Korea can help expand on and grow these opportunities. President Trump’s trip abroad is a sign of our continued commitment to our allies and a platform on which to forge new ones.