Publicatii | Brief Analysis - Politica La Est


Not only that the withdrawal of USA ( August 2) and Russia ( August 3 ) from the INF Treaty of 1987  was considered  by majority of  experts as a significant event leading to the overthrow  of the arms control system at the global scale. But the comments  with that occasion of US Defense Secretary , Mark Ester, about the intention of his country to deploy such  weapons in  Indo-Pacific area  has created an uproar in that  large area. Primarily, China has been the loudest voice condemning such a development.


At a distance of several dozens minutes, US  State Secretary Mark Pompeo  retweeted  an important announcement of Jens Stoltenberg , NATO  Secretary General :
„ @SecPompeo
Secretary Pompeo Retweeted Jens Stoltenberg
The US and NATO agree: Russia violated the INF, and leaving the agreement is in the best interests of our collective security. Treaties are worthless unless respected by all signatories.
Today, the #INFTreaty ceases to exist. Russia bears sole responsibility for the Treaty’s demise. #NATO will respond in a measured & responsible way and continue to ensure credible deterrence & defence. 


In May – June this year, the threat of war in the Persian Gulf has been increasingly   high. Under the pressure on the hawks of Trump administration the incidents has multiplied in the Gulf and not only, after the deployment of an American air carrier in the Gulf ( ‘Abraham Lincoln’  being sent in May ). The Iranian shoot-down an  American drone on June 20, and has brought the likelihood of war nearer. President Trump allegedly postponed an already ordered   military operation to strike several Iranian targets on June 20, and he boasted in a tweet that the number of Iranian  lives lost following it convinced him that it is  morally wrong such a reply to Theran. 

UK: ‘No Deal’ BREXIT or General Elections ?

According to the British system- which with that occasion has entered under the fire of criticism for being undemocratic ( ?!?) – Boris Johnson has become PM. Tory Party maintained the helm of UK and had it itsa disposal the way of that country to the future. Especially important in that moment, knowing that Brexit should be solved in accordance with the result of the June 2016 referendum, and also to begin to reinstate the economic ( and not only ) relationship with EU- with or without deal – and also with other states in the system to tackle with the consequences of leaving EU.
         On July 24 Bojo was invested by the Queen Elisabeth in the chair of PM and the following day he has delivered his inaugural speech in front of the Commons .  In  “ The Spectator”  it was  published the same day the evaluation of what Boris Johnson said. He stated from the very beginnings that “our mission is to deliver Brexit on the 31st of October for the purpose of uniting and re-energising our great United Kingdom and making this country the greatest place on earth. And when I say the greatest place on earth, I’m conscious that some may accuse me of hyperbole. But it is useful to imagine the trajectory on which we could now be embarked.”

Evolutions with global impact(4) Is "our ugly war" the most important global issue today?

Osaka. The G-7 meeting in Japan (end of June 2019) was awaited with much interest in the Xi-Trump meeting and the possibility of a decision in the war between the two superpowers, at the initiative of D. Trump. Perhaps Putin's interview in the Financial Times (June 27th), through an unprecedented attack on neo-liberal ideology, has raised even more expectations on the eve of the reunion (the Russian and American leaders were due to meet in Japan and the quasi-similar hostile views were known of the two regarding some neo-liberal accents), but the focus of global attention remained on the Trump-Xi meeting. And this has a simple explanation. In the last years - from 2011-2012, any prognosis on the size of the international system and its state in 2025, 2030, 2035 and so on - drafted by prestigious US institutions or other horizons - specified that systemic "engines" would work in the future depending on the nature of US-China relations. To give an example: the 'alternative worlds' of the years 2035-2040 were planned - and they are in the number of four - and defined by the way in which the relations between the two "big ones" were then evaluated - cooperation and its degree or hostility and its nature