by Marco Pondrelli
The crisis and internal contradictions in the United States have increased exponentially in this transition phase, in which we have an elected President who behaves like a President and a President in office who is not present to himself, who is heterodirected by the deep state. In the midst of this confusion, however, some data are starting to emerge.
Last week we dealt with the Ukrainian conflict, in this case we want to focus on other scenarios starting from the Middle Eastern one. The Palestinian drama has no end, because no one today is able to stop the destructive force of Israel. The data we read, probably incorrect by defect, are those of a genocide in which hospitals have become the main target. They want to annihilate a people, the dead children are not a mistake but the pursuit of a ferocious but at the same time lucid strategy.
It would be wrong to reduce this conflict to Netanyahu’s choices, the strategic plan behind this criminal war is not to save a corrupt politician from prison but to redraw the map of the region. It must be noted that the axis of the Resistance or the Shiite crescent has suffered multiple defeats in recent months. Lebanon has suffered very hard blows and even if Hezbollah has managed to resist its leadership has been hit hard. Having unblocked the election of the President, also thanks to the support of Hezbollah, is an important signal but the situation remains alarming.
Things are not going any better in Syria either. In this country the axis led by Iran with the support of Russia had repelled the US attack carried out with the help of ISIS. What happened and how Assad’s government could have collapsed so quickly is difficult to say. One can ask whether there was a dialogue between the main powers at the base, but this will only be clear in the future when the role of the new government is understood. The reality meanwhile is that a secular government has collapsed and Syria remains suspended between destabilization and the dangers of reactionary involution, those who in the past sided with the terrorists of Isis and al Qaeda to bring ‘democracy’ to Syria, today can enjoy the rubble created. The Italian Atlanticists can rejoice for the humiliation of Putin except running the risk of finding themselves with some Russian base in Libya. Those who are the cause of their own misfortune…
Yemen risks being, as Enrico Vigna clearly pointed out, the next front of the conflict. Obviously the Houthis are the terrorists in the description of the Western press, in reality a people exhausted by a bloody civil war (also fought with Italian weapons) is fighting for the Palestinian cause, an example that other countries should follow. The situation in Yemen has cooled following the reopening of the dialogue between Iran and Saudi Arabia (mediated by China), if the Houthis can hit Israel they can do so because they do not have an open internal front.
In this context the role of the Saudis is delicate, Israel would like to reach formal recognition with Riyadh to isolate Iran, dividing the opposing camp. If Saudi Arabia attacked the Houthis they would be caught between two fires with the risk of arriving at a “normalization” of Yemen. At the moment Riyadh has been careful not to reopen the front with Iran, but its attitude remains ambiguous, evidently the result of a delicate internal dialectic, there was a rapprochement with the brics + followed by a slowdown in adhesion. On the other hand, the channel of dialogue with Russia seems to remain open, confirmed by the constant dialogue regarding the determination of the price of oil. What Dilip Hero has defined as the cold war of the Islamic world could reopen, for Israel it would be the best way to close the Palestinian question by dividing the opposing camp.
The Middle Eastern situation is not the only cause for concern. In addition to the Ukrainian conflict, other clouds risk gathering on the horizon. Trump’s statements on the annexation of Canada and the invasion of Greenland (Denmark) and Panama must make us reflect. As a ruthless businessman, Trump does not think about war; his goal is to obtain the best results for the United States by resorting to threats. But what does the President-elect want? What is his goal? It may seem strange but Canada, Greenland and Panama have a common denominator: China. As Giulio Chinappi recalled, it would not be the first time that the US intervenes in Panama; the canal is of strategic importance to the United States and China’s role must be limited in every way. The Panamanian nation was born with a war of the USA against Colombia (used by Lenin to explain that self-determination is not always progressive) and the canal is considered, even if it is no longer, their property, being able to open and close the taps at will would give Washington great bargaining power.
To analyze the importance of Greenland and Canada, we need to move to the Arctic. It is true that the Danish island is rich in rare earths and it is true that the first investor in the country is China, but this does not explain Trump’s exit. China has started to use the Arctic route during the less cold months when navigation is possible, not only because it allows it to avoid the Strait of Malacca but also because it is faster than the one that Indo-Pacific reaches Europe. Although it does not overlook this sea, China considers itself an Arctic state (it entered the Arctic Council as a permanent observer), this is the door to strengthen its relationship with Russia in this quadrant as well. The United States knows that it does not have the strength to challenge Russia in the Arctic, so it believes it is necessary to create two bottlenecks. On one side there is the Bering Strait and on the other an axis that includes Iceland and Greenland, control of the latter, which Trump wanted to buy in the previous mandate, is therefore important from a geostrategic point of view. In the past, no matter the political color of the US Administration, there have also been disagreements with Canada because the latter believes it has full sovereignty over the Northwest Passage. The US knows that the Arctic is one of the hubs of global conflict and wants to project its influence there too, without directly challenging Russia and China but limiting itself to surrounding the area.
The Trump Presidency therefore seems to present itself with the will to strengthen the interests of the USA but unlike the previous administrations, neo-lib and neo-con, it will not do so by creating areas of destabilization but by trying to build an advanced balance (obviously from Washington’s point of view). We are obviously attempting to make predictions, confirmation or not of what has been exposed will be available after January 20.
Join our channel telegram
