Opinion

NATO doing damage control

With a crucial NATO member flip-flopping on their support, European powers are grappling with how to shore up their defences. The recent NATO summit in The Hague saw agreement on a 5% military spending target, but the question remains: is this enough to stave off any looming threats?

In short, probably not in the near future. The real issue isn't just about spending; it's about the perceived divisions within the alliance. While the 5% overall and 3.5% core military spending targets are a step in the right direction, they only begin to address the anxieties of Eastern European nations.

The Widening Gap

Many Western European countries have historically maintained lower military spending, prioritizing domestic welfare. This has inadvertently left Eastern European nations feeling that they are left to shoulder the defence burden. While focusing on one's citizens is paramount, a perceived lack of full commitment to NATO, the very alliance underpinning the current way of life, sends a concerning signal to allies facing the most immediate threats. Should the US and Western Europe fail to come to their aid, these nations fear they'll be left isolated.

A potential conflict with Russia isn't really envisioned as a massive, conventional war by all. From Russia's, and even some Eastern European countries', perspective, it could involve exploiting the growing rifts within NATO. If Western allies aren't prepared to defend their eastern flanks, Eastern European nations could feel abandoned. Simply sending weapons and ammunition won't be enough. Even acts of sabotage or attacks on manufacturing and civilian targets in the West could erode public support for a sustained conflict. This hesitation is precisely what nations like Russia are testing: whether the West is truly willing to commit its personnel, equipment and taxes to "fight someone else's war."

Ukraine: A Litmus Test

The support for Ukraine has become a stark illustration of the growing rifts within NATO. With more and more Western countries appearing unwilling to fully back a by many perceived Western-aligned nation, it raises questions about whether Western democracies are either unable or unwilling to invest in securing their way of life.

Compounding this is a significant shift in social norms and values, particularly in Western Europe, where an anti-war sentiment is prevalent. This extends to an aversion to deterrence through maintaining a well-equipped defensive army. Eastern allies observe this trend with growing distrust, feeling increasingly isolated. They might ask: why commit to an alliance that sometimes hinders their own ambitions if it won't come to their aid in times of need?

Western Europe wagging their fingers to any action while being unwilling to fully commit resources, while overblown, isn't entirely inaccurate. It's easy to give up someone else's territory, land, and lives for your own safety. This approach, however, is unsustainable and strains relationships. Even the argument of "prolonging the inevitable to build up" falls apart when considering the West's slow pace since the start of the Ukraine war. The anti-war stance, if anything, appears to have strengthened. Statements from countries like Spain indicating an inability or unwillingness to fully stand with allies only reinforces the feeling among nations like Poland, Romania, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia that they cannot fully rely on their Western partners.

The 5% spending target is a start, not the solution.

Fine, I will do it myself

Mali restarts its mining ambitions

Barrick’s gold mine “Loulo-Gounkoto” was shuttered after a dispute over ownership of the joint venture and the offshore storage of its gold reserves. Mali’s government is now working to restart production under an temporary administrator.

In 2023 Mali’s junta demanded payments for back taxes and wanted higher royalty payments and higher stakes in local joint ventures. While 2 other mining companies in the country came to a settlement, Allied gold corp and B2Gold, Barrick has brought the case to international arbitration. Stating that their subsidiary has binding conventions that cannot simply be altered by regulation nor legal changes. They also will defend their right to store gold and proceeds of gold sales offshore.

Mali has been warming up to countries like Russia during all of this. Interim president Assimi Goïta met with Vladimir Putin during a five-day visit to Moscow. This was accompanied by some major economic and military deals. Earlier in the year, Wagner left the country and was replaced by the Russian state run Africa Corps. Since Mali still needs help fighting jihadist groups that still run dangerous terror campaigns in its northern territories.

On the economic side, Russia had agreed to help build smaller nuclear reactors in Mali and to help build infrastructure to get the resources needed for it out of the ground. Uranium One, a Rosatom subsidiary, signed deals with the Mali government to explore and develop Uranium and Lithium deposits all over the country.

Mali appears to be actively seeking closer ties with Russia, favoring Russian-operated companies and reducing its reliance on Western counterparts. Recent deals and regulatory changes within the country increasingly seem to prioritize Russian businesses and partnerships.

This shift isn't unique to Mali, several countries in the Sahel region are also moving away from Western influence and towards Russia's sphere of influence. This is no surprise with the significant increase in Russian military presence in the area and a notable decrease in Western presence and aid.

China entering the fray

China playing the long game

Rumours are swirling about Chinese cargo flights potentially entering Iran, though these claims remain unverified. While the exact nature of any potential cargo is unknown, speculation ranges from military aid to support Iran's defences to assistance with rebuilding its nuclear capabilities.

Luxembourg-based cargo carrier Cargolux has denied claims that their flights were used for these alleged transfers. Specifically, flight numbers CLX9735, CLX9736, and CLX9737 are reportedly still in Turkmenistan, according to flight trackers, and have not yet arrived in Luxembourg as scheduled.

What Could This Mean for China

If these unconfirmed reports were true, what would be China's motivation? One theory suggests China could be aiming to keep the United States strategically distracted with other adversaries, thereby diverting American resources and attention away from the Pacific region. This could be a relatively low-cost manoeuvre for China, potentially serving their geopolitical interests while also strengthening ties with a major oil supplier – a potential "win-win" in terms of both optics and strategic advantage.

Where has all the uranium gone?

Iran’s missing uranium

In a development that may not surprise close observers, recent nuclear strikes in Iran appear to have fallen short of the Trump administration's strategic goals. While the strikes likely damaged or destroyed centrifuges, a critical component of Iran's nuclear program, its enriched uranium remains unaccounted for.

Sources suggest the enriched uranium, stored in easily portable 12kg cylinders, was moved prior to the strikes. These storage units, at this stage, pose no immediate radiation threat to humans, making their relocation a straightforward decision for Iran, which anticipated the attacks to some extent.

This development is a significant blow to the administration's aim of halting Iran's nuclear proliferation. Previously, there was at least some international oversight into Iran's nuclear ambitions. Now, with the enriched uranium potentially stored in unknown, untraceable locations, it becomes far more difficult to monitor. The 14 bunker busters, while tactically effective against the known facilities, failed to achieve their broader strategic objective.

While Iran's nuclear program may have been set back by a few months, the increased secrecy and lack of knowledge about other facilities and the current enriched uranium stockpile will likely empower Iran to continue its work in the shadows. The IAEA's role will likely be further diminished, with little to no access or information regarding Iran's future plans. Since the U.S. withdrawal from the nuclear accord in 2018, Iran has already restricted IAEA access, making it nearly impossible to track centrifuge manufacturing capabilities or spare parts. These recent strikes have only solidified the mystery surrounding Iran's nuclear program to the international community.

Iran already announced, on June 12th, that it was making progress on a new secret facility to be inaugurated later. Details were not made public, but it shows that the 3 sites struck by the strikes were not the only places where Iran has nuclear proliferation capabilities.

That’s it for this Maric’s weekly.

Thank you for reading. If you found this insightful and want to keep in the loop, make sure you subscribe to this newsletter so it automatically hits your inbox every week.

Stay safe,

Maric