‏إظهار الرسائل ذات التسميات International Relations. إظهار كافة الرسائل
‏إظهار الرسائل ذات التسميات International Relations. إظهار كافة الرسائل

2025-05-23

Logical Question is not Whether China Will Become the First Superpower?But when?

 



Dr. Salam Al Rabadi.


https://russiancouncil.ru/en/blogs/salam_alrabadi-en/logical-question-is-not-whether-china-will-become-the-first-superpower/

          All propositions that indicate and predict the decline or rise of global powers remain subject to debate and uncertainty. There is no scientific method that allows for accurate predictions about the future of the global system. For example, if we consider that that the current tariff war between the United States and China, Rare Materials Wars, or the recent wars in Ukraine, Gaza and Lebanon, Yemen and Syria have raised serious questions about the global balance of power.

But here we must bear in mind, contrary to what is common among many academic elites, that changes in the balance of power at the level of international relations are no longer largely subject to a "zero-sum game"; on the contrary, it has become a "non-zero-sum game". That is, the increase in the influence, authority, and power of one country does not necessarily mean that other countries will completely lose their influence, authority, and power..

Moreover, the fact that one country is the most powerful no longer means at all that it is the only country that possesses or monopolizes power and influence. In this context, we can address the problematic of trying to compare the growing power of China and the declining position of the United States. Here we must draw attention to the fact that this decline is due more to the change in the nature of the global system than to the military or political weakness of the United States, or both. This is a result of the inevitability of the profound changes and transformations that the structure of global society has undergone.

        It is clear that contemporary international relations are now based on a system with power distributed rather than concentrated in one direction, as there are intersections and intertwinings of interests and influences. But despite all these facts, we cannot ignore the basic dialectic:

How is it possible that the real influence of American power did not last more than 25 years?

Moreover, based on extrapolated conclusions related to the fall of empires or the current reality of world politics, it is clear that the relative decline of American power will continue regardless of attempts to correct it. Consequently, the most logical questions may focus not on whether China will become the world's first superpower, but:

·        When will that happen? And does China really want or think about assuming the responsibility of world leadership?

·        And if China has such a desire, is it willing to do so? Does this serve its strategic interests at the current moment?

Based on the repercussions of recent wars, conflicts and crises at all levels (political, economic, and cultural), it is possible to address the problems of classification of the global system, which are linked to the terms unipolarity or bipolarity, which have lost their meaning. It seems difficult to see a global system controlled by one or even two poles. This is due to many qualitative factors, whether military, economic, political, cultural, environmental, technological, etc., which have become among the most important determinants of international relations, including, but not limited to:

      There is no single country that enjoys superiority in all elements of power.

      The era of knowledge that crosses political, cultural and security borders.

      The phenomenon of terrorism in all its manifestations.

      The environmental issue and climate change in all its aspects.

      The problematic demographics and migration.

      Dilemmas of artificial intelligence and scientific and technological progress at all levels.

      The interconnection and multiplicity of influence of many forces within the global economy.

      Radical changes in the standards for measuring military and security capabilities.

    Therefore, it can be said that the world of international relations today is subject to an apolar system. As a result of the inevitable pattern of changes that have increased the scope of complexities associated with the issues of terrorism, environment, technology, media, real, rare materials, and electronic viruses, etc. This pattern supports the non-polar system according to several trends or paths, including:

      Many flows occur outside the control of states and therefore limit the influence of great powers.

      Some developments serve regional countries and increase their margin of effectiveness and independence.

      The existence of enormous wealth and influence subject to the control of new active forces, such as non-governmental organizations, transnational corporations, political movements, individuals,…etc.

     In light of the above, we are currently in an era far removed from the classic classifications associated with the term polarity, not to mention the difficulty of fully understanding the enormous structural transformations in the structure of the global economy and the reality of international politics.

     Therefore, it must be kept in mind that although the apolar system is inevitable, it requires caution, as it may generate more randomness and instability. Where logically, the problematic now lies in how to find the kind of balances and understandings associated with the configuration of the non-polar world.

    In the context of talking about balances, we must remember the fact that the regularity system will not emerge on its own or automatically. Even if the apolar system is left to function according to its randomness or spontaneity, this will make it more complex and dangerous and thus move towards more chaos and absurdity. Consequently, attention must be directed to potential risks, where an apolar world order will complicate political diplomacy and alliances will lose much of their importance, because they require strategic vision to face predictable threats and compromises.

     But unfortunately, not all of these standards are expected to be available in a non-polar world. On this basis, it is extremely difficult to predict future political scenarios, which seems like a scientific task of enormous proportions, which forces us to adopt and raise a series of questions about the nature of the powers capable (in particular, China) of taking the initiative and assuming the responsibility of global leadership in the light of a non-polar system.

 


2024-11-19

Strategy Prospects Chinese Investment in Africa and the West: Political Dilemma and Geostrategic Changes

 


By Dr. Salam Al Rabadi

     The expansion of Chinese transnational corporations influence globally does not deviate from the context of the strategic plans adopted by the Chinese state to secure its vital economic and political sphere. It is clear that the investment strategies of Chinese companies are based on making China a global economic, political and military power.

     Therefore, it can be said that these investment policies inevitably reflect China’s vision of how to achieve long-term political and economic goals. On this basis, it seems that the influence of Chinese investments on the African continent represents a geostrategic change that will upset many global economic and political balances at all levels and in all areas.

      Chinese investments have expanded their scope of work across the continent, and the volume of trade between China and Africa is increasing at a very high rate. Where during the summit of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) held in Beijing in September 2024, China pledged to implement about 30 infrastructure projects across the continent and provide financing and support worth about 51$ billion over the 3 years(2025-2028).

     The trade volume between China and Africa currently amounts to approximately 167$ billion (in the first half of 2024), with Chinese exports estimated at 97$ billion, compared to African exports worth 69$ billion. At present, there are more than 10,000 Chinese companies operating across the continent and are active in all sectors (technology, infrastructure, mining, agriculture, rare metals, green energy, etc.) and the number of Chinese citizens in Africa is estimated at about two million people, and they are the largest foreign community inhabiting the continent.

     Consequently, as a result of the growing influence of Chinese investments, it has become clear that there is a Sino-Western competition within Africa, as there are serious geopolitical questions and concerns in the West about the repercussions of these huge investments, which fall within China’s political vision of the state. We can infer this competition by following the West’s attempt to work to counter China’s initiative, called the “Belt and Road” or New Silk Road, especially in its African aspect. 

     Therefore, from the monitoring of this strategic conflict related to these investments, which is based on the principle of transcending traditional political and economic confrontations, it is no longer possible to ignore many of the problematic revolving around the West's attempt to involve issues related to sustainable development in this conflict, especially at the level of issues related to governance, transparency and the fight against corruption, environmental standards, human rights, etc.

     This is through the West directing many accusations and harsh criticisms at Chinese investments for not adhering to and complying with sustainable development standards in Africa. Here the following logical questions can be asked:

         What are the dimensions and repercussions of Western accusations against China that its investments in Africa violate sustainable development and human rights standards?

         Are there now purely political trends in dealing with Chinese investments instead of trends based on how to help promote sustainable development policies in all their dimensions on the African continent?

    Assuming that these investments do not fall outside the realm of competition between China and the West, we must draw attention to the problematic of the political dimension in Western criticism of Chinese investments in terms of their neglect of sustainable development standards on the African continent, especially in failed states. 

     This problematic becomes clearly visible when tracing the emphasis on the adoption of strict environmental standards and commitment to sustainable governance that Western countries are trying to impose on many countries that have investment relationships with China. This is with the aim of trying to limit China's economic and investment capacity and power.

     For example, sustainable development policies that focus on reducing emissions and transitioning to clean energy are being leveraged to limit the expansion of heavy industries in China and developing countries that rely on them for rapid economic growth. While developed countries continue to monopolize advanced clean energy technologies, enhancing their economic and technological control.

     In sum, it seems clear that there is a political and economic exploitation of the concepts of sustainable development as a tool by which to curb the expansion of Chinese influence on the African continent. Unfortunately, developed countries have often used it as a means of pressure to promote their interests and undermine the rapid growth of developing and emerging countries, thereby contributing to slowing the pace of their economic and political rise.

 In light of the above, we should not ignore the strategies of some countries based on using the concepts of governance and transparency to achieve political objectives. This opens the door wide and seriously to raise a dialectic:

How does the West exploit all the concepts of sustainable development at the economic and political level to confront the influence of Chinese global investment, specifically on the African continent?


2024-06-08

Israel Y La Guerra Global Contra Siria: Cambios Geopoliticos


Por Dr. Salam Al Rabadi

 Centro de Estudios Internacionales para el Desarrollo(CEID),la Sociedad Argentina de Estudios Estratégicos y Globales (SAEGG), Argentina.. 

ISSN 2422-667X


Los resultados de la guerra global contra Siria constituyeron una amenaza real para Israel, contrariamente a lo que había planeado. Con la victoria de Siria y sus aliados en esa guerra, se produjeron cambios geopolíticos que amenazaron el equilibrio de poder que anteriormente había tendido a favor de Israel. El objetivo de esa guerra global era y sigue siendo paralizar la capacidad de Siria y sacarla del círculo de conflicto regional y global sobre el eje de resistencia y su papel futuro en la confrontación con Israel.

    

     A Israel le interesa desmantelar a Siria. La continuación de esta guerra significa que Siria ya no representa ninguna amenaza estratégica para Israel, especialmente en términos de la incapacidad de las instituciones militares para desarrollar sus capacidades integrales y el impulso hacia un mayor vacío político y el debilitamiento del Estado sirio. En consecuencia, esto conduce a un aumento de las posibilidades de que Siria haga concesiones fundamentales y estratégicas al nivel del conflicto árabe-israelí  .

      

     Sin embargo, parece que esta guerra tuvo resultados y repercusiones adversas y algo peligrosas en la seguridad nacional israelí, al contrario de lo que se esperaba. Siria y el eje de la resistencia pudieron salir de esa guerra algo victoriosos a nivel estratégico al preservar el actual sistema de gobierno e impedir la división de Siria, además de adquirir una feroz experiencia de combate como resultado de la lucha contra los movimientos terroristas, también abrió un camino Nuevo frente de batalla en el sur de Siria contra Israel, donde el ejército iraní tiene ahora presencia directa en la frontera con Israe.

      

     Por lo tanto, con base en las repercusiones y resultados de esta guerra global contra Siria, hay preguntas o problemáticas fundamentales que deben plantearse, y son las siguientes:

 

· ¿Cómo podemos abordar los cambios geopolíticos resultantes de la victoria del eje de la resistencia en la guerra global contra Siria?

· ¿Cuáles son las implicaciones de los logros militares alcanzados por Irán, Siria y Hezbollah en sus guerras contra los movimientos terroristas en futuros enfrentamientos integrales y directos con Israel?

· ¿Son las instituciones políticas y de seguridad israelíes capaces de afrontar los desafíos cruciales que se avecinan?

2024-06-04

Israeli Intervention in the Syrian War: Opportunities and Challenges

 


By Dr. Salam Al Rabadi

The Galician Institute of International Analysis and Documentation (IGADI),Spain.

      Perhaps it does not require much effort to demonstrate the extent of Israel's involvement and active participation in the global war launched against Syria since 2011, which represented a real opportunity to settle scores with the resistance axis, which has become a real deterrent to their influence[1]. Consequently, Israel has been an important partner in the war from the beginning, starting with plans to rely on the Muslim Brotherhood movement, in addition to the understanding with some Gulf states and Turkey to bet on the ISIS movement and the Al Nusra Front, or a direct and explicit intervention by launching air or missile attacks on Syrian territory. The most important of these was the Israeli attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus in April 2024. 

        This way of thinking, which considers the use of force in all its forms as the only way to maintain Israeli superiority in the region, reflects the mental security structure of the vision that the Jewish State has of itself and its neighborhood. As a result, Israel launched numerous airstrikes against the positions of the Syrian army and Hezbollah, with the aim of strengthening and supporting the terrorist movement's fighters to ensure their control over the largest area of ​​Syrian territory. Despite Israel attempt to give the impression that there is no connection with all the events of the war in Syria, Israel public contributions on the ground were enough to confirm the depth of involvement in the war. With the development of events and the defeat of the terrorist movements, Israel intervened directly in the war, in order to achieve the following objectives:

      1. Refusal to recognize the victory of the resistance axis in the war.

2. Support terrorist movements and make them feel that Israel does not abandon its allies.

3. Prevent the advance of the Syrian Arab Army on the southern front bordering its borders.

4. Prevent the transfer of weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

5. Prevent the establishment of camps for the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in Syria.

6. Ensure that there is no direct friction between the resistance axis and the Israeli army in the Golan region.

      In fact, there is a lot of evidence that confirms the clear Israeli intervention in the war as its training and logistical contribution was developed into direct participation, including the leadership of field operations, but not limited to:

-    Medical support for terrorist fighters inside Israel.

-    Direct intervention and coordination with terrorist groups: especially in Daraa - Quneitra - Golan.

-    Field intervention in battles (Israeli officers were responsible for terrorist camps). Some of them were eliminated during Syrian airstrikes against those camps.

     To sum, the goal of the Israeli intervention in the global war in Syria was to try to limit the role and influence of the resistance axis. If this intervention had been successful, it would have had very important strategic opportunities and geopolitical repercussions for Israel. Since could achieve the following: 

1. Disrupt Syria's development of its military and technological capabilities: which are based on confronting Israel and finding a strategic balance with it.

2. Divide and fragment Syria: involving the state and the army in internal political and military confrontations to weaken and fragment them.

3. Destruction of Syrian unconventional weapons: the withdrawal of Syrian chemical weapons during the war in 2014, in accordance with United Nations Resolution 2118.

4. Limit arms transfers to Lebanese Hezbollah: This is achieved by attacking supply lines and transferring weapons from Syria to Hezbollah in Lebanon without entering into a comprehensive war with them.

5. Limit Iranian influence: This is achieved by destabilizing Syria and increasing the intensity of the sectarian and nationalist confrontation between Shiite Persian Iran and Sunni Arab countries.  

      Although Israel was able to gain benefits from the global war against Syria, with all that, there are also serious geopolitical changes and future threats as a result of the strategic victory of the resistance axis in that war in cooperation with Russia. The nature of the challenges it faces has become very different, requiring creating radical modifications to the structure and concept of Israeli national security. The most important of these threats and changes are: 

-    The resistance axis now has offensive military capabilities that can reach Israeli depth.

-    The Syrian army and Hezbollah now have tremendous military experience as a result of the guerrilla war with terrorist movements.

-   The Axis of Resistance will develop its military strategy based on attacking Israel's air and maritime superiority in any future confrontation. 

     In light of the above, and as a result of the victories achieved by the Syrian army and the resistance movements, it must be recognized that the new political and military realities resulting from the global war against Syria confirm the existence of a clearly defined strategic vision by the resistance axis to confront the Israeli plans.

         Therefore, the attack by the Palestinian movement Hamas on October 6, 2023 and the direct Iranian military attack on Israel (in April 2024) through hundreds of marches and missiles as a reaction and self-defense after its consulate in Damascus being subjected to Israeli bombing, can be considered just a simple example that reflects the extent of radical military geopolitical changes in the balance of power, which will be just a point in the ocean of a future comprehensive confrontation on all fronts between Israel and the axis of resistance.


       [1] The resistance axis: is a political term used primarily in the Middle East and means the implicit strategic alliance (political and military) that primarily opposes the Israeli occupation of Palestine. This axis includes: Iran, Syria, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Palestine, as well as the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq, also the Houthi Ansar Allah movement in Yemen.


2024-03-30

Paper: Economic Dynamic and Demographic Problematic of the Welfare State in Europe

 



Associação Portuguesa de Economia Política, Lisbon School of Economics and Management(ISEG)\Portagul.

Europe is expected to face a decline in the number of working-age population and a possible decline in the size of the labor force. Inevitably, this reality will raise strategic questions about the available European options and alternatives, especially at the level of the dialectical relationship between demographic growth, the welfare state. 

It is clear that the future of the welfare state in Europe stands on unstable economic ground. Which will have fateful implications at all levels. As a result of declining demographic growth, rising aging, and widening social, economic and political inequality, Europe's long-term welfare state is in question. 

Consequently, these changes will result in a number of challenges that are likely to be of great importance in the coming decades. Therefore, this reality requires raising many question marks related to the following problematic: 

Can protect the welfare state and continue economic growth under the weight of a declining fertility rate and a high aging rate? Is there a current model (European or global) that confirms this?

See: https://www.academia.edu/116094556/Economic_Dynamic_and_Demographic_Problematic_of_the_Welfare_State_in_Europe

2023-06-30

International Relations And Problematics of Artificial Intelligence And Biotechnology Revolution

 


Dr. Salam Al Rabadi

       If the Russian-Ukrainian war was the most important event that dominated the year 2022, but perhaps the decisive role of relying on artificial intelligence weapons in this war will raise many future problematic related to the reality of international relations and the future of humanity. It goes without saying that artificial intelligence and the biotechnological revolution will have very serious radical political and ethical impacts in all economic, security, legal, cultural and environmental sectors, not to mention concerns about the ability to manipulate human nature.  These issues inevitably raise many strategic problematics at the international relations level, wich can be expressed by asking the following questions:

 1-  What are the ethical strategies that AI algorithms and the biotech revolution are supposed to stick to? How concerned is the possibility that the weapons of mathematics could be used to achieve dirty political ends

2-  To what extent can proactive laws be put in place that are capable of limiting and confronting these repercussions? Why this global slowdown in setting strict standards for controlling these developments? Does that future reality require the creation of a global moral constitution along the lines of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

3-  Is there a political vision at the level of international relations capable of approaching these strategic challenges?

 We must acknowledge the fact that the challenges of artificial intelligence and the biotechnological revolution, with their political, cultural, and security implications, are rarely studied strategically. Accordingly, there is an urgent need to reconsider this reality according to a critical approach based on an ethical, cultural, political and security vision, which can be framed based on the following problematic:

    1-         Problematic of cyber security and space wars.

2-          Problematic of algorithmic bias and societal security.

3-            Problematic of criteria for the concept of algorithmic justice and cultural dilemmas.

4-            Problematic of emotional computing and the automation of human nature.

5-            Problematic of technical solutions (modelling) for climate change.

6-            Problematic of geological wars and future climate engineering (climate weapons).

7-            Problematic of the ethical and political of biotechnology (Biotechnical Revolution).

8-            Problematic of governance, accountability and control related to technology.

9-            Problematic of the aura of objectivity that today's culture confers on algorithms and science. 

       According to those problematics international relations will face many dialectics related to how technologies change the reality of politics, society, and even human nature. So, in the future all political debates will focus on the problematic relationship between politics and science. It is the relationship that can be expressed through the following question: 

To what extent should societies be directed and controlled by artificial intelligence and the biotech revolution? And on what terms?

         In this context, despite the complexities that will face the problematic of the relationship between science and politics, but the dialectic of the impact of science on human nature will remain the most problematic issue. Accordingly, the question is: 

What if normal biological human evolution was no longer absolutely necessary? 

       Inevitably, there are many question marks regarding the fears and doubts surrounding developments of artificial intelligence,robots and biotechnologies. Where it seems that there is no longer anything biological link between these developments. So, one of the future issues that will arise in the field of humanities is the problematic of the nature of the human relationship with artificial intelligence and the possibility of its superiority over it, not to mention the many dialectics between humanities, biologists and neuroscientists. This reality will lead to several questions in international relations about technological determinism: 

1-       Are there new patterns of selection since robots and biological behaviors control the fate of humanity more than genes?

2-       How can these patterns be approached theoretically and practically at the political level?

3-       What are the cultural and ethical values that artificial intelligence and the biotechnical revolution are supposed to adhere to? Who will decide that? 

         Based on these future questions,  with scientific considerations intertwined with commercial interests, it became necessary on a political and moral level for states to intervene, as there are a number of unethical technologies that have been put under political scrutiny on a global level The experience of trying to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction or placing strict controls on human cloning experiments may be the best proof of the possibility of control.

         This requires adopting a modern vision that is concerned with establishing clear and unambiguous laws and treaties with regard to confronting these problematics, especially at the level of international criminal law. For example, the Statute of the International Criminal Court must be amended to suit these risks and challenges as a kind of proactive global security, so that the jurisdiction of the court is expanded to include future crimes that threaten the fate of humanity and related to the following issues: 

-      The biotech revolution.

-      Climate change.

-      Artificial intelligence and emotional computing.

      It is evident by tracing the context of the development of international relations and international criminal law at the theoretical and practical levels, that they do not keep pace with these new global patterns. So, with the existence of loose and vague political concepts, the need arises to adopt the principle of bearing criminal responsibility explicitly and deterrent in light of the provocative uncertainty associated with technology.  

         Therefore, there are real and realistic question marks and doubts about whether the natural biological development of humans is no longer necessary at all, as a result of the developments of artificial intelligence and the biotechnical revolution. Hence, the fact that the problematic of the issue of the contradiction between the futures of artificial intelligence and the biotechnical revolution with human nature will inevitably impose itself on the political and ethical arena. Here, the following problematics should be raised:

 

1-       Is there an urgent political need to know what are the natural biological conditions for human existence?

2-       Does the reality of technology problematic require research into the nature of politics or the politics of nature?

         In sum, in the coming few years, pattern of technological transformations related to Artificial Intelligence, Robotics, Biotechnology, and the Internet of Things are likely to have a significant impact on the balance of power in global politics, which will increase the adoption of policies to nationalize technological innovations as strategic areas and an integral part of the biological, national, and cyber security of states. So, this pattern requires, at the level of international relations, to ask the following question:

 Do we have to know the culture and ideas of scientists in artificial intelligence and biomedicine, before studying political leaders, in order to understand the strategic reality of global politics, international relations and the future of humanity?



For communication and cooperation

يمكن التواصل والتعاون مع الباحث والمؤلف سلام الربضي عبر الايميل
jordani_alrabadi@hotmail.com