Three Shaking Pieces

Tim Marshall’s The Power of Geography is a look at how the future of different countries will look like, and the role of geography in it. As American dominance is starting to decrease:

“The kaleidoscope is still being shaken and the pieces have not yet settled.”

Let’s look at three of those shaking pieces.

 

Australia, a traditional Western ally, increasingly faces what is called its “China choice”. China is, by far, its biggest trading partner. Whether or not China overtakes the US in economic might, it is true that China is growing and the gap is reducing. Unlike the last Cold War, where the USSR was militarily mighty but economically weak, China is only getting stronger on both fronts. And China is increasingly projecting strength southwards in the South China Sea, thereby inching closer to Australia (even if that is not the intent). Can/should Australia rely on America to “protect” it, should that day come? Or will the US turn out to be a fickle ally, esp. when Australia is an ocean away? In the past, Australia has changed allies quickly, from Britain to America by the end of World War II. Could it do it again, for entirely pragmatic reasons?

 

As the world tries increasingly to reduce its dependence on oil, and the Saudis fall in favour in Western capitals, Marshall says it too is one of those shaking pieces – remember how they refused to adjust oil production during the Ukraine war to suit American demands? A country with no other industries or sources of income is precariously poised. Even a reduction in oil revenues can set off a disastrous chain of events – the Saudi government would have less money to pay for the upkeep of its citizens, who might then revolt, putting the kingdom’s rulers at risk. A weakened Saudi would inevitably increase the relative power of the other major power in the region – Iran. A stronger Iran would set off actions and reactions from Israel. Since Israel is no longer America’s best friend (ever since the Iran nuclear deal), a churn in the Middle East isn’t too far-fetched.

 

Then there’s Turkey. The Western media loves to blame it all on their President being dictatorial. But of course, things are never that simple and the West will never admit its own role. The EU, for example, has always tried to keep Turkey at an arm’s distance – it isn’t given EU membership. But geopolitics and Turkey’s strategic location ensured it did become a NATO member – even today, despite all the increasing disagreements, Turkey remains the key to blocking the Russian navy from entering the Mediterranean. But Turkey has been at loggerheads through history with another NATO member, Greece. Which has led France to wryly ask which side NATO is supposed to support if two of its members go to war?! America’s disastrous war in Syria resulted in a huge refugee inflow to Turkey, something for whose upkeep (surprise, surprise) the EU won’t pay. Hence, the periodic Turkish threats to open the gates and let the refugees loose on Europe. Turkey always knew that as Muslims, the West would never truly want them, even before terrorism became a problem for the West. So, over time, they have been building their military equipment domestically, even buy weapons systems from the Russians (yes, this NATO country buys from Russia!), and sells its military hardware to countries America frowns upon. This is a country whom the West needs, yet it doesn’t like. Turkey knows that, and acts accordingly.

 

Several shaking pieces indeed, with potentially big implications.