December 23, 2024 – Top Geopolitical Events & Security Developments

Teetering on the Edge: Could a Weakened Iran Go Nuclear

The Biden administration is expressing concern that a weakened Iran, under pressure from regional and international setbacks, may decide to pursue nuclear weapons. White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan highlighted this risk, particularly as Iran faces diminished conventional military capabilities due to Israeli strikes on key facilities like missile factories and air defenses. With Iran’s influence in the region reduced following blows to its allies, including Hamas and Hezbollah, and the loss of Iran-aligned Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, voices within Iran may push for revisiting its nuclear doctrine.

Iran, which claims its nuclear program is peaceful, has escalated uranium enrichment since the U.S. withdrew from the nuclear agreement during Trump’s administration. Sullivan emphasized the urgency of this potential shift in Iranian policy, noting the “real risk” of Iran considering nuclear armament. He has been briefing the incoming administration and coordinating with allies like Israel to address this threat.

As President-elect Trump prepared to take office, his administration appeared poised to intensify sanctions on Iran’s oil industry rather than prioritize diplomatic negotiations, a move criticized by those advocating for a return to diplomacy as a more effective approach. This policy direction could further escalate tensions regarding Iran’s nuclear intentions.

Missile Tensions: U.S. Warns of Pakistan’s Long-Range Threat

The Biden administration has revealed intelligence indicating that Pakistan is developing a long-range ballistic missile capable of reaching the United States. This development, seen as a significant emerging threat, has led to sanctions on Pakistani state-owned entities involved in missile testing and development. U.S. officials expressed concerns about Pakistan’s expanding missile capabilities, which include acquiring equipment to test large rocket motors. The U.S. has urged Pakistan to reconsider its actions, emphasizing that such advancements could take years or a decade but would disrupt regional and global stability. Pakistan, however, has dismissed the allegations as baseless and harmful to bilateral relations.

Tensions between Washington and Islamabad have grown, with U.S. focus shifting toward countering China and strengthening ties with India, reducing Pakistan’s strategic importance after the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. Pakistan’s military alliance with China, its nuclear arsenal of approximately 170 warheads, and its strained relations with India, a rival nuclear power, underscore the complex dynamics. Analysts suggest that Pakistan’s missile development could be aimed at deterring U.S. intervention in future conflicts with India or safeguarding its nuclear arsenal.

The sanctions, the first against a Pakistani state-owned entity for missile development, include penalties on companies supplying equipment for long-range missiles. While the U.S. stresses its intention to maintain dialogue with Pakistan, the disclosure of this intelligence at the end of President Biden’s term signals an urgent diplomatic effort to address the issue, leaving it as a key challenge for the incoming administration.

Unyielding Threat: How Yemen’s Houthis Defy Global Powers and Disrupt the Red Sea

Despite concerted U.S. and allied efforts, Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthi rebels continue to pose a significant challenge. They have maintained attacks on commercial shipping through the Red Sea and launched missiles at Israel, even as other Iranian-backed groups like Hamas and Hezbollah have paused their activities. The Houthis’ actions have paralyzed vital trade routes and caused billions in global losses. U.S. and coalition forces have destroyed hundreds of Houthi drones and targeted their command centers, but the group remains undeterred, leveraging sophisticated weaponry likely supplied by Iran and Russia.

The Houthis, who control much of Yemen, use their fight against Israel to boost domestic popularity and distract from Yemen’s dire economic conditions. They have transformed from a small mountain-based group in 2004 into a technologically advanced force capable of targeting ships and infrastructure across the region. U.S. officials worry about the unprecedented scale of external support the Houthis receive, including advanced missiles and drones. Despite these capabilities, Israel has intercepted the majority of Houthi-launched missiles and drones.

Experts highlight the growing threat posed by the Houthis, whose ambitions to disrupt international trade and challenge global powers reflect their alignment with Iran’s broader regional agenda. Their resilience in the face of nearly a decade of military campaigns underscores the challenge of deterring a group with limited economic stakes but substantial external backing.

U.S. Mission in Syria: Navigating Regional Turmoil and Uncertain Futures

The U.S. military mission in Syria faces growing uncertainty following the collapse of the Assad regime and escalating tensions in the region. With about 2,000 U.S. troops stationed in eastern Syria, the mission’s future is under scrutiny as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to reassume office. Trump’s previous skepticism about foreign entanglements contrasts with the ongoing threat of an Islamic State resurgence. The new interim Syrian government, led by Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), complicates the situation further, as U.S. policymakers weigh support for Kurdish forces like the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which have been instrumental in countering ISIS but are increasingly vulnerable.

The shifting dynamics in Syria also impact neighboring Iraq, where U.S. forces serve as a logistical hub for counterinsurgency efforts. Iran’s influence, Turkish-backed militias, and ISIS resurgence are key concerns shaping U.S. policy. Tensions with Turkey over the SDF’s role and Kurdish autonomy add complexity, as Ankara views the SDF as linked to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). Meanwhile, prisons and camps housing ISIS members remain a critical issue, with the SDF warning of a potential ISIS regrouping amid regional instability.

In light of these developments, Iraq may request an extension of U.S. military support beyond the planned 2025 withdrawal deadline. Both U.S. and Iraqi officials recognize the strategic importance of maintaining a military presence to counter ISIS and manage regional upheaval, highlighting the broader stakes of the U.S. mission in the Middle East.

Britain’s Defense Crossroads: Balancing Future Ambitions with Immediate Threats

Britain is undertaking its third defence review in just four years, aiming to address pressing challenges within its military strategy. The review, led by a panel of experts including George Robertson, Sir Richard Barrons, and Fiona Hill, will prioritize modernizing armed forces through digital technologies like AI and autonomous systems. However, this must be done within a constrained budget tied to increasing defense spending from 2.3% to 2.5% of GDP, leaving little room to address existing gaps. The nuclear deterrent, AUKUS submarine pact, and GCAP warplane project are consuming a significant portion of the defense budget, forcing tough trade-offs on other military capabilities.

Key debates revolve around whether Britain should focus on maritime and air power, leveraging its traditional strengths, or emphasize land forces to address immediate threats from Russia. Proponents of the maritime-air strategy argue for flexibility in addressing NATO and global challenges, while land-air advocates prioritize countering Russia’s aggression with a smaller, tech-enhanced army modeled after Ukraine’s approach. Both visions are constrained by the timeline of threats and limited funding, with critics warning that long-term projects like GCAP could divert resources from addressing immediate needs.

Ultimately, Britain faces a pivotal choice: invest in future capabilities at the risk of near-term vulnerabilities or prioritize shoring up current forces to address immediate threats. This decision has far-reaching implications for NATO commitments, relations with the U.S., and the country’s global military role. Unless defense spending rises significantly, Britain must accept significant compromises in its strategic ambitions.

North Korea’s Unlikely Gamble: Troops in Russia’s War on Ukraine

U.S. intelligence has revealed that North Korea independently proposed sending troops to support Russia in its war against Ukraine, with Kim Jong-un deploying at least 10,000 soldiers. These forces, embedded with Russian units, are now actively engaged in combat, including on the front lines, despite limited combat experience and malnourishment. North Korea’s aim appears to be gaining future Russian support in diplomatic and technological areas. The deployment, however, has resulted in significant casualties among North Korean troops, with around 200 reported killed. Their presence highlights deepening cooperation between Russia, North Korea, and Iran in sustaining military operations.

North Korean soldiers, while receiving better medical care than their Russian counterparts, have struggled with integration into Russian units. They contribute to Russia’s counteroffensive efforts in Ukraine, which continue to strain both sides. Russia’s reliance on allies like North Korea and Iran has allowed it to maintain artillery and drone attacks on Ukraine’s infrastructure. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s counteroffensive in the Kursk region, although resource-intensive, has been effective in halting Russian advances in other regions.

Both nations are grappling with heavy casualties and resource depletion. Russia faces mounting losses, with 600,000 troops reportedly killed or wounded, while Ukraine contends with recruitment challenges and limited weapons supplies. Western nations remain concerned about North Korea’s growing role and its implications for global security, as evidenced by new U.S. sanctions targeting Pyongyang’s military support for Moscow.

– F.J.