Federico Bordonaro

Anatol Lieven, politologo statunitense, afferma senza mezzi termini che gli effetti del riscaldamento globale potrebbero avere implicazioni sociali e geopolitiche catastrofiche:

For market economies, and the Western model of democracy with which they have been associated, the existential challenge for the foreseeable future will be global warming. Other threats like terrorism may well be damaging, but no other conceivable threat or combination of threats can possibly destroy our entire system. As the recent British official commission chaired by Sir Nicholas Stern correctly stated, climate change “is the greatest and widest-ranging market failure ever seen.”

Lieven cita il rapporto Stern, lo commenta e conclude:

For the further future, the report predicts that if we continue with business as usual, then the rise in average global temperature could well top 5 degrees Celsius. To judge by what we know of the history of the world’s climate, this would almost certainly lead to the melting of the polar ice caps, and a rise in sea levels of up to 25 meters.

As pointed out by Al Gore in “An Inconvenient Truth,” this would mean the end of many of the world’s greatest cities. The resulting human migration could be on such a scale as to bring modern civilization to an end.

If this comes to pass, what will our descendants make of a political and media culture that devotes little attention to this threat when compared with sports, consumer goods, leisure and a threat from terrorism that is puny by comparison? Will they remember us as great paragons of human progress and freedom? They are more likely to spit on our graves.

Underlying Western free-market democracy, and its American form in particular, is the belief that this system is of permanent value to mankind: a “New Order of the Ages,” as the motto on the U.S. Great Seal has it. It is not supposed to serve only the short- term and selfish interests of existing Western populations. If our system is indeed no more than that, then it will pass from history even more utterly than Confucian China — and will deserve to do so.

Nella sua previsione del collasso dell’URSS, Randall Collins sosteneva che in un contesto di “iperestensione”, le élite politiche di una grande potenza tendono a dividersi sul modo di affrontare l’incapacità di vincere le resistenze armate della “periferia” (come in Afghanistan negli anni ‘80). Con il che, accelerano la sconfitta strategica.

Anche se è fuor di dubbio che il rapporto tra Washington e Baghdad è diverso da quello Mosca-Kabul di un ventennio fa, è altrettanto vero che alcune similitudini esistono. Gli USA hanno tentato di fare dell’Iraq il perno di un “Nuovo Medio Oriente”, filo-occidentale, ma non hanno saputo ottenere la vittoria decisiva (politico-strategica) dopo il rovesciamento di Saddam Hussein. Sono però rimasti coinvolti in una lunga guerriglia in cui lo sforzo logistico si combina alla crescente resistenza identitaria (cultural-religiosa e nazionale) dei vari gruppi armati iracheni.

Il presidente statunitense GW Bush propone un mutamento tattico basato sul rafforzamento del contingente militare in Iraq, ma la classe politica appare divisa sul da farsi, mentre non mancano pareri negativi da parte militare.

Due analisti dell’intelligence statunitense spiegano la loro contrarietà all’ipotesi appena menzionata:

Turning to a more in-depth analysis of any “surge” deployment, Lang and McGovern warned, “A ’surge’ of the size possible under current constraints on U.S. forces will not turn the tide in the guerrilla war. Reinforcement of Baghdad by several thousand U.S. troops last summer simply brought on more violence. Those who believe still more troops will bring ‘victory’ are living in a dangerous dream world and need to wake up.”

Riporta il Los Angeles Times del 23 dicembre:

“Most Democrats are pushing for the start of a draw-down in U.S. forces, which currently number about 135,000. […]
Bush is considering adding as many as 30,000 troops to the force of about 140,000 already in Iraq, but he has not committed to the idea. He is expected to launch a new Iraq strategy, which he calls a “new way forward,” in early January. That would coincide with the Democrats taking majority positions in the House and Senate after a midterm election that was widely interpreted as rejecting the president’s conduct of the Iraq war.“

Una delle variabili da monitorare più attentamente nei prossimi mesi sarà dunque la possibile frattura tra Repubblicani e Democratici, così come tra pianificatori politici e strateghi militari, riguardo al modo di affrontare l’emergenza in Iraq — tenendo bene a mente le lezioni della storia.

Intervista a Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty riguardo al possibile impatto della morte dell’autocrate turkmeno sul mercato del gas naturale.

Approfondimento per Asia Times Online:

Germany has consistently proven itself to be one of China’s most reliable strategic-political partners in Europe. More good things are likely to come about next year when Germany takes over the European Union’s rotating presidency.

Dall’ambiente all’energia, dalla sicurezza alle telecomunicazioni, dalle infrastrutture ai processi di standardizzazione, Berlino è di gran lunga il miglior alleato europeo della Cina. Saprà Angela Merkel forgiare una politica europea di partenariato con la Cina?

Secondo recenti sondaggi, “sempre più cittadini francesi condividono le posizioni dell’estrema destra”.

Una mia analisi per il P.I.N.R. sulle tattiche elettorali di Jean-Marie Le Pen e sulle sue reali possibilità alle presidenziali 2007.

Le Pen’s image is inextricably linked to the far right’s anti-immigration rhetoric. Such a political landmark has been both Le Pen’s ace and his curse in the last decades. By playing the anti-immigration card, he has been able to collect millions of votes consisting of French citizens who estimated that France’s traditional republicanism needed a dramatic turn if Paris was to preserve its French and European character.

L’Azerbaigian è considerato dall’UE come uno degli Stati-chiave per la propria sicurezza energetica.
Analisi scritta per ISN-Security Watch.

Analisi previsionale scritta insieme a Jephraim P. Gundzik per Equilibri.net

Global geopolitical instability will continue to have a strong influence on energy markets. In 2007, energy prices will remain buoyant despite moderately weaker energy demand on a global scale and the U.S. expected economic slowdown. Next year, global energy demand growth will very likely remain greater than the potential growth of global petroleum products. Therefore, policy makers in the world’s largest energy consuming countries, including the U.S., E.U., China and Japan have begun to respond to rising energy prices and declining energy security. With the world’s largest energy consumers all moving to dramatically increase the use of renewable energy sources in the short-, medium and long-terms, the renewable energy sector is quickly becoming one of the world’s fastest growing industries. Investors tend to overlook geopolitical risk – at their own perils. However, its correct assessment is vital when it comes to energy markets, since geopolitical risk analysis explains not only why certain investments become particularly dangerous, but also why and where new opportunities arise.

Brief per il P.I.N.R. sulla sempre più complicata questione dell’adesione di Ankara alla U.E.