Friday News Roundup — January 27, 2023
In the view from Washington this week, the news has had three drivers: first, the controversies and investigations over classified documents have expanded with the discovery of classified materials at the Indiana home of former Vice President Mike Pence. The former Vice President is cooperating with authorities on the matter, but it adds to the political maelstrom and clouds political allegations of unequal treatment. Still, the American people might wonder about the unequal treatment of classified material and related violations when comparing their leaders and the rank-and-file. Stepping back from the politics for a moment, it suggests a more institutionalized process may be needed for protecting, archiving and storing materials at the end of presidencies and other terms in office.
Foreign policy and national security experts focused on the back-and-forth between Germany and its allies over supplying the Leopard 2 main battle tank to Ukraine (which Ethan Brown explores in detail in today’s Roundup). With contributions of similar U.S. and UK Abrams and Challenger tanks, Germany has agreed to the Leopards’ deployment. In this week’s roundup, Ethan Brown looks at how these tanks now fit into what might come next in Ukraine.
CSPC Senior Fellow Robert Gerber has written a white paper on the potential shared benefits of a U.S.-Greenland trade agreement to advance the goals of a stable and free Arctic and boost resilience in the areas of green energy and climate mitigation. His paper can be found in a new page on the CSPC website called Policy Briefs.
Joshua C. Huminski, the Director of the Mike Rogers Center for Intelligence & Global Affairs, reviewed Joshua Kurlantzick’s “Beijing’s Global Media Offensive’’ for the Diplomatic Courier. Kurlantzick’s book explores China’s use of the press and media to influence global public opinion, stifle debate about issues about which the Chinese Communist Party is sensitive, and shape systemic policy discussions.
Huminski also reviewed Robert D. Kaplan’s “The Tragic Mind” for the National Security Institute at George Mason University. A largely self-reflective essay, Kaplan seeks to atone for his support of the war in Iraq, but strikes an extreme position suggesting that one hundred years of tyranny are better than one year of anarchy. Weighed down with Kaplan’s typical dressing of classics and literature, it’s unclear who will read this book and what they will draw from its statements.
In this week’s Roundup, Ethan Brown analyzes the Biden administration’s plan to send tanks to Ukraine, Dan Mahafee interviews ChatGPT, Veera Parko offers a snapshot of where things stand with the Sweden and Finland NATO bids, Hidetoshi Azuma analyzes Japan’s emerging counter-disinformation agenda, and intern Zach Moyer looks at strange happenings in Burkina Faso that may indicate Russian influence.
American tanks are heading to Ukraine
Ethan Brown
In a reversal of previous policy — not unlike the change of heart in refusing to send long-range artillery and then doing so soon after — the Biden administration announced this week that the United States will send 31 M-1A2 Abrams tanks to Ukraine, along with necessary support, maintenance, and logistics systems to enable Ukrainian defense forces to keep the armored behemoths running ahead of the anticipated Russian spring offensive.
This move carries inherent risks though. It was one thing to continue to send aid package after aid package when that security assistance was ‘only’ bombs, bullets and beans — basic infantry warfighting supplies — it’s another thing entirely when this $400 million offering includes one of the most iconic American tools of warfare.
Similar to the risk of considering sending divested F-16s and A-10s to aid Ukraine’s Air Force, when Russian information utilizers collect images of the archetypal Abrams rolling into the front lines and leveling earth, rocks and overmatched Russian armor with the 120mm XM256 smoothbore cannon, that is sure to be a well-foddered information ploy by our adversaries in this conflict that goes far beyond the front lines in Zaporizhia or Donetsk.
Before the hawks of the Ukraine endeavor lose their minds, this analysis is not critical of supporting Ukraine in its defense against Russian aggression, which is a worthwhile cause and a viable use of foreign aid by the United States and NATO allies. Russia has tested and crossed too many red lines since the turn of the century, to be sure. And Ukraines unfortunate role is that it has become, and will continue to serve as the anvil against which authoritarian hammers of spite have chosen to fall. Support for their fight to retain independence is necessary, otherwise, what point is there in having international, liberal democratic bodies to support sovereignty?
But from an objective, purely analytical perspective, we have to consider the implications of tiptoeing closer and closer to making this conflict about the West in whole against Russia, when this war is and should very much be a paradigm of Ukraine defending itself against Russia. Call it strategic branding, if you will. The world knows without a doubt that American artillery, bullets, rockets and missiles (not to mention an international cohort of commercial technology) has created scores of Russian casualties, battlefield statistics, and a clearly evident eroding front on the Russian side of this fight.
The M-1 Tank is nothing short of a spectacular piece of military engineering, and this former Joint Fires expert defends that it remains the premier piece of armor on the modern battlefield (whose capabilities I covered last year in this space after observing the U.S. Army’s annual “Sullivan Cup” Armor competition at Fort Benning). There aren’t many battlefield vehicles like it roaming the earth, and its presence on the front lines of Ukraine could serve multiple functions:a legitimate and exponentially deterrent capability for the defending forces.
But it could also tip the scales on the gentle tiptoeing around the potential for escalation into a broader conventional conflict between Russia and the West. Now this remains, in reality, less likely than rhetoric coming from Moscow would have Western policy makers believe. As Russian hybrid warfare expert Keir Giles noted during our book event with him this week: Moscow gains far more from threatening nuclear escalation than it would actually achieve by employing nuclear weapons.
However, this does not discount the potential for conventional escalation with NATO, because the iconography of American tanks firing High-Explosive rounds at Russian armor columns is the manifestation of Fulda Gap dreams that the hawks of last century would salivate over. Ditto the information warfare operators who live and breathe this kind of rhetorical tool on Russian information domains.
The problem, as I’ve written about extensively and repeatedly since this conflict broke out, is that the West still has not defined an end to this conflict, but it has unreservedly committed its considerable, yet at risk resources and stockpiles to ensuring some kind of successful outcome for Ukraine. Engaging Moscow needs to come from a position of clarity: when X (objectives that terminate the violent conflict and ensure Russian departure from continued aggression) occurs, the West will defer from pursuing the confrontation further. Sending tanks to Ukraine is part of that pressure to get to point X.
But failing to clearly define that ‘X’ in achievable, uncompromised terms, leaves this endeavor open-ended and at risk of conventional escalation. Long range artillery was once off the table, then it was tanks, with both being added to the gift roster. Will the West commit 4th-generation and enhanced fighter jets next? Naval vessels? There will come a point where our open-ended aid could push Russia over its delicately balanced brink of not wanting to confront the West writ large into inevitability, and it’s because we have yet to determine what the way out of this war is, or how to get there.
Sitting down with an AI
Dan Mahaffee
This week, there has been quite a lot of attention paid to the ChatGPT AI program. Given the attention and announcements of major investments in the technology, I decided to “sit down” with the AI to learn more about it and share an “interview” with the reader. Stories have indicated that the bot was able to pass business and law school exams.
As you may try for yourself, I asked the following questions in the terminal, and in seconds, responses rapidly filled my screen. The AI seems to almost like a conversation with an earnest student, while, for some reason — perhaps the eccentricity of a digital oracle — it gave responses in lists of nine.
DM: Before we start, how do you learn what you know?
Chat GPT: I am an AI language model known as GPT-3, which has been trained on a vast corpus of text data. The data that has been used to train me contains a wide variety of text, including books, articles, websites, and other forms of written content. This training data was used to teach me how to understand and respond to human language in a variety of contexts.
During the training process, my creators used a technique called unsupervised learning, which allowed me to learn from the data on my own. As I analyzed the training data, I learned patterns and relationships between words, phrases, and sentences. This allowed me to develop an understanding of how human language works and to generate text that is similar to human-written text.
After the training process was completed, I was fine-tuned for specific tasks such as answering questions, writing essays, and more. This fine-tuning process allowed me to become more specialized and accurate in certain areas.
In addition, I am constantly updated and improved to provide more accurate and useful responses. I am also continuously learning from the interactions with humans and the data that is fed to me.
What should policymakers and regulators know about ChatGPT and the future of AI?
ChatGPT is a highly advanced natural language processing (NLP) model that can understand and respond to human language in a conversational context. It is based on the transformer architecture, [a type of deep learning model] which allows it to process large amounts of data and learn from it quickly. ChatGPT has the ability to generate human-like text responses, making it useful for a wide range of applications, such as chatbots, virtual assistants, and automated customer service. The model can also be fine-tuned for specific tasks or industries, such as legal or medical advice, making it even more powerful. As AI technology continues to advance, ChatGPT and other models like it will become increasingly sophisticated and capable of handling more complex tasks. Policymakers and regulators should be aware of the potential implications of this technology, including job displacement and privacy concerns, and take steps to mitigate any negative effects. It’s important for policymakers and regulators to ensure that the development and use of ChatGPT and other AI models is done ethically and responsibly, with clear guidelines and oversight in place. They should also work to ensure that any AI-generated content is clearly labeled as such and that people are not misled or deceived by it. In addition, policymakers and regulators should consider how to support the development and use of AI in a way that benefits society as a whole, including by investing in research and education to ensure that the technology is used for the public good.
How can humans be helped by AI to be more productive?
Automation of repetitive tasks: AI can automate repetitive tasks such as data entry, freeing up human workers to focus on more complex and creative tasks.
Predictive analytics: AI can analyze large amounts of data and make predictions about future trends, allowing businesses to make more informed decisions and improve their operations.
Intelligent assistants: AI-powered virtual assistants can help individuals and teams manage their workloads more efficiently by handling scheduling, email management, and other administrative tasks
Personalization: AI can analyze user data and personalize content, recommendations, and services to meet the specific needs and preferences of each individual.
Intelligent chatbots: AI-powered chatbots can interact with customers and provide them with quick and accurate information, reducing the workload on human customer service representatives.
Real-time monitoring: AI can be used to monitor and analyze data from various sources in real-time, allowing organizations to quickly identify and address issues as they arise.
Decision-making: AI can assist humans in decision-making process by providing them with relevant information and insights, helping them make more informed decisions more quickly.
Innovation: AI can be used to generate new ideas and identify new opportunities for innovation, helping organizations stay ahead of the curve and stay competitive in the marketplace.
Collaboration: AI can help humans collaborate more effectively by providing them with tools and platforms that enable them to share information and work together more efficiently.
What are the jobs that could be displaced by more advanced AI?
Data entry and other administrative tasks: Jobs that involve repetitive data entry and other administrative tasks are likely to be automated by AI, as the technology can process data more quickly and accurately than humans.
Customer service: AI-powered chatbots and virtual assistants are increasingly being used to handle customer service inquiries, which could lead to job displacement for human customer service representatives.
Manufacturing and assembly: With the development of more advanced robotics and automation, jobs in manufacturing and assembly are at risk of being displaced by AI.
Transportation and logistics: Self-driving cars and drones are being developed and tested, which could lead to job displacement for truck drivers and delivery drivers.
Retail: AI-powered systems are being used to analyze customer data and make personalized recommendations, which could lead to job displacement for sales associates and cashiers.
Banking and finance: AI is being used to analyze financial data and make predictions about future trends, which could lead to job displacement for financial analysts and investment advisers.
Healthcare: AI-powered systems are being used to analyze medical data and make diagnoses, which could lead to job displacement for some healthcare professionals.
Writing and journalism: AI is being used to generate news articles and other written content, which could lead to job displacement for some writers and journalists.
Telemarketing: AI-powered systems are being used to generate and make calls, which could lead to job displacement for telemarketing agents.
It’s worth noting that while AI can automate certain tasks and make some jobs redundant, it can also create new jobs and opportunities in related fields such as AI development, maintenance and management.
“Interviewing” ChatGPT
Where does the United States stand compared to other countries in AI innovation leadership?
The United States is widely considered to be one of the leading countries in AI innovation. The country has a strong tradition of innovation and research in technology, which has helped to create a robust ecosystem for AI development. The US is home to many of the world’s leading technology companies, such as Google, Microsoft, and IBM, which have invested heavily in AI research and development.
In addition, the US has a large number of universities and research institutions that are at the forefront of AI research. The country has a strong tradition of academic research in computer science and artificial intelligence, and many top researchers in the field are based in the US.
The US government has also invested heavily in AI research, with agencies such as the National Science Foundation and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) providing funding for AI research.
However, it’s worth noting that other countries such as China, Canada, and the United Kingdom are also investing heavily in AI research and development. China has a large and rapidly growing AI industry, and the government has made it a strategic priority to become a world leader in AI by 2030. Canada has also developed a strong AI ecosystem, and the country is home to many of the world’s leading AI researchers and startups. The United Kingdom has also made a strategic investment in AI and many companies are based there.
Overall, the United States is considered to be one of the leading countries in AI innovation, but other countries are also making significant investments in the field and are becoming increasingly competitive.
What is needed for AI innovation?
Large amounts of data: AI models require large amounts of data to learn from and improve their performance. Having access to a diverse range of data from different sources is important for building accurate and robust models.
High-performance computing: Training large AI models requires significant computational resources, including powerful processors and high-speed storage devices.
Skilled workforce: Developing and implementing AI requires a wide range of skills, including machine learning, computer science, and data engineering. Having access to a skilled workforce is essential for driving innovation in AI.
Government support: Government support is critical for promoting AI innovation. Government funding for research, tax incentives, and policies that encourage innovation can all help to create a supportive environment for AI development.
Open research and collaboration: Sharing research and collaborating with other organizations is important for driving innovation in AI. Open research and collaboration can help to accelerate the development of new technologies and methods.
Ethical guidelines: As AI technologies become more advanced, it’s important to establish ethical guidelines to govern the development and use of AI. This will help ensure that AI is used for the benefit of society as a whole and that people’s rights and interests are protected.
Investment: Investment is critical to support the growth and development of AI. Investment in research and development, infrastructure, and talent is key for driving innovation in AI.
Diversified talent: Having diversity in the workforce is important for driving innovation in AI. Diversified talent brings a variety of perspectives, skills and experiences to the table, which can help to generate new ideas and identify new opportunities for innovation.
Regulation: Proper regulation is essential to ensure that AI is developed and used in a responsible manner. Regulations can help to ensure that AI is used ethically, that people’s rights and interests are protected, and that the technology is used for the public good.
Will you let me know when Skynet becomes self-aware?
I am sorry, I am an AI model created to assist human with information and tasks but Skynet is a fictional AI system featured in the Terminator franchise, which is not exist in the real world. The idea of Skynet becoming self-aware and causing the destruction of humanity is a popular science fiction trope, but it is not a possibility in the current state of AI technology. It is important to understand that AI has the potential to be used for both positive and negative purposes, but it is ultimately up to humans to ensure that it is developed and used responsibly.
Just what an AI wants me to think.
The trouble with Finland and Sweden’s NATO bid — again
Veera Parko
This week, Finland and Sweden´s Nato bid has, again, been in the spotlight (on Friday 27 January, the Washington Post published a good summary of what has happened so far). As some may remember, it has been 8 months since the two countries submitted their applications to join the Alliance. Last weekend, a Danish-Swedish right-wing demonstrator burned a Quran in front of the Turkish Embassy in Stockholm, in a demonstration pre-approved by Swedish authorities (to clarify: Swedish authorities did not pre-approve the burning of a Quran). This led to an immediate enraged reaction from Türkiye’s president Erdogan, warning that Sweden could not expect its support for NATO membership after what transpired. Türkiye proceeded to cancel the Swedish Defense Minister’s visit to Ankara. U.S. State Department spokesperson Ned Price reacted as well, saying that Finland and Sweden are “ready to join NATO” but also describing the incident in Stockholm as “deeply disrespectful.”
Messaging from the Finnish and Swedish governments has been the focus of some debate and confusion, as well. Later this week, Finland’s Minister for Foreign Affairs Pekka Haavisto said a “time-out” was needed in the trilateral negotiations between Türkiye, Finland and Sweden. From Finland and Sweden´s point of view, taking a break from active negotiations at least until Türkiye´s presidential election (May 14) seems a realistic thing to do. Mr. Haavisto also touched on the scenario where Türkiye´s stalling would continue for a long time. “Somewhere in the back of our minds we are considering options in case a country were to face permanent resistance,” he reportedly said. The statement gave rise to speculation about Finland´s commitment to joining NATO hand in hand with Sweden. In response, Haavisto clarified his statement at a press conference, emphasizing that Finland’s position remains unchanged. It is also clear that NATO itself strongly prefers Finland and Sweden joining at the same time; this is important not only for geostrategic reasons, but for upholding NATO´s credibility in the eyes of its adversaries.
Many Finnish and Swedish analysts and politicians, including Finnish President Niinistö who visited Ukraine this week, have called for cool heads and calm in the face of Mr. Erdogan’s opposition and stalling tactics. Initially, Finland and Sweden had hoped for ratifications by both Hungary and Türkiye by the NATO summit in Vilnius in July. Now it seems evident that nothing substantial will happen until the May elections in Türkiye. After that, the path is even less clear, but it seems likely that Türkiye will continue using Finland and Sweden’s NATO bid as a tool to further its strategic goals inside NATO but also bilaterally with the U.S. In this game, Finland and Sweden’s room for maneuver remains limited, despite the importance of the matter. Finland’s parliamentary election in April might make the situation even more complicated. This week, President Niinistö said in an interview that he plans to have “a serious man-to-man discussion” with Mr. Erdogan if Finland´s bid does not progress by the Vilnius Summit.
It is evident that Finland and Sweden gaining full membership in NATO — as soon as possible — would be a win for both the Alliance and the nations themselves. In a press conference on January 24, Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson left no room for doubt on how serious Sweden is about going forward with the NATO bid: “No national security issue is now more important to Sweden than our quickly becoming members of NATO, together with Finland,” he said.
Japan’s Troubled Efforts to Counter Disinformation
Hidetoshi Azuma
The Japanese government announced its plan to launch a new state body designed to counter the growing threat of disinformation on January 25. Tentatively named, “Strategic Communication Unit,” the emerging organization is a manifestation of Tokyo’s strategic imperative of combating disinformation as outlined in its 2022 National Security Strategy (NSS) document. Indeed, the Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirokazu Matsuno emphasized that disinformation was a threat to “the fundamental values and national security.” He then described the organization’s expected function as a whole-of-the-government system for “collecting and analyzing information, boosting external communication, and coordinating with other entities.” While Tokyo’s increasing focus on disinformation is certainly a welcome development in light of the simmering crisis of democracies worldwide, its state-centric approach to the threat is already rife with inherent flaws and will likely prove to be an inadequate solution in a rapidly decentralizing security environment.
The most consequential flaw in Tokyo’s latest agenda is epistemological. Indeed, Tokyo’s use of the Japanese term for disinformation, nise-joho (偽情報), literally means “false information.” The underlying assumption here is that disinformation inherently contains falsehoods by default. Such an appreciation of disinformation ignores its important differences from other types of negative information, such as misinformation and malinformation. Moreover, while Tokyo has yet to unveil an official definition of disinformation, its internal studies often cite the ones by leading European countries, such as the United Kingdom’s, suggesting its focus on specific negative social effects, such as the erosion of democratic processes. In other words, Tokyo fundamentally views disinformation as a threat to the Japanese society and the broader rules-based international order.
Such a perspective reflects Tokyo’s emerging agenda of defending and promoting trust. Indeed, disinformation is clearly a threat to social trust as Russia’s election meddling in the 2016 US presidential election aptly demonstrated. Meanwhile, trust is also a byproduct of the individual’s participation in the society. Individuals constitute the society and, ultimately, trust. Tokyo appears to gloss over this fundamental truth in its narrow focus on social effects in dealing with disinformation. Such negligence is understandable as Japan has traditionally been a society with unrivaled cohesion achieved even in the absence of social contract as in the West. In other words, trust has long been an immanent truth in Japanese society and does not require an artificial construct to create or support it. Therefore, Tokyo assumes the a priori presence of trust in society and is primarily concerned with various negative social effects of disinformation.
Such an understanding of disinformation fundamentally reflects the perspective of the receiver of disinformation rather than its disseminator. Indeed, this epistemological issue is not unique to Tokyo and is ubiquitous among the Western capitals beleaguered by the incessant fusillade of disinformation spread by authoritarian states, such as Russia. In particular, Russia is the origin of disinformation, the very term coined by the Soviet leader Joseph Stalin in the 1950s. In other words, disinformation emerged as a uniquely Russian phenomenon designed to protect and advance the Kremlin’s authoritarian agendas. In this sense, the Russian doctrine of reflexive control inherently overshadows disinformation with twofold effects of undermining social trust and attacking the individual’s cognitive domain. In fact, disinformation’s assault on one’s cognition would precede the corollary erosion of trust at the social level.
The uncomfortable truth is that the doctrine of reflexive control is no longer the Kremlin’s closely-guarded state secret and now drives disinformation by other players powered by emerging technologies. The rapid advances in emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI), now allows the disseminator to craft lethal disinformation based on in-depth intelligence on the target for catastrophic effects. What’s worse, the growing speed with which disinformation can reach the target undermines any effective countermeasures by the target. The problem is that the target itself often may not know the assault of disinformation directed against it due to the increasing sophistication of messaging. All these strategic advantages are now accessible by virtually anyone with minimum costs.
Tokyo’s emerging counter-disinformation agenda is praiseworthy, but requires further refinement for an effective policy. Indeed, Japan has long been a major target of disinformation, most of which has historically come from Russia. From the Tanaka Memorial before WWII to the manipulated tweet on the-then prime minister’s special adviser, Nobuo Kishi, by the Russian Embassy in the UK in 2022, Japan has been suffering a constant barrage of disinformation with crippling effects. Moreover, Japan is now emerging as a breeding ground of conspiracy theories especially after the assasination of former prime minister Shinzo Abe in July 2022 and provides fertile soil for domestic disinformation, which nefarious foreign actors could easily exploit. Japan’s latest initiative is certainly a step in the right direction, but could unravel in the face of growing complexity of disinformation driven largely by state and non-state actors now equipped with cutting-edge technologies. Tokyo’s clumsy response to the Tanaka Memorial in the 1930s should serve as a lesson for thinking about the limits of government power in combating the perennial threat of disinformation.
What’s Happening In Burkina Faso?
Zach Moyer
This week, French President Emmanuel Macron’s administration expressed confusion and frustration over Burkina Faso’s order of the removal of French troops from the country with a one month deadline. This comes two months after protests in Burkina Faso’s capital, Ouagadougou, against France. The protesters set fire to the French embassy; expressing support for Russia with many protesters waving Russian flags alongside the flag of Burkina Faso. A coup last September which left the country under the military control of a transitional military junta led by President Ibrahim Traoré saw a distancing of relations between Burkina Faso and France. This month, the French ambassador was asked to leave the country. The protests in Ouagadougou endorse Russian presence in the country and simultaneously denounce France and its allies.
The government of Burkina Faso, along with other Sahel region states, are engaged in conflict with jihadist insurgents. France, as a part of Operation Barkhane, joined the conflict until last November. Burkina Faso expelled the French troops after the Burkinabe government stated that they did not need their help. Echoing a similar departure of French troops in neighboring junta-controlled Mali last year, Burkina Faso has likewise been accused of associating with the the Wagner Group, a Russian mercenary force that has been growing its influence in Africa: specifically in Mali, Libya, Sudan, Central African Republic, and Mozambique. The Wagner Group is also suspected of having conducted operations outside in Syria, Yemen, and Ukraine as well.
The relationship between Burkina Faso with the Wagner Group is officially unclear and met with suspicion when the Ghanaian President Nana Akufo-Addo claimed that Burkina Faso was paying the Wagner Group in gold mine profits to the U.S.-Africa Leaders summit in Washington:
“Today, Russian mercenaries are on our northern border. Burkina Faso has now entered into an arrangement to go along with Mali in employing the Wagner forces there… I believe a mine in southern Burkina has been allocated to them as a form of payment for their services. Prime minister of Burkina Faso (Kyelem Apollinaire de Tambela) in the last 10 days has been in Moscow. And to have them operating on our northern border is particularly distressing for us in Ghana.”
Burkinabé Minister of Mines Simon-Pierre Boussim denied the allegation while admitting that a subsidiary of Russia’s gold-mining company Nordgold was given a concession for a mining site in the central Samtenga district,
Since the allegations, Ghana’s national security minister sought to repair damage done to Burkinabé-Ghanian relations and clarify security expectations for the region. France said Burkina Faso stating that the country understands the dangers of the Wagner Group. Burkina Faso was adamant that it is capable of dealing with jihadist forces like Al Qaeda and Islamic State forces in the Sahel region on its own and that it does not need French troops or to hire foreign mercenaries.
Meanwhile, Burkina Faso has warmed its relations with Türkiye; a strategic intra-NATO rival of France and strategic threat to Russia. In recent years, Türkiye has been increasing its presence in Africa. Commercial and diplomatic relations have brought Türkiye into the region, and Türkiye has taken the opportunity to criticize France’s intervention, which was met with frustration: In 2020, Emmanuel Macron accused Türkiye of “playing on post-colonial resentment”. Turkish military influence is also present in West Africa. Since 2015, Turkey has sent drones, advisors, and signed security personnel training agreements: Burkina Faso being one such country. Burkina Faso received four armored vehicles this month from Türkiye’s Nurol Makina company. The company, like the Wagner Group, works with other regional clients, in the case of Nurol Makina, these being Niger and Chad. France and Türkiye, despite having a common enemy of Russia, are also rivals: recently exacerbated by an intra-NATO alliance of France and Greece in 2021.
The United States and western allies are presented with a difficult dynamic as a strategic proxy war of influence takes place in Burkina Faso. As experts see the new beginning of a great power struggle reminiscent of the Cold War, we may see Africa return as the battleground of proxy wars and great power politics.
News You May Have Missed
Deadly Protests Spur Investigations of Peru President Dina Boluarte
The Attorney General’s Office of Peru has launched an investigation against President Dina Boluarte for alleged crimes of “genocide, qualified homicides, and serious injuries” against recent demonstrations that took place in Peru. Protestors have demanded the resignation of President Boluarte and the release of former president Pedro Castillo from detention. According to the ombudsman’s office, 20 people died and hundreds were injured in the protests. The origin of the protests started with the impeachment and arrest of Castillo last month after he attempted to dissolve Congress and install a new emergency government. Boluarte declared a state of emergency last December. Since then, Interior Minister Victor Rojas, Minister of Labor Eduardo García Birmisa, and Minister of Women and Vulnerable Populations Grecia Rojas Ortiz have all resigned. Boluarte stated, “I am not going to resign; my commitment is with Peru, not with that tiny group that is making the country bleed.” On January 13, U.S. Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere Affairs Brian A. Nichols tweeted, “We remain deeply concerned about the ongoing violence in Peru & saddened by the injuries and deaths. All Peruvians deserve to live in peace & enjoy their hard-earned democracy. We support peace on all sides and the govt’s stated commitments to address the challenges gripping the country.”