Theme

Diplomacy

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
NATO Summit in The Hague II: everyone survived, now all eyes on Türkiye

NATO Summit in The Hague II: everyone survived, now all eyes on Türkiye

The Nato Summit held in The Hague on 24-25 June was a failure, wrapped in success. It was a success because it avoided public display of divisions, mainly by avoiding issues: it was the shortest summit anyone can remember; it also had a very short final statement that basically had two points, the first a re-commitment to article 5 of the North Atlantic Charter and the principle that an attack on one will be considered an attack on all. The fact that Nato leaders in the Hague had felt the need to re-emphasise this should be a cause of worry not celebration, but in the end, it is good that it was said. The second outcome, the one that received most attention, was the commitment of European countries to spend more on their defence: 5 per cent of GDP, of which 3.5 per cent on hard defence, and 1.5 per cent on related ancillary areas such as infrastructure. You may, if you want, believe that this was a response to US President Donald Trump's insistence. Or, if you are more prudent, understand that countries that matter – Germany, France, Poland and the Scandinavian countries had decided on this course of action quite separately, and as a response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which was a wake-up call. Finland and Sweden’s decision to abandon their neutrality, and join NATO was taken long before Trump returned to the White House. The EU’s decision to spend massively on defence was always to ensure that other European countries are part of this process, willy-nilly.

Filter archive

Publication date
Editor's choice
Opinion
Opinion: The future of the China-US-Russia triangle after Pelosi's visit to Taiwan

Opinion: The future of the China-US-Russia triangle after Pelosi's visit to Taiwan

Since February 24, 2022, the international community's focus was concentrated entirely on the war in Ukraine and the growing Russia – West confrontation. It seemed that nothing could change the situation until the end of hostilities in Ukraine. However, on August 2 and 3, almost everyone’s attention shifted from Ukraine to Taiwan. As the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, stated her intention to visit Taiwan, up to half a million people were watching the trajectory of her plane on air flight tracking sites. The negative reaction of China, including the warning of President Xi during his conversation with President Biden that those who played with fire would be perished by it, created hype around this visit. Many were discussing the possibility of Chinese military jets closing the airspace over Taiwan and preventing Pelosi’s plane from landing in Taiwan, while some enthusiasts were even contemplating the possibility of a US-China direct military clash. As Pelosi landed in Taiwan and met with the Taiwanese President, the global social media was full of amateur assessments about the strategic victory of the US and the confirmation of the US global hegemony. However, as the dust settles down, and information noise and manipulation eventually decreases, a more serious assessment is needed to understand the real consequences of this visit.
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
NATO Summit in The Hague II: everyone survived, now all eyes on Türkiye

NATO Summit in The Hague II: everyone survived, now all eyes on Türkiye

The Nato Summit held in The Hague on 24-25 June was a failure, wrapped in success. It was a success because it avoided public display of divisions, mainly by avoiding issues: it was the shortest summit anyone can remember; it also had a very short final statement that basically had two points, the first a re-commitment to article 5 of the North Atlantic Charter and the principle that an attack on one will be considered an attack on all. The fact that Nato leaders in the Hague had felt the need to re-emphasise this should be a cause of worry not celebration, but in the end, it is good that it was said. The second outcome, the one that received most attention, was the commitment of European countries to spend more on their defence: 5 per cent of GDP, of which 3.5 per cent on hard defence, and 1.5 per cent on related ancillary areas such as infrastructure. You may, if you want, believe that this was a response to US President Donald Trump's insistence. Or, if you are more prudent, understand that countries that matter – Germany, France, Poland and the Scandinavian countries had decided on this course of action quite separately, and as a response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which was a wake-up call. Finland and Sweden’s decision to abandon their neutrality, and join NATO was taken long before Trump returned to the White House. The EU’s decision to spend massively on defence was always to ensure that other European countries are part of this process, willy-nilly.
Editor's choice
News
Fragile Israel – Iran truce brokered by Trump comes into effect but Israel claims Iran violated ceasefire

Fragile Israel – Iran truce brokered by Trump comes into effect but Israel claims Iran violated ceasefire

Hours after US President Donald Trump said his ceasefire had taken effect, Israel said it intercepted two Iranian missiles, with Defence Minister Israel Katz vowing that the military would "respond forcefully". Israel had stated on Tuesday it agreed to Trump's declaration of a ceasefire with Iran, adding that it had achieved all its objectives in the 12-day war with its arch-enemy. According to AFP, Iran denied launching missiles at Israel after the ceasefire announcement, and said it had "compelled" Israel to "unilaterally halt its aggression", while stopping short of officially accepting the ceasefire plan.
Editor's choice
News
Spain wants the EU to immediately suspend its association agreement with Israel

Spain wants the EU to immediately suspend its association agreement with Israel

​​​​​​​Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares will ask EU ministers in Brussels to suspend the agreement with Israel with immediate effect. According to Albares, "The time for words and statements is over", and he added that "The Palestinians in Gaza have no time to lose."
Editor's choice
Analysis
Analysis: Shadows and Sunlight: Armenia and Türkiye Seek Common Ground

Analysis: Shadows and Sunlight: Armenia and Türkiye Seek Common Ground

Pashinyan's official visit to Türkiye on June 20, 2025, marks a strategic shift from symbolic reconciliation to strategic rapprochement. Normalisation, for Yerevan, is not an end in itself but a transformative initiative to put an end to Armenia's geopolitical isolation, to diversify its transit routes, to decrease its reliance on Russia and to get access to Turkish ports, measures that reorient Armenia economically and logistically toward the West. Türkiye, on its part, is seizing the moment to strengthen its role as a regional intermediary. Consequently, by promoting normalisation, Ankara solidifies its impact in the South Caucasus and sends a positive signal to Western partners: the EU and U.S., in particular, about its evolving role in the region's stabilisation.