Diplomacy
Experts warn US-China tensions rooted in structural miscalculations, not short-term policy shifts
A panel of academics and policy analysts convened by Harici Media offered diagnoses of US-China relations that diverged in some respects but overlapped in others. The relationship was framed as a product of structural tensions, shifting global priorities, and competing civilizational outlooks rather than short-term policy choices.
Opening the discussion, the moderator noted that the webinar took place against a backdrop of intensifying global crises, including the prolonged war in Ukraine, escalating tensions involving Iran, and instability in Venezuela. These developments, he suggested, have unfolded alongside a US foreign policy that appears at once interventionist and strategically ambiguous, particularly in its approach to China.
The panel brought together Professor Radika Desai, a political economist at the University of Manitoba; Dr Christopher Mott, a Washington fellow at the Institute for Peace and Diplomacy; Nelson Wong, vice chairman of the Shanghai Center for RimPac and International Studies; and German philosopher and writer Dr Hauke Ritz.
“The United States assumed China would remain subordinate”
Desai argued that the roots of current tensions lie in long-standing structural miscalculations rather than recent political shifts.
Desai said, “The real source of the difficulty in Sino-US relations actually comes from the original assumptions under which the United States created the opening to China.”
She added that Washington initially expected Beijing to accept a subordinate role within a US-led global order. Desai said, “The United States imagined that China would very happily accept a subordinate position… in which the US could profit from China in a variety of different ways.”
That assumption, she said, collapsed as China moved up the value chain and rejected a complementary economic role limited to low-value production. Desai pointed to successive administrations, from George W Bush’s tariffs to Barack Obama’s “pivot to Asia” and Donald Trump’s trade war, as evidence of a consistent trajectory.
Desai said, “On the one hand the United States would dearly wish to subordinate China, on the other hand it is impossible to do so.”
She also described China as increasingly perceived as a stabilizing force amid what she characterized as Western-driven disruption. Desai said, “China increasingly appears as an oasis of predictability, stability.”
Turning to US domestic dynamics, she linked foreign policy volatility to internal political and economic pressures. Desai said, “There is no method in Trump’s madness… what you see are frequent changes of direction and policy.”
She argued that US leaders face structural constraints that prevent them from fulfilling electoral promises, contributing to erratic policymaking. Desai said, “The internal crisis of the United States has reached a very critical point.”
“They can’t quit the Middle East”
Mott broadly agreed with Desai’s assessment but focused on strategic incoherence within US foreign policy.
Mott said, “I agree with everything that Professor Desai said… that’s a very good summary of where we are right now.”
He traced Washington’s earlier goal of prioritizing competition with China through a “pivot to Asia,” while noting that successive administrations have repeatedly been drawn back into Middle Eastern conflicts.
Mott said, “Every single subsequent president gets dragged back to the Middle East… they can’t quit the Middle East.”
He cited interventions in Libya and Syria, as well as continued engagement with Iran and Israel, as evidence of a persistent pattern. Mott argued that electoral promises of reduced interventionism often translate into deeper involvement once in office.
Mott said, “People promise less interventionism… and then they double down on their predecessor’s level of interventionism.”
He also pointed to the centrality of US alliances, particularly with Israel, in shaping policy. Mott said, “There is one ally that is favored in DC more than any other ally.”
While acknowledging China as a peer competitor, he suggested that US strategic focus has shifted away from direct confrontation with Beijing. Mott said, “Competition with China is deemphasized… but very much interventionist towards the Global South.”
He characterized current US strategy as an attempt to maintain declining unipolar dominance through coercive measures. Mott said, “They are attempting to shore up a fading unipolarity through a kind of hard power doctrine.”
“China wants to manage itself, the US wants to manage everyone else”
Wong offered a perspective rooted in cultural and historical differences, emphasizing China’s preference for pragmatism and restraint.
Wong said, “China always wants to manage itself but the US always wants to manage everyone else’s business.”
He argued that Western narratives dominate global discourse, while China adopts a more reactive posture. Wong said, “China is extremely passive when it comes to dealing with the outside world.”
According to Wong, China’s rise has been shaped as much by external perceptions as by internal ambition. Wong said, “The confidence of China… has actually been pushed up by the outside world.”
He stressed that Beijing does not seek confrontation and prioritizes economic engagement. Wong said, “China never wants to destroy the relation with the US… it’s a big market.”
At the same time, he underscored firm red lines, particularly regarding Taiwan. Wong said, “China will never recognize Taiwan as an independent entity, never.”
He described Taiwan as a core national issue shaped by historical narratives, while reiterating that Beijing prefers peaceful reunification. Wong said, “China always wants to seek a peaceful reunification… there is no timetable.”
On economic tensions, Wong highlighted China’s preparedness for trade conflict. Wong said, “China has been prepared for this for over a decade… we have weapons and started to fight back.”
He noted that China has reduced its dependence on US exports and diversified markets. Wong said, “China’s export to the US has been reduced… from about 20% to below 8%.”
Despite tensions, Wong maintained that neither side seeks military conflict. Wong said, “We do not foresee any immediate threat of a war between the two countries.”
“Europe is at a crossroads”
Ritz framed the debate in terms of Europe’s strategic and cultural trajectory, arguing that the continent remains constrained by its alignment with the US.
Ritz said, “The ability of those leaders… to think about an independent course of Europe is limited.”
He pointed to emerging dissent within Europe, citing countries such as Hungary, Slovakia and Spain as examples of growing interest in alternative paths.
Ritz suggested that change may be driven not from Europe itself but from shifts in the Middle East. Ritz said, “The attack of the United States… has disrupted the global economy to such a large extent.”
He argued that Iran’s resistance could reshape regional dynamics and weaken US influence. Ritz said, “Iran plays in the Middle East a similar role as Russia plays in Europe.”
In his view, Europe’s dependence on the US has eroded its cultural and strategic autonomy. Ritz said, “We have lost the connection to our ancient roots… we have become multicultural societies driven by consumption.”
He called for a rediscovery of European intellectual traditions and a reorientation toward dialogue with other civilizations. Ritz said, “We have to regain this curiosity about different cultures.”
Ritz also predicted a long-term realignment involving closer ties between Europe, Russia and China. Ritz said, “The way to Moscow goes over Beijing.”
“Regionalization is inevitable”
Returning to strategic considerations, Mott argued that global geopolitics is moving toward regionalization, with alliances becoming more geographically anchored.
Mott said, “Geography has a gravity… alliances that were built generations ago do not.”
He questioned the feasibility of US-led deterrence strategies in Asia, particularly regarding Taiwan, noting the limitations of allied contributions.
Mott said, “I think it is extremely debatable… whether everyone would be on board with a kinetic defense of Taiwan.”
He suggested that countries in Asia and elsewhere will increasingly prioritize regional arrangements over global alignments. Mott said, “There will be a breakup of the assumptions of globalized diplomacy.”
“Trump seeks a ‘victory’ but lacks leverage”
Desai, returning in the final segment, argued that US policy is driven by a search for symbolic victories rather than coherent strategy.
Desai said, “This has nothing to do with controlling the Persian Gulf… this has to do with trying to produce some kind of military victory.”
She dismissed claims of US success in Venezuela and predicted failure in Iran. Desai said, “The United States is losing in Iran… it does not have what it takes to win.”
On US-China relations, she argued that Washington lacks leverage. Desai said, “Trump did not have the upper hand even beforehand.”
She pointed to China’s control over rare earths and its willingness to resist pressure. Desai said, “China has shown that it knows how to stand up to him.”
Desai concluded that global instability reflects deeper structural shifts. Desai said, “We are looking at the consequences of the United States going out of control.”
The South Korean government has decided to withdraw part of its embassy staff from Ukraine.
According to the Yonhap news agency, Foreign Ministry spokesman Park Doo-sun cited the Kyiv administration’s failure to take “positive steps” in the dispute that began with the leak of information concerning the handover of North Korean prisoners of war as the justification for the move.
The spokesman also listed the ongoing threat of air strikes, which complicates the safety of diplomats, among the reasons.
Following the withdrawal of part of the personnel, essential diplomatic contacts will continue under the leadership of the charge d’affaires ad interim to Ukraine. All consular staff tasked with protecting South Korean citizens will remain in Ukraine.
Prior to this move, the Seoul administration decided on 8 October to withdraw its ambassador. The Foreign Ministry stated at the time that it was ready to continue consultations with Kyiv to resolve the emerging issues constructively.
Tensions between the two countries began with a speech delivered by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the United Nations General Assembly in September.
Zelenskyy announced that two captured soldiers from the North Korean army had been handed over to South Korea.
South Korean President Lee Jae-myung, meanwhile, accused Kyiv of breaching a confidentiality agreement.
Lee said the disclosure of this information endangered the prisoners’ families and stability on the Korean Peninsula.
Seoul expects a public apology
Dmytro Lytvyn, an adviser to the Ukrainian president, denied the existence of a confidentiality agreement.
The South Korean Foreign Ministry summoned Ukrainian Charge d’Affaires Andriy Veshkin on 28 September and issued a note of protest against Lytvyn’s remarks.
President Lee Jae-myung warned in a statement on 2 October that they would take additional measures against Kyiv if Ukrainian authorities did not acknowledge the agreement and make a public apology. Lee stated that Ukraine itself had initially requested that the transfer of the prisoners be kept confidential.
Ukrainian Foreign Ministry spokesman Heorhii Tykhyi said the dispute stemmed from differing interpretations of the confidentiality regime.
Tykhyi noted that Seoul, based on its constitution which recognises the entire Korean Peninsula as its own territory, requested that the prisoners be handed over “like its own citizens”.
Describing the handover as a “gesture of goodwill”, Tykhyi stated that they were conducting closed-door negotiations to resolve differences of opinion.
Ambassador Park Ki-chang returned to Seoul on 10 October. According to a report by The Korea Times newspaper citing the ministry, recalling the ambassador served as a diplomatic protest against the leak of information regarding the prisoners.
The newspaper wrote that South Korea had last taken a similar step in 2008 by withdrawing its ambassador to Japan.
Moscow warned foreign diplomats
On 3 October, the Russian Foreign Ministry reiterated its warning to foreign nationals, including diplomatic mission staff, against remaining in Ukraine.
The ministry recalled its advice to leave Kyiv, citing ongoing strikes against military targets.
The ministry noted that those who failed to heed the warnings would bear responsibility for the potential consequences.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in a statement on 24 September that they had no information regarding Kyiv handing over two North Korean prisoners of war to Seoul.
Peskov, noting that prisoner matters fall under the authority of the Defence Ministry and intelligence services, said, “Contacts through the special services are continuing.”
August Hanning, who led Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND) between 1998 and 2005, was arrested on 6 October on allegations that he obtained roughly 2,000 classified agency documents and used them during contacts with intelligence officers from a foreign state.
Accused of high treason and espionage on behalf of a foreign intelligence agency, the former spy chief is alleged to have procured the documents from former BND employee Manfred D.
Prosecutors stated that the leaked records included internal briefing notes presented to senior German officials, though the Berlin government has not yet publicly disclosed which country received the classified data.
According to an exclusive report by Jake Green for The Cradle, seized email exchanges revealed extensive ties between the arrested Hanning and former Mossad director Danny Yatom.
The correspondence shows that the two former intelligence directors built an ongoing network of contacts following their public service, combining commercial ventures, efforts to secure political influence, and intelligence links.
This dynamic has triggered debate that using personal connections and official access for private gain has left Germany’s intelligence apparatus vulnerable.
Intelligence notes for 10,000 euros and campaign proposals
According to the reviewed emails, Hanning told Yatom in a 2018 message that he could prepare an “overall assessment based on information obtained from senior German officials and intelligence agencies” concerning an unidentified candidate.
The former BND head committed to completing the report by 13 July in exchange for 10,000 euros.
Contacts between the two men subsequently expanded to cover domestic political processes in Germany. Ahead of the September 2021 federal election, Yatom asked Hanning to approach leading candidates.
Describing CIY Global as a “political campaign company”, the former Mossad chief noted that he aimed to introduce its capabilities to German politicians, and he mentioned his intention in the same exchange to transfer documents concerning a cybersecurity firm.
Cybersecurity partnership and surveillance operations across Europe
The partnership between Yatom and Hanning reached beyond political lobbying initiatives into the cybersecurity sector.
Hanning reportedly served as a consultant for World Health Energy Holdings, a cybersecurity company linked to Yatom.
Firms of this type, established or managed by former intelligence personnel, provide commercial platforms on the international market for Israeli-origin surveillance, cyber intelligence, and political influence capabilities.
The operational presence of private Israeli-based surveillance technologies across Europe has recently entered judicial records through scandals in Poland, Spain, and Greece.
Polish prosecutors announced on 12 October that data collected under the previous government via Pegasus spyware against political opponents had been transferred out of the country, adding that manufacturer NSO Group maintained access to the technical infrastructure.
In Spain, the 2022 CatalanGate investigation established that at least 65 people, including politicians, lawyers, and civil society representatives, were targeted using Pegasus or Candiru software, with Citizen Lab researchers publishing strong evidence linking the operation to Spanish authorities.
In Greece, the surveillance operation targeting journalist Thanasis Koukakis and Member of the European Parliament Nikos Androulakis was determined to have used Predator software, linked to Intellexa, a company founded by former Israeli intelligence officer Tal Dilian.
In the German espionage investigation, the traffic between Hanning and Yatom involving paid reporting, contacts with electoral candidates, and commercial partnerships does not yet provide conclusive legal evidence regarding the final destination of the roughly 2,000 classified documents.
Nevertheless, the disclosed correspondence gives German investigators a concrete line of inquiry to assess whether classified state secrets reached commercial networks tied to Israeli intelligence.
US President Donald Trump has dismissed Kimberly Guilfoyle, the US ambassador in Athens, following serious press reports concerning her conduct.
White House Press Secretary Katie Zacharia told reporters during her first briefing that Guilfoyle had been asked to resign.
“She was doing a good job, but we didn’t like what we read in the press,” Trump said. “She was not a member of my family. I think she dated my son a long time ago.”
In a social media post, Guilfoyle stated: “These claims are unfounded, and I will resolutely defend my name, reputation, and integrity.” She added that she was particularly proud of the embassy’s work.
According to Kathimerini, her removal came as no surprise in Washington. Days of successive disclosures and vigorous exploitation of the matter by Democrats had been inflicting political damage on the White House ahead of the sensitive midterm elections.
The US State Department was instructed not to comment, with crisis management transferred entirely to the White House.
Reports indicate that most of the president’s team swiftly favoured Guilfoyle’s dismissal, while Secretary of State Marco Rubio was reportedly uneasy with the demonstratively warm public welcome she had staged for him.
Democrats on the House Foreign Affairs Committee have called for an investigation.
“Her resignation does not absolve her of responsibility,” the lawmakers wrote, adding: “While American families struggled to make ends meet, she used her position as a Trump administration official to enrich herself.”
Chargé d’Affaires Josh Huck will assume ambassadorial duties until a successor is chosen.
Meanwhile, Guilfoyle’s departure is expected to cause delays in agreements between Greece and the US.
These include the so-called “Rubio package”, comprising approximately $4 billion in arms deals finalised only days before the secretary of state’s arrival.
Several procedural steps still remain before the contracts can be signed.
In Athens, opposition parties are demanding answers. Dimitris Mantzos of PASOK called for a detailed briefing on the agreements reached during Rubio’s visit.
German officials urge fighter jet alliance with Sweden and Spain
US wealthy demolish multimillion-dollar mansions for land
US and Israel weigh Iran strikes after midterm vote, reports say
Pentagon plans covert spy ring for economic war on China, report says
EU reopens debate on naming envoy for Ukraine talks with Putin
-
Europe2 weeks agoBerlin Left Party backs Israel’s right to exist for coalition pact
-
America2 weeks agoHow will Brazil’s presidential runoff work?
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoThe West is preparing for war not with Russia, but with its own people, French analyst Georges Kuzmanovic insists
-
Russia2 weeks ago71 EU lawmakers demand closure of Russian Houses in 15 member states
-
Europe2 weeks agoMI6 investigates potential leaks after former BND chief is detained
-
Russia2 weeks agoUS and Russian figures discuss American stake in Nord Stream lines
-
Russia2 weeks agoDrone strike shuts down Yandex data centre in Russia’s Ryazan region
-
America2 weeks agoTrump weighs presidential memorandum to cut surging US diesel prices
