Connections

Twenty-five years after its creation, the Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes continues to serve its stakeholders by adapting to new challenges and providing timely policy recommendations and relevant education and training solutions. This article briefly summarizes the origins of the Consortium, its working modalities, and future opportunities.

The world is witnessing a fundamental change in the international system. The international politics will likely evolve into a competition of systems in a multipolar world. This shift has significantly influenced how African countries interact with the rest of the world. African states have entered an era of choice. The narrative of Africa being the "Dark Continent" is transforming into one of a "rising continent," with interactions increasingly involving a growing number of "non-traditional actors." Some African governments have increasingly embraced economic, diplomatic, and security ties with Russia. Africa’s abundance of strategic resources, favorable demographics, and attractive growth prospects give its leaders leverage in global affairs.
Africa's relationship with the West has been complex, producing both positive and negative impacts. Neither capitalist-oriented nor socialist African governments have been able to transform the continent. A general sense of disappointment and frustration prevails among Africans toward Western powers, stemming from unfulfilled promises that democracy would lead to development and economic growth. Building trust and credibility will require greater European transparency regarding their interests, minimizing policy incoherencies, and addressing the gaps between European offerings and African needs.

The European Union perceives the world as multipolar, with countries of the Global South expanding their political and economic influence alongside the rivalry between the United States and China. Cooperation, compromise, and multilateral engagement are central to the EU's mode of operation, and the European Union and its member states favor this approach in shaping international relations. However, in a security environment characterized by strategic competition, the European Union, as the world's largest trading bloc, must assert its role. "Strategic interdependence" appears to be the EU's response to addressing the complexities of a changing world.

Strategic movement of forces and their sustainment often depend on civilian infrastructure (ports, airports, railways, and road networks). During developing crises, potential adversaries could exploit seams between military and civilian authorities and use civilians to restrict, delay, or completely prevent the movement of forces and disrupt supply chains. This can be achieved indirectly, by exploiting the information environment, or directly, for instance, by inserting agitators into crowds. Many civilians, especially vulnerable groups, appear susceptible to disinformation and manipulation, creating opportunities for adversaries to use them in pursuit of specific interests. However, civilians’ legal rights and entitlements, particularly those enshrined under international humanitarian law, impose restrictions on Western militaries in coping with such situations. From NATO’s perspective, this could further encourage adversaries to exploit these approaches. 
The article provides several case studies from different countries where civilians have disrupted military power projection. It then outlines seven hypothetical scenarios in which adversaries exploit civilians to counter the logistics and mobility of military forces. The methodological framework for developing plausible future scenarios involves drawing on past events while also leveraging creativity in future considerations, including technological advances combined with human inventiveness. This approach enabled the authors to consider possible future developments and threats in terms of weaponizing civilians to contest military mobility. The findings presented in this article provide incentives for testing military resilience in wargame scenarios and exercises simulating disruptions to strategic mobility and logistics.
 

This article analyzes India's stake and role in the context of the renewed confrontational relationship between Washington and Beijing. The examination of India’s strategic vision, along with the changing dynamics of its bilateral ties with the United States, China, and Russia, demonstrates that New Delhi's foreign policy toward Washington has been shaped by events in South Asia and the Indian Ocean, as well as by the dynamics of America's evolving relationships with key Asian powers. India has assumed a prominent role in the United States’ efforts to enforce a rules-based international order in the Indo-Pacific. Both nations have leveraged shared values to deepen their engagement, also driven by pragmatic considerations. At the same time, maintaining close relations with the United States has become a strategic necessity for India. The partnership between India and the United States has been reinforced by their increasingly adversarial relationships with China. India has shown a noticeable shift in its approach to the U.S.-China strategic rivalry, driven by New Delhi’s changing threat perception of China – from a partner to a security threat.

Strategic competition and the concept of being in a struggle currently shape the mindsets and the construction of the social reality of policymakers, academics, and the public. This article analyzes how U.S. policymakers and analysts, the Russian leadership, and the Chinese Communist Party perceive the current security situation. It also explores the often-underestimated role of strategic narratives. By summarizing the key points of the strategic narratives of the United States, Russia, and China, the article discusses the implications of the competitive mindset on humanity’s ability to address essential global security challenges

This article explores the geopolitical and geostrategic importance of the Black Sea region within the complex dynamics of major-power competition, focusing primarily on the interests and strategies of the United States, China, Russia, and other regional players. It highlights the region’s major threats and challenges, ranging from military threats and hybrid operations to socio-economic and ecological concerns. These multifaceted challenges are leveraged by key stakeholders to advance their interests, further complicating the strategic landscape. This complex geopolitical environment, fraught with risks and competition, underscores the need for a nuanced understanding of the dynamics at play. The article introduces the concept of strategic trilemmas in the Black Sea region, involving the active participation of Türkiye, Ukraine, and pro-Western littoral states (Romania, Bulgaria, and Georgia) on one side, with Russia on the opposing side. Addressing the region’s challenges requires a comprehensive approach to promote stability, security, and cooperation. While Russia’s influence remains a concern, the potential for reducing its dominance and increasing cooperation in the Black Sea region offers bilateral and multilateral collaboration opportunities in this crucial geopolitical theater.

Strategic competition has significantly reframed American strategic thought, particularly its national security and military strategies, by defining the threats to American primacy and the rules-based international order posed mainly by China and Russia. However, the term "strategic competition" is not universally understood within the U.S. government, leading to varying perspectives on how to proceed. Additionally, it does not adequately address how competitors approach international competition, creating a risk of miscalculation and an increased chance of conflict. Finally, for the United States, strategic competition establishes a framework that perpetuates challenges for American strategy and the use of elements of national power. While "strategic competition" is necessary to focus and drive American strategy and strategic calculus, it is also a vague and imperfect construct that could lead decision-makers down consequential paths.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) sees the growing role and influence of the People's Republic of China as a return to the natural state of affairs. Building on ancient concepts like Tian Xia and driven by historically shaped preferences for control and dominance, the CCP proposes a "community of shared future for mankind" as an alternative to the Western-shaped rules-based order - a China-centric, hierarchical world order with Beijing at its core, engaging with subordinate states to the "benefit of all." This article introduces Beijing's perception of strategic competition, its main interests and drivers, and the avenues it pursues to promote its alternative world order.

The Indo-Pacific is one of the most consequential regions in the world. Its demographic and economic trends make it a pivotal engine for global economic growth. At the same time, various ethnic, territorial, and maritime disputes in the region threaten to destabilize not only individual states and the region but also the international system. Against this backdrop, the Sino-American strategic competition adds another layer of complexity to regional dynamics, bringing with it several opportunities but also significant challenges. Consequently, how this competition evolves will have global repercussions. This study explores the role of the Indo-Pacific in the broader Sino-American strategic competition and assesses the perceptions and interests of key regional actors. The author argues that these actors are exercising their agency in ways that constrain or co-opt the Sino-American strategic competition to further their interests. Conclusions are made that this challenges the emergent Cold War 2.0 discourse, which envisions Washington and Beijing forming two coherent blocks vying for influence, by revealing the region’s complex realities.

Following Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the United States, along with an international coalition of over 40 allies and partners (including the European Union and G7), imposed sanctions designed to restrict Russia’s access to capital, technologies, and other resources necessary to wage an aggressive war. Despite Georgia’s historical alignment with EU sanctions following Russia’s 2014 actions, the Georgian government opted not to officially join the coalition in 2022, citing economic concerns and fears of potential Russian aggression. However, Georgia’s strategic location and transportation infrastructure have made it a focal point for Russia’s attempts to evade sanctions, creating significant security risks given Georgia’s history of conflict with Russia. This study explores the challenges and threats facing Georgia in the aftermath of the sanctions, focusing on the complexities of balancing its international obligations with its security concerns. The analysis of Georgia’s foreign trade data reveals a surge in trade volumes involving specific products and countries, indicating efforts by Russia to circumvent sanctions. The research methodology integrates academic studies and original statistical analysis to underscore the urgency for Georgia to strengthen its cooperation with coalition members and improve its compliance with sanctions policies. The study concludes by proposing measures for Georgia to mitigate these threats, including developing a comprehensive trade control policy and enhancing administrative capacities to support coalition efforts in weakening Russia’s military capabilities.

Utilizing the British Broadcasting Corporation Monitoring (BBCM) service to track and analyze the use of the term “Anglo-Saxons” by Russian officials, media representatives, state policy documents, as well as wider advocates of Russia’s narrative, this article surveys how Putin’s regime references it. The term’s meanings are open-ended, dynamic, and evolving, and its applications tend to be context-sensitive. “Anglo-Saxons” functions as an epithet, trope, synonym, metaphor, and analogy in contemporary Russian discourse during Putin’s fifth term. It represents a “collective West” perceived as intent on destabilizing Russia. The supposed threat of “Anglo-Saxons” is used to justify political choices, legitimize internal order, characterize Russia’s alternative geopolitical identity, and outline its vision of a preferred global order. Following a genealogy of the term, tracing its evolving meanings through the medieval, early modern, and modern periods, the article identifies three core ways in which official discourse deploys the “Anglo-Saxon” concept: 1) “Anglo-Saxon Atlanticists” and the “collective West”; 2) the “Anglo-Saxon Reich” – portraying the “fascist Anglo-Saxons elite” and “Ordinary Nazis”; and 3) “Anglo-Saxons” as “Fifth Column” and “Foreign Agent.” Finally, the article concludes by exploring the trajectory of “Anglo-Saxon” usage and reflecting on its efficacy in legitimizing current Russian policies and strategies.

Technology and innovation have significantly influenced the Russo-Ukrainian war, impacting not only the armed conflict but also the reconstruction of reclaimed territories and the restoration of services. Few believed in Ukraine’s survival when the Russian invasion began in February 2022. This article examines how Ukraine, through its ability to embrace technological advancements and apply innovative solutions, gained a comparatively advantageous position against Russian aggression. We focus on the fundamental differences in the early stages of the war, particularly highlighting Ukraine’s adept integration of emerging dual-use and advanced Western products and technologies.

The Black Sea, historically a crossroads of empires and modern nations, has become a critical focal point in 21st-century geopolitics. This article examines its multifaceted importance, from strategic maritime linkages and energy reserves to its evolving role as a theater for great power competition. By analyzing the interests and actions of key players such as Russia, Türkiye, and NATO, we highlight the region's dual significance as both a hub of cooperation and a potential flashpoint for conflict. Drawing on historical context, current geopolitical developments, and strategic analyses, the article underscores the Black Sea’s broader implications for global peace, trade, and stability in an era of renewed global power dynamics.

This study examines the status of the Crimean Peninsula within the frameworks of international law and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) legal framework. The urgency of this issue is heightened by the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine, which deepens the uncertainty surrounding Crimea’s status. Currently, Crimea remains a disputed territory, posing significant legal and political challenges. The central question of this study is whether Crimea, given its undefined status, can fully exercise the rights and privileges associated with EAEU membership. The study explores potential implications and possibilities for Crimea's integration into the EAEU. Through a detailed analysis of legal intricacies and international legal instruments, the article highlights specific features of the EAEU's legal landscape. Despite its annexed status, Crimea operates within the framework of both the Russian Federation and the EAEU. Member states maintain a delicate balance by engaging with Crimea under de facto recognition while avoiding international sanctions. This dual approach reflects the complexities of the situation. The practical value of this research lies in its potential to inform broader policy development regarding Crimea’s legal status amidst the ongoing conflict. By considering the impact of the current war, the study offers a timely and relevant analysis of the evolving geopolitical landscape and its effects on Crimea's legal standing.

Since Russia annexed Crimea and its war of aggression against Ukraine, the security environment of the Black Sea has undergone significant changes. The increased Russian military presence in the Black Sea basin has posed a challenge to NATO's strategic interests, including energy security and the preservation of free navigation. This policy-focused article examines ways to enhance trilateral cooperation in the Black Sea region among the three NATO littoral states--Romania, Türkiye, and Bulgari--to counter Russian influence. This influence has been a relatively overlooked aspect of NATO's strategic concerns, which has yet to produce a comprehensive strategy for the region. Greater trilateral cooperation among NATO members with coastal access to the Black Sea is envisioned as a step towards the development of a NATO Black Sea strategy and the potential creation of a joint fleet. The three countries have already launched successful initiatives, such as the establishment of MCM Black Sea in January 2024, which serves as a platform for collaborative maritime demining in response to the Russian-Ukrainian war. This article aims to untangle the complexities of expanding NATO's presence in the Black Sea basin and offers recommendations for both domestic and international policies to advance NATO’s strategic objectives.

The era of Arctic exceptionalism has ended, bringing uncertainty to a region with tremendous strategic and economic potential. With Finland and Sweden joining the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance, the Arctic faces an unprecedented division: around half of the Arctic aligns under the NATO flag, while the other half remains Russian. Climate change is a critical factor driving regional activity, and the warming trends are affecting the region’s economic development, infrastructure, and military activity. With Western sanctions blocking technological and economic cooperation with Russia, China is well-positioned to fill the gap. The “no limits” friendship between Russia and China facilitates increased Chinese investment and presence in a region historically wary of non-Arctic states. This article will examine how climate factors enable both the strengthened ties among like-minded Western Arctic nations and the growing relationship between Russia and China to assess whether a new “ice curtain” is emerging as strategic competition intensifies in the Arctic.

Tensions in great power competition, geopolitical shifts, and external shocks—such as the 2008-2009 global financial crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic, and Russia’s war against Ukraine since February 2014—have put the global economy under stress. International trade, foreign direct investment, and global value chains have been redirected, diversified, and de-risked. Rather than leading to de-globalization, this has resulted in a "fragmentegrated" global economy that is both tripolar, regionally and globally fragmented, and integrated at the same time. The world economy remains deeply interconnected rather than fully decoupled.
This "fragmentegrated" global economy is exposed to great power competition and the increasing weaponization of economic interdependence, affecting all sectors of the multilateral system. Conflict and confrontation dominate under these conditions of “chained globalization.” However, strategic interdependence and the development of counter-coercive instruments can provide mitigation tools for actors facing pressure from great powers.

Strategic competition is not new, nor is the use of activities short of warfare by governments to shape the international system in their favor. However, the ability of state and non-state actors to directly influence populations through a range of rapid and non-attributable actions is different from previous iterations of strategic competition. These activities, referred to in this article as hybrid threats, directly challenge state sovereignty and represent the key distinguishing feature of contemporary strategic competition. To clarify this argument, the article aims to provide working definitions of strategic competition and its distinction from great power competition; to explain what hybrid threats and hybrid warfare are and their roles in the broader strategic objectives of state and non-state actors; to describe how strategic competitors and adversaries perceive these activities; and to emphasize the importance of building resilience within populations to counter hybrid threats.

This article examines the impact of the Russian Federation’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 on the strategies of the United States, United Kingdom, France, NATO, and the European Union regarding the Black Sea region. The author highlights how the invasion has emphasized the strategic importance of the Black Sea for the international order. In addition to analyzing official state actions, the author explores the academic and intellectual discourse in the United States, United Kingdom, and France to assess the region’s strategic significance.