Russia's war with the west: a new front in the Mediterranean

Russia is not the only state that seeks to revise the order in the Mediterranean that is being destroyed: China and Iran are also trying to gain a foothold in the region that becomes controversial and remains central to the geopolitics of the Eastern Hemisphere. The United States has been in the Mediterranean since the early 19th century.

If Washington wants to remain a powerful force here, it should develop a consistent strategy in which the free use of seas will be a priority, not a dispute over ownership of them. This will take effort to strengthen democracy throughout the region, as well as to strengthen the old and new alliances on both shores of the Mediterranean. Only in this way will Washington be able to withstand the growth of sea separation and the geo -economic influence of China on the Mediterranean ports.

Focus has translated the new text of Tibo Muzerg, dedicated to the new front against Russia. Today, the Mediterranean is on the edge of many crises caused by Russia in its attempts to weaken Europe's determination. Take, for example, the energy crisis: Europe needs to find new energy sources quickly, and many of them are in the Mediterranean or beyond.

Algerian and Libyan hydrocarbons are an obvious solution, as well as liquefied natural gas, which can be imported from Qatar - through the Mediterranean. In the long run, the participants are already working to replace the expected absence of Russian gas, accelerating the development of gas reserves that have recently been discovered by the shores of Egypt, Israel and Cyprus. These reserves have already become a source of tensions between NATO -Greece and Turkey, even when oil and gas were cheap.

Now that prices for them are offset and the problems of ownership and transportation are not yet solved, only increasing tensions and incitement of differences within the Alliance are expected. It is worth mentioning that when French President Emmanuel Macron sadly called NATO "unmixed", he meant, first and foremost, a tense relationship between France and Turkey in the Eastern Mediterranean, as well as the predictable passivity of other Western allies.

Food safety crisis, reducing production and exports from Ukraine have set the task to deliver food from Europe to the main world importers of grain in Africa and the Middle East. It is almost impossible to bypass the Mediterranean for grain from the Black Sea, as well as for major Western exporters such as France and Spain.

If the Northern Mediterranean fails to meet the grain of its southern and east shores, it will be doomed to lack food and increase inflation, which can potentially lead to political instability and another migration crisis. As in 2015, it will give Russia the opportunity to pump tensions not only between Europe and the Middle East, but also between NATO allies, accusing the United States of provoked problems in the region and forcing Europeans to pay for it.

This strategy was effective in France and Italy in 2015 and may well weaken the determination of the Allies. Once upon a time, the Mediterranean was considered the next central Europe - a place where prosperity and democracy will soon be rooted and spread. Instead, we see impoverishment and chaos on its shores. In addition, if previously instability was mainly the problem of the coast, now it is growing at sea.

The Mediterranean becomes very close with the influx of new players who are aware of the strategic importance of the sea, which, despite the fact that it occupies less than 1% of the surface of the Ocean of the Earth, provides 20% of world marine traffic. Resident states such as Greece, Italy, France and Turkey are rapidly re-elected.

In addition, the war in Syria was Iran's reason to strengthen the land corridor in the Mediterranean, and also allowed Russia to gain a foothold again at sea, investing in the Soviet naval base in Tartus. From here, Russia has managed to increase its presence in the region, where it is currently conducting joint naval operations with China. Beijing is also looking for ways to fix themselves in the Mediterranean by buying civilian ports.

The Mediterranean remains the most important node to trade between Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, and Chinese leaders understand it. Beijing has already found a civic entrance point to the northern coast: the Chinese state -owned company COSCO purchased the Piraera port in 2016. Recently, China has signed a memorandum of understanding with Algeria on the construction and development of El Hamdania's port from 2021, which should become the second largest port in Africa.

Now Beijing seeks to make similar acquisitions in the northwestern part of the Mediterranean, recently aiming at the ports of Genoa and Trieste. China also acquires assets in areas such as Taranto in southern Italy, which is of little commercial importance, but strategically located at the intersection of the Western and Eastern Mediterranean and is an important NATO naval base. The fact that the Mediterranean projections of China are mostly civic in nature should not deceive anyone.

China understands the value of controlling the sea gate. In the end, Beijing can find ways to develop a double-use port, if not a full-fledged naval base, somewhere in the European-Mediterranean region. China recently discovered its first foreign military base in Jibuta. It is located at the entrance to the Red Sea, which is the main point of entrance to the Mediterranean through the Suez Canal. Recently, the Mediterranean was considered an American or at least Western "Mare Nostrum".

Today it looks more and more controversial. As a thalassocracy, whose leadership depends on the guarantee of freedom of navigation, the United States cannot afford to lose the Mediterranean, allowing it to become separated and openly controversial.

Although the constant presence of the sixth fleet certainly provides guarantees of preservation of military superiority, a lesson that was made from wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is that not all geopolitical problems can be solved exclusively by military means. China uses economic capabilities, not rigid power to become entrenched in key ports, preferring financial hatching rather than military power.

Turkey, although it is a NATO member, also took on the role of a rebel, challenging the available order in the sea. In his desire to build a "blue homeland" to tie Turkey with rich resources on the coasts of North Africa, Ankara is hosting with Cyprus, Greece and France.

Although this controversy in the Eastern Mediterranean is of the greatest concern, tensions are increasing among other allies of the United States in the West: Morocco and Spain are not only warned through migration but also through the Spanish territories of Seuta and Melic. Understanding and, if necessary, mediation between contradictory claims of these union Mediterranean states will be a difficult task for American diplomats.

Because tensions continue to grow, the US will often ask to take someone's side and may have to listen to requests. It is a very important role in NATO, especially in relations between Greece and Turkey. But there are other options: the actual distribution of Abraham agreements to Morocco at the end of 2020 opens up new opportunities for cooperation, and Washington can count on strong bilateral ties with countries such as Egypt or Jordan, for peace and stability.

You will have to pay for this by solving these countries in their internal affairs, but it is the price that the United States should be ready to give to solve the problem of the Middle East. The United States needs to create special tools such as general regional forums and a revived dialogue of the Nato-Mediterranean to convince their partners to pay attention to wider security issues instead of local or regional conflicts.

Washington should also set clear basic rules and develop a number of options for violators in response to violators. This should include conditions and restrictions on the sale of some modern types of equipment and weapons, such as F-35, as well as other geo-economic tools, including clearer investment recommendations for US companies in infrastructure and port projects in countries of particular interest.

In a region where events can develop quickly, America should show that it can adapt to changing circumstances - and that in the event of a break in partnership unions, the United States can still act unilaterally. This requires a clear and consistent strategy aimed at freedom of seas. In order to guarantee safety in the Mediterranean, the US will have to reserve and even strengthen military presence in the region. But diplomatic efforts should be aimed at long -term threats.

Among foreign players, China is the most serious challenge. American diplomats should strengthen their public position to show the true price of Chinese "investments" in the country, especially if they seem that they come without any conditions.

Although Washington has spent considerable resources on the development of the Indo-Pacific Strategy, including AUKUS and QUAD diplomatic group, it should still develop a similar strategy for the Mediterranean that could supplement (and even expand) its Indo-Pacific achievements. To begin with, American diplomacy should not be afraid to encourage the state of the region to strengthen their sovereignty, helping allies document the consequences of Chinese economic participation.

In this regard, Italy's adoption by the Golden Power Legislation in 2012 and 2021, which required the mandatory verification of foreign direct investment in the main sectors, could be an example for the region. In the end, democracy protection should also be an important component of US policy in the Mediterranean. On the south shore, after a short moment of hope associated with the Arab Spring, democracy in several countries breathes incense.

Democracy has been weakened by the 15-year economic and social crisis on the northern coast. This contributed to the growth of both the left (Spanish "Damos", the Greek "Syris" and the Italian "Five Star Movement"), as well as right populism (the Italian "League", the Spanish "VOKS" and the Turkish Party of Justice and Development).

Democracy is important for the United States: Turkey is a good example of how authoritarianism can make states more unstable and ready to cooperate with opponents of the West. Washington does not need to start a new crusade for democracy, but it should make the region safer for the prosperity of democracies. The cessation of democratic rollback, which will accompany the economic decline of the Mediterranean, should be a priority.

To do this, it is necessary to focus on countries with weakened democracy to strengthen democratic forces, to better integrate populist forces and to promote constructive dialogue between the democratic countries of the region. Let democracy invented in Greece and improved in medieval Italian cities, but in the Mediterranean it is as fragile as in another world. It is easy to forget that democracy in Greece, Spain and Portugal is only 15 years older than democracy in Poland or Ukraine.

Of course, the transformation of the Mediterranean into a safe place for democracy does not exclude work with the countries of the region that are far behind in their democratization. The reality of Mediterranean policy, especially in North Africa, in the Middle and Middle East, is that the fundamental avoidance of dictators is often more painful in the long run than interaction with them.

If local and regional leaders do not find ways to build this new Mediterranean order with the West, they will find other partners for this purpose. However, it is possible to make a clear difference between the reluctant interaction with authoritarian regimes and the involvement of allies whose democratic nature is a guarantee of their goodwill. In the Mediterranean, there is a sufficient variety of forums and formats to ensure this difference.

At the intergovernmental level, there is a Mediterranean Union and the Mediterranean Dialogue of NATO, as well as annual Rome-Med and Med Atlantic Forum conferences. They can be revived or encouraged according to the US goals. The Mediterranean has always been a difficult region that is difficult to fit in any framework. The US Mediterranean strategies were too common to hostile, and political and economic elements remained bureaucratically divided between Europe, the Middle East and North Africa.

Such separation led to instability. Since the Mediterranean is becoming restless, America has to approve a specific Mediterranean strategy that unites military, geo -economic and political power to support freedom of shipping and stability. This strategy should be complemented by the United States already developed for the Indo-Pacific.