Search

Begin New Search Topic International Relations Political Geography Africa Content Type Special Report Publication Year within 3 Years Publication Year within 1 Year

1. A Monumental Relationship: North Korea and Namibia

Author:
Tycho van der Hoog
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Visitors to Windhoek, the capital city of Namibia, will quickly learn a remarkable fact that is well-known among the local population—much of the capital’s architectural landscape is designed and constructed by North Korea. In recent years, North Korean nationals have built the official residence of the president of Namibia, the State House; the national cemetery for the fallen heroes of the liberation struggle, the National Heroes’ Acre; the national history museum, the Independence Memorial Museum; the Ministry of Defense headquarters and other buildings. The Namibian government thus uses North Korean aesthetics for some of the most important aspects of its power: the president, the history, and the army. This analysis explores the relationship between Namibia and North Korea by providing historical and political context to the aforementioned buildings. Today, Namibia often has the reputation of a quaint and sometimes sleepy destination, tucked away in the southwestern corner of the African continent. Yet, Namibia was at the center of geopolitical tensions for most of the twentieth century. The complicated decolonization process of Namibia, or “the Namibian question,” as it became known in the corridors of the United Nations (UN), had its roots in the aftermath of three decades of German occupation between 1884 and 1915. German South West Africa, the area that became modern Namibia, was transferred to South Africa as a League of Nations mandate territory and renamed “South West Africa.” South Africa viewed the territory as an unofficial fifth province and introduced brutal apartheid legislation. Internal opposition against the South African regime resulted in the formation of nationalist organizations, of which the South West Africa People’s Organization (SWAPO) became the most prominent.
Topic:
International Relations, Economics, Politics, Arts, and Culture
Political Geography:
Africa, Asia, North Korea, and Namibia

2. The Dragon and the Bear in Africa: Stress-Testing Chinese-Russian Relations

Author:
Robert E. Hamilton
Publication Date:
11-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Foreign Policy Research Institute
Abstract:
This report is based on a chapter of my forthcoming book on the relationship between China and Russia. For the US, this is arguably the most important bilateral relationship in the world today. A robust, resilient partnership between Beijing and Moscow has the potential to remake world order. It would usher in an era of international relations based on power and polarity, eroding the role of international law and institutions, and undermining the sovereignty and agency of smaller states. This world order would represent a serious threat to US interests, as currently defined. On the other hand, transactional, “thin” ties between China and Russia allow the US some breathing space. Instead of a revisionist authoritarian alliance, the US would confront two states that represent different types of challenges. In this case, Washington could deal with the acute, militarized threat of Russia in the near term, while remaining postured to confront the “pacing” threat of China—the only potential peer competitor to the US—over the longer term. The academic and policy worlds have been seized with the China-Russia relationship for almost two decades. Policy debates revolve around how to confront the two, with some arguing that the current focus on reversing Russia’s invasion of Ukraine puts the US at risk of being unprepared for the threat China represents. Others argue that Russia is not merely a disruptive power but represents a profound and immediate danger to US interests. Competition for resources often lurks in the background of this debate: US government organizations focused on Europe tend to argue for focusing on Russia first; those with an Indo-Pacific focus tend to argue that China should be the focus. What this debate often fails to consider is the nature of their relationship and its impact on US policy options. The scholarly debate fills this gap by focusing directly on the nature of the relationship: one camp defines it as a strategic partnership and the other defines it as an “axis of convenience.” Often missing from scholarly analysis, though, is an analysis of the implications for US policy. In other words, scholars often argue forcefully for one of these characterizations of the China-Russia relationship but then fail to advise what the US should do in response. Instead, their analysis focuses on the implications of the relationship for theoretical approaches to international relations. The book that will include this report aims to close this gap between the policy and scholarly debates. It aims to provide a better understanding of the nature of the China-Russia relationship and use that understanding to inform US policy options. It will do this through a novel approach. Instead of focusing on Chinese-Russian interaction at the level of the international system, as most approaches do, it focuses on their interaction “on the ground” in regions where both have important interests at stake. This report examines Chinese-Russian interaction in Africa; other chapters of the book focus on Central Asia, Eastern Europe, and East Asia. Africa and Central Asia provide good testing grounds for the China-Russia relationship because both have important but different interests there. How they advance and defend those interests and how they interact in doing so, can yield important insights into the nature of their overall relationship. These regions are also important because the US footprint is light. The US has been called the “binding agent” in ties between Beijing and Moscow. The idea here is that shared resistance to the US is the only major thing they have in common. In this view, removing the US from the equation will make China and Russia more likely to find reasons to compete rather than cooperate.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Africa, Russia, China, Eurasia, and Asia