President George W. Bush has increased the number of American troops in Iraq. It is too early to say whether this decision will be the moment when the United States begins to turn the tide, or whether it is just a last-ditch attempt to fail. Some important questions remain to be answered. Is civil war imminent? What will happen if the United States withdraws additional troops?
Even so, it is now clear that the surge is an important event. This shows that Bush has decided to reject the thorny Baker report, which is widely regarded as the US withdrawal strategy. By the end of the year, the reduction of violence in Iraq (especially Baghdad) has begun to convince some people who are suspicious of sending more troops. Even the elected Democratic presidential candidate refused to promise that the United States would completely withdraw its troops from Iraq by 20 13 years ago. The surge indicates that the United States will keep troops in Iraq for a long time.
February: Vladimir Putin's Munich speech.
The Russian president showed the new trend of Russian foreign policy with an unusually angry speech. In his speech, he accused the United States of "almost unrestrained use of force ... plunging the world into the abyss of conflict". Putin's speech heralds a year in which Russia has become more and more confident in everything from missile defense in Kosovo to arms control and energy policy. High oil prices and the booming domestic economy have strengthened the confidence of the Russian government. Russia's confidence abroad is a supplement to the growing authoritarianism at home. Russia believes that it is rising again, and it hopes that the whole world will realize this.
August: Credit Crisis
This summer, the American housing loan crisis broke out and is still developing. Maybe in the end, it's just a financial and economic problem. If so, the credit crisis may not occupy a place in the five most important geopolitical events this year. But in recent years, the ability of American consumers to keep buying is crucial to the global economy. If the subprime mortgage problem makes it stagnate and indirectly leads to further depreciation of the US dollar, this event is of great significance to global politics. Sino-US relations will deteriorate; The European economy will be under pressure, as will the entire global trading system. The United States will find it more difficult to pay for its role as a world policeman. We should remember that the background of political turmoil in the 1930s was the Wall Street stock market crash of 1929.
165438+1October: PetroChina has become the world's largest company by market value.
Indeed, there are plenty of reasons to show that this matter is somewhat illusory. The shares issued by the company on the Shanghai Stock Exchange only account for 2.2% of its total share capital. The market value of the company exceeds 1 trillion dollars (twice that of ExxonMobil), which of course reflects the bubble in China stock market. In less than a month, the market value of PetroChina has evaporated by one third (although its market value is still higher than that of ExxonMobil). However, the fact that the company with the largest market value in the world is a China enterprise has an irrefutable symbolic influence. The success of PetroChina is not a fluke. At present, among the 10 companies with the largest market value in the world, four are China companies.
165438+ 10: Pakistani president Musharraf launched a small coup.
If you are listing events with global influence, why choose one country instead of another? The events I have reason to list include: Nicolas Sarkozy was elected president of France; British Prime Minister Tony Blair resigned; The division of the Palestinian Authority; Or Hugo Chavez was frustrated in the referendum in Venezuela; Turkey's Justice and Development Party (AKP) won the general election, ending the country's constitutional crisis and establishing civilian rule. Of course, there are also long-term trends that make headlines, such as rising oil prices and melting Arctic ice sheets.
Instead, I chose General Musharraf to declare a state of emergency. Pakistan seems to contain all the most intractable problems in American foreign policy. The policy of the United States is to develop democracy, combat terrorism and curb nuclear proliferation. But in Pakistan, the United States found its ally to be a military regime, a nuclear proliferator, and an uncertain ally with vague positions in the war on terror and the Taliban forces in Afghanistan. General Musharraf's decision to seize power and put the country's judges under house arrest has put western countries in a dilemma and proved how unstable Pakistan is still. But the United States did not sever its relationship with him, because all seemingly feasible alternatives seemed worse.
Is there a theme that connects these five events? Of course there is. This connection is a growing pressure on the world's only superpower. The United States is caught in a war that is constantly consuming strength and demoralizing. Russia, America's old rival, is becoming more and more confident. A new rival, China, is on the rise. Pakistan, an important ally of the United States, threatened to sever relations with it. At present, the American economy is under greater pressure than in the past few years. Happy new year.