When explaining the Israel-Palestine conflict, two analytical frameworks can be applied. One is the traditional framework of “complex national, religious, and territorial conflicts” between the two, and the other is a new framework termed the “Global Neo-Cold War.” Both frameworks are necessary these days, as the world has long entered a “Neo-Cold War” era, characterized by challenges orchestrated by the “Axis of Tyrannies” that seek to alter the “status quo” by force from the existing international order led by democratic nations.
Under the latter framework, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, the Taiwan Strait and the Korean Peninsula can be considered four major potential flashpoints, where authoritarian powers seek to alter the “status quo” through force.
In Eastern Europe, Russia is attempting such a change in Ukraine, while in the Middle East Islamic forces are challenging the “status quo” by exporting Islamic revolutions in a bid to reignite pan-Islamism, deny Western influence in the region and the existence of Israel.
In Asia, concerns are increasing over China’s military capabilities pointed at the Taiwan Strait. On the Korean Peninsula, North Korea seeks to alter the Korean “status quo” through nuclear threats. The hermit kingdom, which now is undeniably the ninth nuclear power in the world, is threatening “first use of nukes” against South Korea. playing flashy nuclear games to neutralize the South Korea-US alliance, the largest obstacle to juche unification.
Seen from the “Neo-Cold War” framework, Hamas’ “Tufan al-Aqsa Operation” — an anti-Israel air-land operation on Oct. 7 which demonstrated a level of sophistication and precision beyond Hamas’ capabilities — seems to be a “calculated adventure” staged by Hamas according to a script written by Iran and sponsored by the Axis of Tyranny countries and anti-Israeli militias in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, etc.
Now the conflict is escalating, as Israel has begun a military response and the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip is worsening, complicating international efforts toward reaching an immediate ceasefire. Thus, the question of whether this conflict will escalate beyond the Middle East has significant implications not only for the Neo-Cold War strategic landscape but also for the “flashpoint” regions.
If the crisis leads to a”clash of civilizations” — in which a reunited Islamic world confronts Israel and its Western supporters, then Russia and China, as well as Hamas, would be beneficiaries.
Escalation of the Israel-Hamas war would deepen the insecurity of Taiwan and South Korea. It would add to Taiwan’s difficulty in resisting China’s “one China” ambitions, and it would deteriorate South Korea’s nuclear security.
North Korea, as Pyongyang claims, is armed with fission and fusion bombs and possesses a variety of delivery means, including short and intermediate-range ballistic missiles, ICBMs, hypersonic missiles etc. Recently, it has launched a submarine operating tactical nukes. North Korea, showing off its growing nuclear prowess, threatens de facto “pre-emptive nuclear use” against South Korea while undermining the US’ commitment to its extended deterrence. North Korea nught believe that Washington would not intervene in a second Korean War if the conflict in Gaza escalated into a major international war, especially given the US’ already significant material support to Ukraine, depleting the US’ defense stocks.
If the communist regime in Pyongyang mistakenly judges that they have a“window of opportunity,” war clouds would quickly gather over the Korean Peninsula.
This situation behooves the two allies, the US and South Korea, to discuss ways to deter such a misjudgment. This is why South Korean strategists — actively discussing what their country can do to independently deal with North Korea’s threats — would like the US and its allies to view the Israel-Hamas war through a Neo-Cold War lens. In other words, to view the conflict as having possible repercussions on the other side of the globe. Undoubtedly, how to stop the Israel-Hamas war, engineer a ceasefire and prevent the internationalization of the conflict would be Washington’s priorities.
Nevertheless, many South Koreans want Washington not to lose sight of what pariah states in other parts of the world are capable of. In the case of North Korea: the continuation of nuclear weapons development, missile launches, defiance of UN Security Council resolutions, alongside the incapacitation of the council through veto power misuse from Axis of Tyranny nations and shaking the global nuclear nonproliferation regime, resulting in a never-ending nuclear nightmare for South Koreans.
Taewoo Kim is senior research fellow of nuclear security research at the Korea Institute for Military Affairs.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission
RSS