Great fact Amanda! If the DOD was one of the first agencies to make great power competition a priority, why are they behind compared to Russia and China?

This is such a great insight! I hadn’t even considered it to be a second arms race!

Today‘s document on the Defense Space Strategy was an interesting read! While I knew about Russia and China‘s economic and military pursuits on earth, I wasn’t aware of their expansion plans for space. I think the 10 year timeframe for building the U.S. Space Force is feasible. However, I’m starting to notice a pattern where the U.S. Is constantly looking towards partnerships with other nations in order to protect U.S. interests. With nations partaking in this space race, I wonder how they will regulate laws for commercial businesses in space. in addition to this, I was also wondering if they will also partake in the collection of resources.

Thank you for the insight and the article! I wonder how laws for space will be enforced?

Today's report from NASA discussing space resources provided valuable information. The concept of space mining might help mitigate current pollution issues on Earth, but I wonder what will happen if multiple groups partake in this activity. In addition to this, there is little detail on the costs of this program. I also wonder who will be the first to make space mining come to fruition. How will we maintain pollution issues on earth? How will the pollution accumulated in space be maintained? While this project is commendable, I hope that this isn't monopolized in the future.

Today's article discussed the U.S. Naval strategy for the Arctic region. I found the partnership component to be interesting. In the U.S. counterterrorism strategy document we read a few weeks ago, this same strategy was implemented of sharing the responsibility. While including more actors in this effort to counter Russia and China is beneficial to the U.S., I can't help but think of the "foreign entanglements" that played a role in the brutality of WW1.

I think this is a great notice @Nadeen Ghazy! The document from Norway noted climate change and even considered two different outcomes if the issue isn't solved. It's not surprising to see that the U.S. Navy didn't address this. I will say that it is foolish to not take this into consideration, as it limits the possibilities to plan for different scenarios.

Today's document appraising the value of the Arctic region left me with many questions. While yesterday's document noted a drastic climate change should we continue emissions, today's document is noting the scramble for oil. I wonder how the oil reserves located here will affect the climate even further. I also wonder how the territory will be divided in the future, and how China's current pursuits in the region will play a role.

Today's article was an amazing introduction to the region. The part that stuck out to me the most was "Russia and China using civilian and commercial actors as vehicles for strategic positioning and for gray zone operations which may escalate to direct confrontation." Currently, China has increased its foreign investments in Latin America. If you were to travel to many countries in the region, Chinese banking and investment companies are seen in major cities. In addition to this, there is an increase in Chinese language schools in the region, which is starting to meet the equivalent of English schools. I find it interesting that Norway has noticed this pattern with China and Russia, where they send individuals and companies in before they get their government involved. Since they're aware of this, I wonder if the Biden Administration will get more involved with the region.

Today's reading on the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) was insightful. The presentation on Tuesday noted that NATO was created during the cold war to deal with the Soviet Union, so seeing that Russia made this group as a response years later is interesting. Article 23 was a bit disturbing to me. "Privileges and immunities of the Organization shall be defined by the relevant international treaty." I know this is to be used in accordance with other international treaties. However, I was wondering what would happen if their goal of making the CSTO on par with NATO would impact this clause.

"The Line" seems as if it will be a great investment into sustainable development. I was questioning if the project will be built the same way Dubai was built by migrant workers. While the project sounds commendable, the opportunity cost behind it is unclear. In connection to Latin America, more cities are adopting sustainable development techniques in order to increase tourism while reducing the carbon footprint. However, countries like Saudi Arabia have more resources to implement projects like this one while hiring international workers to do most of the difficult work. I wonder if we will see any human rights abuses as a result of this project, given how short the time constraint is for the building time.

Great point! The rise in gender based violence is also is seen in migration across the region. With the pandemic closing official immigration checkpoints, migrant women have been taking smuggling routes to get to other countries. As a result, sexual assault cases have spiked.

Transparency is necessary in Latin America, especially in anti-corruption efforts. I agree with your viewpoint, as the IDB's efforts have shown an emphasis on solving this issue. Civilian oversight is a great way of doing this! I wonder how this would be implemented.

The second portion of the DEO Chapter mentioned the importance of institutional capacity and rule of law. The IDB argues that "the COVID-19 pandemic requires strong, coordinated actions from across a range of institutions as well as citizen trust to comply with the measures needed to address the crisis." I noticed that Brazil's handling of the pandemic has been problematic as a result of this. President Bolsonaro has run through 3 health experts since the start of the pandemic and is now transitioning into his 4th one. In addition to this, his beliefs around COVID have caused an uproar. His criticism and refusal to close Brazillian beaches reveal a lack of coordinated actions to mitigate the spread of COVID. As a result of his handling of the virus, his approval ratings are low, and the vaccination efforts have been undermined.

@Eric Bruckenstein Great point on the morality of the issue! I think it’s important to note how morality issues play a role in state capacity. The human freedom index addresses some of these things and through reframing the debate by adding inclusion issues, other needs can be met in the future. It seems like an attempt under Maslow’s hierarchy of needs To move the needle.

@Nadeen Ghazy great point! I’ve been keeping up with current vaccinations efforts by countries in Latin America and I noticed that infrastructure and development have played a large role in this.

Today’s article on the Development Effectiveness Overview was insightful. While the sustainable development goals were listed to reveal growth, I was wondering what the difference was in prior years in comparison to 2020. I also wondered why there is a big push for environmental conservation if we are focusing on economic development. I noticed that second and third world countries are often pushed to uphold conservation efforts at the expense of their own economic development. While international and domestic aid helps to combat the goals listed in the document, it still would be preferable for these countries to develop their own forms of aid without having to worry about conservation efforts.

Today's statement by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China left me curious. I wasn't aware of how impactful Pompeo's well-wishes to Taiwan was, until reading the statement. I initially thought that the One-China principle was only related to economic purposes, so seeing the direct response from China is interesting. I wonder how the Biden administration will develop relations with Taiwan, and whether previous actions under Trump will impact relations with China.

Today's document on Japan's Vision of a Free and Open Indo-Pacific provided updates on current work in the region to promote trade. For starters, I found it interesting that they had developed projects in over 15 countries. Japan notes that they're willing to work with anyone in order to promote free trade in the region. I wonder how this will directly affect Sino-Japanese relations given the work that China is currently doing. I noticed that there is a difference in the view of Africa between the two countries. The documents we've seen on China all see the continent as a resource bank, whereas this document notes that Japan wants to bring out the potential of Africa as a “global main player. ” While these are contrasting views of the continent, both countries note the power that this part of the world potentially holds. As a result, the United States might want to look into partnering with Japan on these efforts as a way to encourage free trade in the region.

Great insight! I agree with your sentiment. China's economic work in the region not only strengthens them, but those around them. As a result, I wonder what the opportunity cost is for regional countries to stay neutral in this versus siding with China.