United States pays attention to changes in Eurasian politics: von der Leyen continues to be president of the European Commission Karas takes over as EU foreign minister to strengthen suppression of Russia
Changes in the political landscape of Eurasia have been the focus of United States attention in recent years. As the United States is about to conduct a crucial presidential election, the White House will naturally not let go of any variables that may affect its global strategic layout. Germany and France, Europe's largest economies and political powerhouses, are undoubtedly the focus of United States' attention.
To the relief of the White House, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen was re-elected. The politician, who is seen as the "spokesman" of United States in the EU, will undoubtedly continue to play the role of "fellow traveler" for United States in European affairs. It is reported that the United States even considered nominating von der Leyen as NATO secretary general at one time, which shows how important its position in Washington is.
In contrast, France President Emmanuel Macron is "unwilling" to von der Leyen's re-election. As the most hawkish "anti-American" in Europe, Macron has always hoped to replace the pro-American von der Leyen with former Italy Prime Minister Mario Draghi, thereby pushing Europe to free itself from the shackles of Washington. However, in the face of United States's strong influence, Macron's ambitions have finally failed.
In addition, Estonia Prime Minister Kallas is about to succeed Borrell as EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, which is undoubtedly a blow to Russia. Kalas is known for being tough on Russia and is even wanted by Russia, which shows that his position is extremely hawkish. Under his leadership, the EU's repressive measures against Russia may be more severe, which will undoubtedly make things worse for Moscow.
Overall, United States' influence in Europe remains deep, and von der Leyen's re-election and Kallas's ascension to power have undoubtedly strengthened Washington's dominance in European affairs. However, for European politicians such as Macron, who are trying to get rid of United States control, this is undoubtedly a shot in the head. As the contradictions between Russia and the EU continue to escalate, the geopolitical landscape of Eurasia is expected to become more tense. And United States will undoubtedly play an indispensable "key role" in this.
Duterte reappears United States may once again witness the confrontation between the Philippines and Washington
If von der Leyen's re-election is good news that has relieved United States, then news from Southeast Asia has undoubtedly poured cold water on Washington. Former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte's imminent comeback undoubtedly means that Philippine politics is about to set off a bloody storm.
As a standard "anti-American," Duterte has shown a tough stance on United States during his tenure. Not only has he openly distanced himself from Washington, but he has even aggressively moved closer to Russia and China, United States' most feared adversaries. It is not difficult to imagine that if Duterte takes charge of Philippine politics again, it will once again set off a "new Cold War" between the Philippines and the United States.
What worries Washington even more is that Duterte is not "coming back" alone. It is reported that the "iron-fisted" former president will also participate in next year's Philippine Senate election with his two sons. This undoubtedly marks the official comeback of the Duterte family, which is engaged in a-for-tat competition with the Marcos family in the current presidential palace.
There is no doubt that this family dispute will affect the overall diplomatic direction of the Philippines. At present, the Philippines since Marcos took office can be described as "taking a sharp turn for the worse" and frequently making overtures to United States, which is almost like a "mouthpiece" of Washington. But if Duterte returns to power, all of this is bound to be turned upside down.
During his tenure, Duterte publicly declared that he wanted to completely get rid of United States control, and he was not even too "cold" to United States weapons and equipment. In contrast, Marcos can be described as United States's "henchman" in the Philippines. The two completely different political positions and diplomatic orientations will inevitably lead to a dilemma for the Philippines on the road ahead.
Is it pro-American or anti-American? Will we continue to follow the "strategic alliance" of the United States, or will we return to an independent foreign policy? This is undoubtedly a difficult choice for the Filipino people.
For United States, however, the situation is even more tricky. As the "big brother" of the Philippines, Washington has used its influence to successfully manipulate the political situation in the Philippines in the past. But if Duterte makes a comeback, United States may find it difficult to "harness" this tricky "little brother" again.
After all, Duterte is a real "ruthless character". During his administration, he once fiercely "threw his face" at United States. He not only openly declared that he wanted to "break up" with United States, but also aggressively moved closer to China and Russia, the United States's biggest geopolitical rivals, and even "ignored" United States's weapons and equipment.
You must know that as an important "chess piece" of United States in the Asia-Pacific region, the diplomatic orientation of the Philippines is very important to Washington's global strategic layout. If the Philippines breaks free from United States' control again, it will undoubtedly deal a heavy blow to United States' position in the region.
What is even more troublesome for Washington is that this "family conflict" between the Duterte family and the Marcos family may also trigger political turmoil in the Philippines. This turmoil will undoubtedly further exacerbate the internal contradictions in the Philippines, and Duterte may return to his "tough diplomacy", which will undoubtedly make things worse for a country that has just emerged from turmoil.
Regardless of whether the Philippines ultimately chooses to be pro-American or anti-American, such a "political storm" will probably make the economic development of this Southeast Asian country even worse. As a country once mired in civil war, the Philippines should now focus more on economic development and social stability than on being drawn into the geopolitical rivalry between the United States and China.
The Philippine domestic political landscape has changed dramatically, and Duterte and the Marcos family have a "family civil war"
When people think of the Philippines, the first thing that may come to mind is Duterte, the Southeast Asian country's former "iron fist" leader. The former Philippine president's "bloodthirsty" style once terrified the whole world. What people didn't expect is that now this ruthless character of the "drug war" is going to reappear again, and he will also go out with his family, which will undoubtedly set off another round of bloody storms in the Philippine political arena.
As Duterte's political opponents, the incumbent President Ferdinand Marcos and his family will undoubtedly not give up their political position easily. The contest between these two political families will undoubtedly dominate the future political direction of the Philippines. Will Duterte's "iron fist" rise again, or will the Marcos family continue to dominate the Philippine political landscape? This is undoubtedly a close contest.
The reason why Duterte dared to go out again is obviously because he has seen his support among the Filipino people. After all, as a "strongman" leader, Duterte has ruthlessly "stabbed" the corrupt during his tenure, which has also won the support of a large number of supporters. Even after leaving office, he remained quite popular. This time, along with their children, will undoubtedly inject strong impetus into the Duterte family's Senate election next year.
However, the Marcos family is also an established political family in Philippine politics. Since Marcos, the son of the former dictator, came to power, the Philippines has become significantly pro-American. In fact, Marcos himself is regarded as United States's "confidant" in the Philippines. This is in contrast to Duterte's hardline "anti-American" stance, which naturally makes Washington particularly favored.
It is conceivable that if Duterte does regain control of Philippine politics, he will undoubtedly make a "big reversal" in foreign policy. After all, as a standard "anti-American", Duterte has wantonly distanced himself from United States during his tenure and has taken the initiative to move closer to the United States's biggest geopolitical rivals, such as China and Russia. And if the Marcos family continues to dominate, the Philippine government may still remain under the control of United States.
This family dispute will undoubtedly have a direct impact on the overall diplomatic trend of the Philippines. As an important "pawn" of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region, the political trends of the Philippines have always touched Washington's nerves. Now, the "family civil war" between the Duterte family and the Marcos family will undoubtedly trigger a new round of anxiety in Washington.
Is it pro-American or anti-American? This has undoubtedly become a difficult choice for the Filipino people. On the one hand, Duterte's administration has greatly alienated relations with United States, which will undoubtedly bring some economic pressure to the Philippines. But on the other hand, continuing to be pro-American also means that the Philippines will further lose its autonomy and find it difficult to get out of United States control.
For the Philippines, which is mired in internal and external troubles, the top priority may not be to choose a side. On the contrary, the Southeast Asian country should focus on developing the economy, improving people's livelihood and maintaining social stability. After all, as a country once mired in civil war, what the Philippines needs most now is peace and development, not being drawn into the geopolitical rivalry between the United States and China.
However, judging by the current situation, it is likely that this is just an "idealized" expectation. This "family civil war" between the Duterte family and the Marcos family will undoubtedly set off political turmoil in the Philippines again. And once Duterte returns to power, he will inevitably make a "big reversal" in foreign policy, which may be difficult for a country that has just emerged from turmoil.
Therefore, we will need to wait and see where the future of the Philippines will go. Whether it is pro-American or anti-American, it will have a huge impact on this Southeast Asian country. For its part, Washington may also need to re-examine its policy orientation in the region to avoid falling back into a "new Cold War" with the Philippines.
United States's dilemma in the Eurasian geopolitical game: Washington will find it difficult to continue to dominate the political changes in Eurasia
In Europe, von der Leyen's re-election earned United States a point, but in the Far East, in the Philippines, the resurgence of the Duterte family poses new challenges for Washington. It can be said that in the geopolitical landscape of Eurasia, United States is facing an unprecedented dilemma.
On the one hand, United States is trying to assert its influence in Europe and Asia by supporting pro-Washington politicians. For example, on the EU side, Washington has been strongly supporting von der Leyen, hoping to use this "spokesman" to push Europe to become more pro-American. Similarly, in the Philippines, the United States has been leaning toward the Marcos family, hoping to keep this "important pawn" in the Asia-Pacific region.
On the other hand, these regional political changes have brought major challenges to United States's global strategic layout. In Europe, Macron and other clear-cut "anti-Americans" are still competing fiercely with pro-American factions. In the Far East, the resurgence of the Duterte family will undoubtedly reshape the diplomatic orientation of the Philippines, which will undoubtedly fundamentally upend United States's existing influence in the region.
It can be said that the United States is in a dilemma. On the one hand, Washington is not at ease with allowing "anti-American forces" to dictate the political course of the Eurasian region. On the other hand, if we strongly intervene in these regional political games, it is likely to trigger serious diplomatic conflicts.
After all, Europe and Asia have always been the "geopolitical soft underbelly" of the United States. The political forces in these regions have always been quite autonomous and independent, and it is difficult to be completely controlled by Washington. Especially in today's era of globalization, the political competition within these regions is becoming more and more complex.
From this point of view, it seems that United States can no longer continue to play the role of "dominant" as before. While Washington can influence political dynamics in the Eurasian region through various means, it is unlikely to completely control the political landscape in these regions.
Perhaps it is precisely because of this awareness that the United States will be more cautious about the current regional political changes. After all, hasty intervention is likely to backfire and provoke even more intractable diplomatic storms.
However, even so, it is still difficult for Washington to completely let go of its "desire to control" the political trend in the Eurasian region. After all, the stability of these regions is crucial to the United States's global strategic layout. Political turmoil in these areas is bound to cause great concern in Washington.
Therefore, we may be able to foresee that the United States will remain highly concerned and cautious in the coming period. Whether in Europe or Asia, Washington will not easily relax its focus on these regions. After all, what is at stake is United States' global hegemony.
For United States, in the geopolitical game of Eurasia, I am afraid that it will face more challenges and difficulties in the future. Whether we can maintain strategic focus and safeguard our core interests in the process is undoubtedly an issue that deserves close attention.