Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Supporters of "I Reject" option react to early results of the referendum on a new Chilean constitution in Valparaiso, Chile.
Can Chile get from “No” to “Yes”?
Sometimes the worst defeats can be the best new beginnings.
It’s been more than a week since Chile’s ultra-progressive draft constitution suffered a landslide rejection. Two-thirds of Chileans voted against it. Turnout was the highest in 30 years. The “No” vote won across every region and major demographic. It wasn’t even close.
But as Chile’s lawmakers get to work this week to map out a do-over, could that stunning defeat actually be a good thing for Chile’s polarized democracy?
There have been many post-mortems on the draft constitution. Some Chileans were wary of its progressive promises on economic and social issues. Others were worried about its establishment of a “plurinational state” or were baffled by woolly clauses about “transverse dialogue between the diverse cosmovisions of the peoples and nations.”
Many voted it down simply because it was supported by the young, left-wing President Gabriel Boric, whose struggles with the economy and crime have cratered his approval rating after just six months in office.
But the biggest issue, according to Isabel Aninat, a policy expert and dean of the law school at Adolfo Ibáñez University in Santiago, is that neither the document nor the constituent assembly that wrote it ended up reflecting the attitudes of the average, median voter. “Chilean voters are much more moderate and much less polarized than the elites,” she says.
And those average voters still want change. A new poll by Chile’s Cadem pollster shows two-thirds of Chileans stillwant to rework or replace the existing constitution, which means there’s an opportunity to do it all over in a way that builds a stronger consensus and yields a document that can win approval.
“The people who are writing the new one are going to have to be careful,” says María Luisa Puig, an Andean region expert at Eurasia Group. “They’ll need to think ‘if I don’t pull together a product that is as consensus-building as possible, the thing is going to be rejected again,’ and then it’s end of story — you can’t be rejected twice.”
That process is what lawmakers are hashing out right now. Lower house President Raúl Soto said Monday that the country’s political parties and the president are “advancing, without rush but without pause” on the roadmap towards a second constitutional process, which could be released before the country’s Independence Day, September 18th.
Key questions surround the timing of new referenda and time limits on new drafting conventions. But the most important issue, says Aninat, is who does the writing.
The last constituent assembly was elected by a low-turnout vote during the pandemic, and it included a number of independents who in practice skewed heavily towards the left or who were seen as unserious – one leading member was outed for faking a cancer diagnosis, while another asked to vote on the document by video from his shower. These individual antics had an outsized impact on people’s perceptions of the work the assembly was doing.
The new process will need to address the participation of independents, perhaps favoring established party representatives instead. And it will almost certainly include a number of appointed experts to help guide the process.
A strong slate of candidates could help the parties rebuild some of the trust that ordinary Chileans have lost in their political system, says Aninat. In a 2021 Latinobarómetro regional study, only 22% of Chileans felt “close” to their political parties.
The defeat has given Boric an opportunity to correct course too. Grappling with a 39% approval rating, he reshuffled his cabinet last week, ousting two long-time allies from his student radical days and replacing them with figures from the country’s traditional center-left. With three and a half years left in his term, the stunning, early defeat he suffered on the constitution offers a chance to reset.
There’s no guarantee that Chile will get it right the second time around. There are still divisions in Chilean society over many issues that constitution-writers will have to grapple with – the state’s role in the economy and the environment, the rights of Indigenous communities, abortion rights, and so on.
And even among those who want to move on from the current constitution, there are splits about whether to replace it entirely, or merely to update it.
But the decisive blow of the “No” vote has provided an opportunity to reset the terms of the debate and to structure it in a way that drives towards greater consensus. In a region where radical shifts from left to right are becoming the norm, Chile has an opportunity to set a different example.
Aninat says that whereas this first constitutional process was “cathartic” – coming out of the massive social upheavals of 2019 and 2020 — “the new process can be more reflective. We have a chance to put our thoughts into the next 30 years and leave that catharsis behind.”
Liz Truss arrives for the announcement of Britain's next Prime Minister at The Queen Elizabeth II Centre in London.
What We're Watching: Liz beats Rishi, Chile rejects charter change, Trump wins DOJ probe delay
Meet the UK's new PM
As expected, UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss won the Conservative Party leadership race on Monday and will become the next British PM, replacing the disgraced Boris Johnson. Truss — a political chameleon who's popular with the Tory base — beat former Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak, a moderate technocrat, by a comfortable margin of 57% of party member votes. She now faces tough challenges at home and abroad. First, a looming recession compounded by a cost-of-living crisis and an energy crunch. Truss, who fancies herself as a modern Margaret Thatcher, plans to announce big tax cuts and perhaps a temporary freeze on energy bills for the most vulnerable Brits — which her economic guru has warned would be fiscally irresponsible. Second, a likely collision course with the EU over the Northern Ireland protocol. Brace for rocky times ahead as Truss tries to convince Brussels to renegotiate the post-Brexit trade deal, which scrapped a hard border between Northern Ireland, part of the UK, and the Republic of Ireland, an EU member state. (No surprise then that Brussels is hardly looking forward to her moving into No. 10 Downing St.) On Tuesday, Truss will travel to Scotland to meet with Queen Elizabeth II, who as per tradition will ask her to form a government at the monarch's Balmoral summer residence.
Chileans say "no" to new constitution
On Sunday, Chileans gave a resounding thumbs down to the new constitution planned to replace the current Pinochet-era charter. Almost 62% of those who voted in a referendum rejected the proposed text, which would have expanded the role of the state in the economy, recognized Indigenous rights, enforced gender parity in public institutions, and required the government to protect the environment. Although more than three-quarters of Chileans voted in October 2020 to get a new constitution, this draft failed to get majority support because many viewed it as too complicated, long (388 articles), and above all progressive. The "no" victory is a major blow to leftist President Gabriel Boric, a big supporter of the referendum whose approval rating has plunged since he was elected five months ago. Boric now says he wants to call another constituent election; to do that, though, he'll need to negotiate in Congress with the center-right opposition, which will leverage the result to influence the process. Still, Chileans may have turned down this charter, but the popular appetite for a new one hasn’t died down — and politicians dragging their feet could lead to social unrest like the 2019 mass protests that triggered the first referendum.
Trump gets his "master"
Challenging the ongoing Department of Justice investigation over his alleged obstruction of justice, Donald Trump scored a legal victory on Monday, when a federal judge granted the former US president's request to appoint a “special master” – a third-party arbiter – to decide if any of the documents seized by the Feds when they searched his Mar-a-Lago residence are covered by executive privilege. (The DOJ opposes this on the legal grounds that the highly classified records, including many labeled "Top Secret," don’t belong to Trump.) Judge Aileen Cannon — appointed by the former president and confirmed by the Senate just days before the 2020 presidential election — wrote in her judgment that while there was no sign of "callous disregard" for Trump's constitutional rights, among the documents taken on Aug. 8 from his Florida residence were some of the former president's medical and tax documents, and that warrants a “brief pause” in the investigation. The order will delay the DOJ’s probe at least until Friday, the deadline set for both the prosecution and the defense to propose their candidates for arbiter.Chileans rally against the proposed new constitution in Santiago.
Ahead of referendum, Chileans lukewarm on new constitution
On Sunday, Chileans go to the polls again to have their say on a proposed new constitution for the country.
Following earlier votes on whether a new charter was necessary and then who'd get to draft it, Chileans will decide whether to approve or reject a new constitution that enshrines some fundamental new rights and expands the role of the state in looking out for poor citizens and other marginalized groups.
How will the charter change Chile if it passes, and what happens if it doesn't? We get some clarity from Eurasia Group experts Yael Sternberg and Luciano Sigalov.
How did we get here?
The constitutional rewrite was proposed by former President Sebastián Piñera as a conciliatory solution following massive protests that erupted in late 2019 after a 30-peso hike to the metro fare in the capital, Santiago – the last straw for many fed-up Chileans.
The protests unleashed social anger over deeply entrenched inequality; and the effects of neoliberal policies protected by the constitution drafted during the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet (1973-1990). After being delayed for several months because of the pandemic, in October 2020 Chileans overwhelmingly voted in a referendum to write a new charter by way of a constituent convention.
The members of the convention were then elected in May 2021, with leftists and independents winning the most seats. They were able to advance many of their proposals through to the plenary, though the most radical ones did not make it into the final draft. Over time, public trust in the process declined as scandals involving members emerged, and the deliberations dragged out.
What big things were included and left out of the final draft?
In addition to addressing women’s and Indigenous rights, the charter expands environmental protections quite broadly to include environmental “rights.” It redefines water as a natural common good that cannot be appropriated, which might result in some changes in the concession system for mining permits.
While some worried the draft would make Chile’s lucrative copper and lithium industries nearly unviable by placing them under state control, outright nationalization of the mining sector was rejected, and property rights remain mostly intact. Still, the draft marks a major shift from the old constitutional framework and would translate into a less business-friendly environment.
How would the new constitution change Chile's political system?
The new charter entails significant changes. The lower house would coexist with a new Chamber of Regions, replacing the senate though with more limited powers, leading to an asymmetric bicameral system. The minimum age to run for president would be lowered from 35 to 30, and presidential reelection for consecutive terms would be allowed.
In parallel, Chile's regions would control their budgets, have direct democracy mechanisms on some issues, and elect their governors. Furthermore, voting would be mandatory, and gender parity would be promoted among elected officials.
The proposed changes to the political system have been poorly received. Most criticisms point to an ill-defined electoral framework, weak powers for the new upper house, expanded responsibilities for lawmakers, and the potential impact of consecutive presidential reelection on policymaking.
Do recent polls give us a clear indication of whether the draft will pass?
The latest polling shows about 46% of people saying they'll vote against the draft, and 37% in favor. But 17% of Chileans say they’re undecided.
Why? For one thing, the messaging of the “yes” campaign in rallies and on TV has been somewhat weak, while the “no” ads have been more coherent and stronger. All campaigning is banned for the last week before the vote.
Also, a recent scandal involving several activists desecrating a Chilean flag during an approval rally has hurt the “yes” side. While the skit was condemned by some pro-approval figures, it essentially encapsulated the fears the “no” camp has been peddling of a deranged and radically leftist future, leaving us less confident that the text will be approved. We know Chileans want a new constitution — that’s what 79% said in the first referendum — but maybe just not this constitution.
What happens if it doesn't?
If the proposed text is rejected, the current constitution will remain in place. But since keeping the Pinochet-era charter is politically toxic, that'll likely result in major social and political backlash. In preparation for such a scenario, the government and political parties across the spectrum have already started to discuss the possibility of a new constitutional process.
However, the path would be lengthy and bumpy. For another rewrite, Congress would have to call another constituent election, something that Boric has already suggested yet would take six at least six months.
Agreeing on the rules — not to mention on the content of a new draft — would likely result in bitter discussions and tough-to-swallow political compromises for many. Uncertainty over Chile’s basic rules of the game will remain.
How might the referendum affect President Gabriel Boric?
A rejection would be a massive political blow for Boric early in his four-year term, as he has long advocated for the constitutional change.
Following such a setback, Boric’s ambitious pension and healthcare reforms would be even more difficult to get passed in a divided congress. Tax reform, another one of his flagship initiatives, would still likely win approval given consensus on the need to raise more revenue; but changes and delays would be likely.
More broadly, the administration would struggle to regain the initiative after linking its fate with the outcome of the plebiscite in a context of high inflation, a deteriorating economic outlook, and an unprecedented security crisis.
Is Latin America’s new “pink tide” for real?
Since it’s August we obviously can’t ask much of you, but try this for fun: take out a red marker and a black and white map of Latin America.
Now, color in all the countries currently led by leftist leaders. You’ll immediately be filling in five of the largest economies — Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Perú. By October, you’ll likely have added Brazil, the biggest of them all.
Along with stalwart leftists in Bolivia, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, and the new presidenta of Honduras, your map will have a big splash of rojo/vermelho bigger than any we’ve seen in at least 15 years. That’s when observers first hailed — or feared — a new “pink tide” in Latin America.
But is the region really back in the red, so to speak? Or is this pink tide different from previous ones? Spoiler: they are not the same. Let’s look at what’s going on.
“This is not so much a movement of voters towards the left,” says Chris Garman, managing director for the Americas at Eurasia Group. “This is a movement of voters who are angry with the status quo, and the left is in a position to capitalize on that anger.”
Voter frustrations have been running high for years in Latin America, no matter who is in power. The massive growth of a new middle class in the 2000s sparked hard-to-meet expectations about better public services and cleaner government. Disgruntlement rose. By 2021, region-wide pollster Latinobarómetro found just 27% of those surveyed had confidence in their governments — a 20-point drop from a decade earlier.
Across the region, incumbents — many of them part of the initial pink wave — paid the price. Argentines, Chileans, and Brazilians, for example, all voted in center-right or right-wing successors. In Mexico, meanwhile, voters chose left-wing nationalist AMLO as a rebuke to the center-right establishment.
Then the pandemic hit. Incomes and economies plummeted, millions were threatened anew with poverty, and massive protests over inequality rippled across the region.
Left-wing opposition figures were in the right place at the right time, given their traditional message of tackling income inequality, and the pendulum swung again.
This time, left-wing leaders took power from right-wing incumbents in Argentina (again), Chile (again), and — for the first time — even Colombia.
In Brazil, meanwhile, left-wing former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva looks set to trounce the current far-right leader, Jair Bolsonaro, in October. In other words, the latest swing to the left is less “workers of the world unite” and more “throw the bums out!”
But these leaders are going to have a much harder time than left-wingers of the past. For one thing, today’s leaders can only dream of the economic situation that prevailed in the 2000s. Prices for the region’s commodities then were booming, China’s economy was roaring, and low-interest rates in the US were flooding the region with investor cash. With so much money in the pot, it was easy to unveil huge new social spending programs, like those Lula used to lift tens of millions of people out of poverty in Brazil.
Today things look very different. Although post-pandemic supply chain problems and the war in Ukraine have driven up prices for Latin America’s fossil fuels and agriculture commodities, inflation is still crushing household incomes. China’s economy is suffering a case of “slovid” (stunted growth amid COVID restrictions), while the US is raising interest rates and flirting with a recession. In other words, today’s left-wing leaders will have far less cash than their predecessors.
They’ll also have a lot less goodwill from their voters. As my fellow Signalista Willis Sparks put it, “anti-incumbency is great ... until you’re the incumbent."
With frustrations running high and cash running thin, the new generation of left-wing leaders will be on a short leash. You can already see that in Chile, where Gabriel Boric’s approval rating has plummeted since he took office; in Peru, where Pedro Castillo is about to be pushed from power altogether; and in Colombia, where experts say Gustavo Petro has mere months to prove his bonafides to an electorate impatient for change.
“We’re living in an era of extremely short honeymoon periods,” says Garman. With fickle voters, sparser finances, and a tougher economic situation overall, the new red tide could wash out just as fast as it rolled in.
Could that mean it’ll be colorín colorado (game over) for the region’s new pink tide before long?
Taiwan and US flags are placed for a meeting in Taipei.
What We’re Watching: Trading with Taiwan, Türkiye talk, battered Boric
Washington & Taipei launch new trade deal
The US and Taiwan just unveiled a new trade initiative to expand cooperation across a number of sectors, including agriculture, tech, and labor regulation, among others. Taipei sees the pact as a precursor to an eventual free trade deal. For Washington, this is the latest initiative to come from its strong Asia focus in recent weeks. Just days ago, President Joe Biden launched the Indo-Pacific Regional Framework, a trade deal with 13 states – including regional heavyweights India, Japan, Australia, South Korea, and some Pacific islands – in a bid to counter China’s regional clout. (Taiwan was not invited to that deal to avoid really irking Beijing.) The US wants to address technology trade with Taiwan, specifically semiconductor production. The self-governing island produces more than 90% of the world’s semiconductors, which power the device you’re reading this on and have been in short supply thanks to the pandemic’s distribution and production disruptions. Washington would love to help prop up Taiwan’s semiconductor industry to block China from getting a bigger piece of the global tech pie. Beijing, obviously not thrilled, called on Washington to “stop elevating relations with Taiwan,” which it sees as part of the mainland.
Time to talk Türkiye
Following a request by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s government, the United Nations agreed this week that, within the organization, the Republic of Turkey will now be known as “Türkiye.” According to Erdogan, the Turkish spelling offers “the best representation and expression of the Turkish people’s culture, civilization, and values.” It’s easy to dismiss this as a cynical political ploy to appeal to Turkish pride and to divert public attention, at least for a moment, from the country’s year-on-year inflation rate of 70% and the weakest currency in the emerging market world. Erdogan has an approval rating stuck between the high 30s and low 40s. On the other hand, why shouldn’t Turks be allowed to decide how they’re addressed by the rest of the world? Why should they be branded with an English word that identifies the country too often with one of the world’s most awkward-looking birds? As The Four Lads once warned us, “That’s nobody’s business but the Turks.” This change is sure to intensify the conflict between beleaguered Signal staffers still learning to write “Odesa” with one “s,” but hear this: we will never accept “Czechia” as the name of the Czech Republic. Never.
The (already) battered Boric presidency
Six months ago, the 36-year-old leftist former student leader Gabriel Boric swept to victory in Chile’s presidential election, clobbering his far-right opponent by 12 points with a promise to “bury” neoliberalism and tackle Chile’s extreme economic inequality. Inaugurated in March, the youthful, bearded Boric even made it onto Time’s list of the 100 most influential people of the year. Then the wheels came off. By late April, his approval rating had plunged to an abysmal 23%, in part because he reduced generous pandemic-era stimulus just as the economy worsened and inflation ticked up. He’s also mishandled rising violence in Southern Chile — one of his ministers was shot at during an early visit to the region. Meanwhile, the country’s new draft constitution — a product of the social upheavals that swept Boric into power — might not even be approved in a referendum this fall. Earlier this week, in his first State of the Union speech, Boric tried to reset a bit, pledging a new progressive tax reform, more investments in infrastructure, and a greater focus on security. But he faces a tough situation: lacking a majority in Congress, the relatively inexperienced Boric is under extreme pressure to navigate the demands and expectations of a deeply polarized society.
Why this COVID surge is different than 2020; behind Putin's threats
Ian Bremmer shares his insights on global politics this week on Omicron, Putin's antics, and Chile's millennial president.
With Omicron cases increasing, is December 2021 really any different than December 2020?
Of course, it's different. You know why it's different? Because so many more people are vaccinated and so many people have already gotten COVID, which means the likelihood that they're going to be severely hospitalized or die goes way, way down. So we should be worrying less individually about COVID even though the policy impact the shutdown impact for at least a few weeks is going to be very significant. And of course, if you haven't gotten your boosters, get those boosters. Of course if you're not vaccinated, I don't know what a booster's going to do for you. Why am I even telling you that?
Why is Putin threatening a military response to NATO?
Well, I mean, first of all, it's kind of what he does, right? I mean, it does sort of go with the job, when you interview for it you have to be willing to threaten a military response to NATO. Secondly, because he controls the media in Russia and they are trying to justify a escalated, recently escalated, military stance. As well as willing to take a more hawkish position against the Ukrainians. And that means you have to justify that NATO is doing stuff against you. And so they've been saying that NATOs sending sort of illicit forces in South Ukraine with chemical weapons capabilities. They're saying that genocide is being perpetrated by the Ukrainians against ethnic Russians. None of this is true, but if you're Russian and all you get for media is Russian state media you actually believe that war is being planned and it's coming from the West. And so in that regard, Putin's ginning up a lot of hostility. What he is going to do with it, of course, is a question for the next couple months. We will see. Certainly it seems like Putin is planning on escalating. I don't think that means invasion, but I do think it means activity against the Ukrainians. We will see what that means.
With Chile electing its youngest president ever, what's next for the country?
Well, I mean, they'll spend a lot more money and they will improve public services. It seemed, I mean, last week an election was hitting both the far left and the far right candidates were moderating their stances to get votes. And that appears to be consistent with the statements that this guy Boric has been making in the days since he's been elected. But this is a huge shift from the wealthiest of South American countries that had been very comfortable with center right policy orientations, it's also got much more unequal. And so this is big backlash and that's why they're redoing the constitution, which is also being controlled by leftist coalition, and it's who the next president is in Chile. So lots afoot in a country that's usually kind of boring and we like it that way.
What We're Watching: Gabriel Boric, new president of Chile
Boric wins in Chile. In the end, it wasn’t even close. Faced with two diametrically opposed choices for president in Sunday’s presidential runoff, more than 55 percent of Chilean voters went with leftwinger Gabriel Boric instead of his far-right opponent José Antonio Kast. The ten-point gap was so wide that Kast conceded before the count was even done. Boric, 35, now becomes the youngest president of any major nation in the world. Elected just two years after mass protests over inequality shook what was one of Latin America’s most reliably boring and prosperous countries, Boric has promised to raise taxes in order to boost social spending, nationalize the pension system, and expand rights indigenous Chileans. But with the country’s legislature evenly split between parties of the left and the center-right, the new president will likely have to compromise on his sweeping pledge to make Chile the land where neoliberalism “goes to its grave.”
Chile's President-elect Gabriel Boric celebrates with supporters after winning the presidential election in Santiago, Chile, December 19, 2021.
What We’re Watching: Chile’s new prez, Manchin sinks Biden’s agenda, Russian NATO wishlist, Australia vs China, Afghan trust fund
Boric wins in Chile. In the end, it wasn’t even close. Faced with two diametrically opposed choices for president in Sunday’s presidential runoff, more than 55 percent of Chilean voters went with leftwinger Gabriel Boric instead of his far-right opponent José Antonio Kast. The ten-point gap was so wide that Kast conceded before the count was even done. Boric, 35, now becomes the youngest president of any major nation in the world. Elected just two years after mass protests over inequality shook what was one of Latin America’s most reliably boring and prosperous countries, Boric has promised to raise taxes in order to boost social spending, nationalize the pension system, and expand the rights of indigenous Chileans. But with the country’s legislature evenly split between parties of the left and the center-right, the new president will likely have to compromise on his sweeping pledge to make Chile the land where neoliberalism “goes to its grave.”
Joe sinks Joe. It looks like US President Joe Biden has come to the end of the road with his $1.75 trillion Build Back Better Plan, now that Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) has announced flatly he’ll vote “no.” With the Senate split 50-50, Biden needs every Democrat vote in the chamber. The White House haggled with Manchin for months — “dancin’ for Manchin”, you might say. Biden even cut the proposed spending in half. But the moderate Manchin said he still “couldn’t get there” because of concerns about the deficit, and further stoking already high inflation. Republicans, of course, are ecstatic, because passing BBB is Biden's key pitch for Americans to vote for Democrats in next year's midterms and re-elect him (or another Democrat in his place) in 2024. It's not too late to reach a fresh compromise on the bill, but the longer the Dems keep squabbling, the longer their odds of retaining control of Congress next November.
Russia makes its demands. With 100,000 Russian troops at the Ukrainian border, Moscow released a bombshell list of demands for the “West” on Friday. Among other things, NATO must relinquish any right ever to expand further eastward, and must stop sending its troops or ships anywhere that could conceivably threaten Russia. What’s more, the Russians are impatient: they want the US to discuss these proposals right now. The US is happy to talk, but won’t give the Kremlin a veto over the choices that sovereign nations want to make about their own security alliances. The Ukrainians, naturally, agree, and on Monday President Volodymyr Zelenskiy will meet with his counterparts from Poland and Lithuania to emphasize the point. We’re watching to see what the US comes back with — one version of a maximalist response would look like this — and what, precisely, Russia is prepared to do if it doesn't like what it sees.
For Beijing, there is thunder Down Under. Tensions between Australia and China just keep rising. After China responded to Aussie requests for a COVID investigation by imposing devastating tariffs and unofficial bans on Australian exports in 2020, Oz is pushing back hard now. Canberra on Friday accused China of “economic coercion,” while cybersecurity officials publicly confirmed malicious attacks against Australia by Chinese spy services working with Chinese telecom giant Huawei. The Aussies also say Chinese intelligence vessels are snooping around in Australia’s Exclusive Economic Zone. These accompany several clearly pro-American moves this year: the Aussies have signed on to AUKUS, an exclusive military club with Washington and London that gives them access to unprecedented weapons tech, are allowing the buildup of US military infrastructure (read, bases) on its soil, and joined America in a diplomatic boycott of the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics. But the Australians are taking the tensions directly to China’s neighborhood, too. Canberra just signed a $770 million weapons deal with South Korea, including tech to build Howitzers — really, really big artillery guns. And even though the spat between the two continues, there is evidence that Australia, while heavily dependent on trade with China, is successfully pushing for diversity in trade partnerships.
An Islamic trust fund for Afghanistan. They didn’t officially recognize the Taliban government. They didn’t even allow the Taliban’s foreign minister to appear in the official group photograph. But foreign ministers from the 57-member Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the second-largest intergovernmental organization after the UN, met in Islamabad on Sunday and pledged to set up a trust fund to address the worsening humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan. Neither the exact amount of the fund nor the contributions by member countries was released, but may not match the $4.5 billion that the UN has appealed for aid to Afghanistan amid warnings that the Afghan economy is in a free-fall, with 23 million facing starvation. The lead organization of the fund will be the Islamic Development Bank, the OIC’s in-house global lender.