The Red Folder

Archived from September 9, 2024.

Key stories for the week, brought to you by Lindsey Zhao and the Red Folder team.

Reading for the sake of reading sucks. Telling yourself to read to win a round is nice but ineffective. This condensed news brief helps you understand current domestic and international issues, analyze the news, and gives you opportunities to read more.

Publishing since January 2024.

Click here to test your knowledge of the stories covered this week with our weekly Extemp Questions!

International Stories

4 key international stories for the week:

1) Ukraine’s Cabinet Overhaul Lindsey Zhao

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has used martial law, enshrined in Ukraine’s constitution, to make any and all decisions he deems necessary to protect the country in wartime. The continuously extended declaration of martial law for the past two years has allowed him to institute curfews, confiscate property for state needs, and increase the quota for military mobilization. Being in a constant state of wartime also creates other unique circumstances- although President Zelenskyy’s five-year presidential term technically expired in May this year, Ukraine’s constitution requires him to stay in his post until “security conditions allow for elections to be held”. There are limited checks to the President’s power under martial law.

While these actions have been deemed necessary to keep Ukraine free from Russia, it is only natural that in any country that’s fighting for its democracy, even a hint of autocracy is closely scrutinized. So is the case now, with Ukraine’s recent decision to almost completely overhaul its Cabinet.

Throughout the war, President Zelenskyy has periodically sacked some of his most senior advisers, generals, and ministers, mostly for predictable reasons. He fired defense minister Oleksii Reznikov last May for corruption scandals and Ukraine’s popular top military commander, Valerii Zaluzhnyi, in February after repeated disagreements over military strategy. Although President Zelenskyy had mostly kept his senior government officials in place at the beginning of the war, he was known for frequently hiring and firing them before Russia’s invasion. His February firing of General Zaluzhnyi, along with a shakeup of other military commanders, was the first major reshuffle of top officials since the war had begun. Primarily, it was a reaction to Ukraine’s sluggish advance against Russian forces, something that may have turned around recently with Ukraine’s offensive into Kursk.

With international attention yet again on the Ukraine frontlines, President Zelenskyy has made a move people have expected for months: reshuffling his government yet again, this time with a focus on his Cabinet ministers. He has replaced his deputy Prime Minister for European Integration, Strategic Industries Minister, Justice Minister, Ecology Minister, and Foreign Minister, the last of whom has served since March 2020. Many of these officials offered their own resignations before they could be fired.

President Zelenskyy said in a nightly address that Ukraine needed ‘new energy’ to continue its fight against Russia. While no major policy changes was expected with the new Cabinet, his replacement of Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba was unexpected: he was one of the most well-known faces of Ukraine, helping advocate for humanitarian aid for Ukraine, pressing the US to allow Ukrainian strikes with Western weapons within Russia, and ensuring Ukraine doesn’t alienate Harris or Trump.

Many worry that these changes are “rash” and “ill-advised” as Ukraine hits a critical juncture in its war against Russia. Even worse, some worry that President Zelenskyy is consolidating power in the presidential office, especially with his appointment of ministers that are seen to be closer to his influential Chief of Staff, Andriy Yermak. Prior to Zelenskyy’s public announcement of his dismissals, many Parliament lawmakers hadn’t even heard about the reshuffling, demonstrating the reduced role Parliament has played in governing since the war began.

Others continue to defend Ukraine’s president, arguing the people have put their trust in him to rule under martial law and that bringing new people in on a regular basis brings motivation and new ideas to the table.

Ultimately, the question of democracy hangs over Ukrainians’ heads: it is a key factor in determining their chances at entering the EU, NATO, and continuing to secure military aid from other countries. Thus, any small whiff of an undemocratic government rightfully worries many Ukrainians.

Read More Here:

2) Ethiopia, Egypt, and Somalia’s Nile Standoff Justin Palazzolo

Ethiopia has always been a clear example of chaotic domestic politics. Abiy Ahmed, Ethiopia’s prime minister, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, and a man who once drew comparisons to Nelson Mandela and Mikhail Gorbachev, pushed Ethiopia into the Tigray civil war, gaining the nickname “bomber jacket Abiy”.

Unfortunately for Ethiopia and “bomber jacket Abiy”, they are facing a conflict involving not domestic actors but two entire nation-states.

Ethiopia is currently locked in a standoff with both Egypt and Somalia. The conflict started in 2011 when Ethiopia announced the construction of the Renaissance Dam. The project was an effort by Ethiopia to dam up the Blue Nile river, which originates at Lake Tana in Ethiopia. For a country where roughly half of the population lacks access to electricity, the dam could provide 5000 MW of electricity, and at its current half-operational state it is already accounting for 16 percent of the country’s power. Ethiopia is a nation that has seen its economy torn apart by war and drought, so the dam could possibly be one of the biggest and most transformative developments not just in Ethiopian history, but in modern African history.

For Egypt, however, the potential for growth Ethiopia faces presents as the exact opposite. Egypt is a nation where 95 percent of people live a few miles from the Nile and draws 90 percent of its water needs from the river. Due to rising temperatures combined with drought and erosion along the Mediterranean side of the Nile Delta, the Nile is shrinking. The UN is projecting ‘water scarcity’ in Egypt by 2025. Over decades, the UN has predicted a 75 percent water loss per inhabitant in the region, a statistic particularly threatening in Upper Egypt where 55% of jobs are related to Nile agriculture.

This crisis is especially troubling considering that Egypt would face an estimated median 31 billion cubic meter water deficit from the filling of the Dam reservoir, because 85 percent of the Nile’s flow originates from the Blue Nile tributary. For Egypt, the dam poses an existential threat to the future of their economy and society. For Ethiopia, the dam acts as a decade-long development that could provide electricity and growth to more than half the nation. Both countries have been unwilling to negotiate on the dam for these exact reasons, so talks chaired by South Africa and the United States failed to resolve any of the tension.

Though claims of a future water war have circulated since 2011’s construction announcement, it seems as though these projections might be becoming a reality now. Egypt recently signed a military cooperation treaty with Somalia allowing for the deployment of 10,000 troops and tons of munitions to Somalia, Ethiopia’s neighbor. Somalia likely signed this treaty in response to Ethiopia signing a treaty with Somaliland, a semi-autonomous region in Somalia, to recognize their independence and move Ethiopian troops in for port access. This move was seen as an invasion by the Somalian government and pushed tensions between the two nations.

This move opens up a potential front for a state-actor conflict between Ethiopia and Egypt. Egypt’s planned deployment of 10,000 men as well as heavy munitions indicates their military is gearing up for far more than dealing with Al-Shabaab and peacekeeping. Furthermore, the existing Ethiopian troop force in Somaliland could easily be a potential target for a conflict. The pullout of the African Union peacekeeping force in Somalia at the end of 2024 could act as a perfect opportunity for pressure to spiral and boil over. Ethiopia and Somalia are the two losers of a proxy war dynamic. Egypt would likely bring the war over the Ethiopian border to make the country feel domestic pressure regarding the Renaissance dam. Somalia, a nation with countless existing civil conflicts, a multi-year drought, and a war with Islamist group Al-Shabaab would be torn apart by a proxy war after a decade of destabilization and conflict.

Neville Chamberlain, a late British Prime Minister, once said, “In war, there are no winners”, words Ethiopia’s PM “bomber jacket Abiy” may have to wrestle with thanks to Egypt and the Renaissance dam.

Read More Here:

3) Pakistan Attacks Afghanistan (Again) Paul Robinson

With nearly a quarter billion citizens, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan comes fifth on the list of most populous countries. Take out the countries more stable than it, and Pakistan tops the list by a mile. The nation is extremely unstable domestically, as its politics are completely dysfunctional; the former prime minister and ex-cricket player Imran Khan is by far the most popular politician despite literally being in jail, the military-run government spends much of their time trying to keep him out of power, and the terrorist organization Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), the local branch of the Taliban, is literally trying to overthrow the government.

Many TPP fighters don’t actually hail from Pakistan; rather, they are nationals of Afghanistan, which is run by the Taliban, and have the mission of installing a similar government in Pakistan as already exists in Afghanistan. It’s not as if this is the only dispute between the two, though, as Pakistan is currently upset about the large number of migrants who attempt to enter from Afghanistan, and wants to send them back to Afghanistan, much to the chagrin of Western human rights groups.

Needless to say, Pakistan and its neighbor Afghanistan do not have a good relationship at all. On Saturday, these tensions escalated into all-out conflict. Afghanistan was trying to build a border check-post on their side, in violation of a previous international treaty which dictates that neither side can build on the border without the consent of the other.

It is quite possible, however, that Islamabad’s decision had little to do with the checkpoint. Rather, the government in Pakistan wants to stop Afghanistan from being able to destabilize their own nation by providing hideouts to TPP militants (many of whom are Afghan nationals). Islamabad wants to send a signal to the Taliban that any action by Kabul which led to a deterioration of Pakistani security would not be tolerated.

Skirmishes between Pakistan and Afghanistan are relatively common, and it is not the case that the recent action is unprecedented. Last March, Pakistan did much the same thing they are doing now for a very similar reason. These incidents are part of a larger conflict, as Pakistan becomes more unstable, the government is trying to do two things. First, they want to stop the direct impact which the TTP, and by extension Afghanistan, is having within their borders. Second, they want to send a message to the Pakistani people that the current government knows how to run things and can keep them safe.

Whether either of these goals will actually come to fruition is anyone’s best guess. Afghanistan is a deeply sectarian state, and it is unlikely that, if Kabul says to leave Pakistan alone, the entire Taliban leadership will do so. On the other hand, Afghanistani provinces near the border with Pakistan are being hurt the most by Pakistan, and may be the most likely to abide by Islamabad’s demands. Even if that is the case, getting all the leadership to comply will likely be impossible by any method other than a full-scale invasion across the entire border. Pakistan likely does not have the resources for that, and even if it did, the West has proved that controlling Afghanistan is no easy task. At the end of the day, Islamabad may be pursuing a solution that will never be effective, and will only serve to worsen conditions both within its borders and those of its neighbor.

Read more here:

4) Russian Misinformation Isn’t Real… RT? Boyana Nikolova

With a nearly century-long rivalry behind it, the US-Russia relationship has never really been the best example of how to maintain strong international relations. There is at least one positive coming from it, however: it’s educating Americans about serious problems.

The US Justice Department recently charged Russian state media company Russia Today, better known as RT, with alleged election interference and has claimed that they intentionally bolstered misinformation to deceive US citizens. Before understanding the motivation behind such a bold accusation, though, RT’s history of scandals will explain a lot more as to why they’re the DOJ’s current target.

In 2022, not long after the Russo-Ukrainian war’s beginning, RT began televising, publishing, and broadcasting massively pro-Russian talking points, disseminating these ideas abroad and concerning governments that a potential disinformation campaign could be at stake. In a matter of months, RT’s broadcasting license was being revoked in countries all over the globe, as far as including the UK and the US. But even without a television channel, RT’s millions-strong platform didn’t disappear overnight.

The media company’s handful of followers watched as even the European Union went on to impose sanctions against them, officially suspending their broadcasting ability in most European nations. To the shock of top-ranking officials and ordinary Europeans alike, the UK, US, and EU bans all failed to achieve the main goal they had set for themselves: decrease the accessibility of news outlets fuelling blatant propaganda.

Two years into each of these bans, RT can still be accessed via website or streaming service in nearly every corner of the internet-armed globe, not even requiring the use of a VPN or undetectable browser. With the content published by the outlet still so easy to find, this means that one of the West’s main counters to propaganda proliferation has failed. In 2024, that reminder has returned in the context of an upcoming US presidential election. The bright side is that it’s finally presented an opportunity for justified punishment by the US, executed by their very own Department of Justice.

So how and for what was RT exposed? A Russian-born man with US citizenship (who coincidentally worked for RT) was recently tied to a series of suspicious developments. Ever since July of 2022, Dmitri Simes received a shocking $1 million as a salary for his journalistic work, on top of a new car equipped with a personal driver. If that wasn’t shady enough, Simes was even politically involved, meaning money laundering was far from the worst crime on his list.

Simes was acquainted with an uncomfortably large part of former president Donald’s Trump social circle, even interacting with his son-in-law Jared Kushner. In letters exchanged between the two, Simes even outlined to Kushner the stance that would be most helpful for Trump to take on Russia, detailing what approaches would be necessary on Ukraine, Belarus, sanctions, and future diplomacy. Furthermore, when Simes’ own think tank facilitated a foreign policy speech done by Trump, who was naturally introduced by Simes himself, even more issues came to the limelight. The Russian ambassador to the US was specifically invited to be among the crowd and yet Simes is just now being revealed as the main suspect as to why.

This isn’t the only action the DOJ is taking, though. The department also accused RT of election interference by recruiting social media influencers and fraudulent online domains to trick US citizens into buying into election-related misinformation. The case currently stands at $10 million and has already been partially acted on. The US has seized 32 of the fake domains pretending to be reputable US news sources while also expanding its investigation into RT’s internal affairs.

In an election year as crucial as this one, the US has a job and it’s to secure a misinformation-free environment before Americans have to go to the polls completely deceived. Whether it begins by tightening the grip on state-owned media like RT or not, it’s clear that a movement to end election intervention among the federal government has been started. The only question is if it can finish before elections come around and it becomes too late.