weighs

Feb. 19 (UPI) — The United States has put military forces in place in the Middle East for a potential strike on Iran but President Donald Trump has not decided whether to attack or continue negotiations on Thursday.

A strike could occur as early as this weekend, with naval and air forces quickly coming into place. National security officials met in the Situation Room on Wednesday to discuss courses of action against Iran.

U.S. armed forces have been assembling in the Middle East in recent weeks as the United States and Iran have negotiated a scaling back of Iran’s nuclear program. The latest conversations took place in Geneva on Tuesday, sans Trump who said he would be involved “indirectly.”

The negotiations between the United States and Iran ended without a resolution on Tuesday. Trump has called for Iran to end its nuclear program.

Iranian officials said they agreed with U.S. negotiators on a “set of guiding principles.” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said to expect more details about these negotiations to come forward in the weeks to come. She did not say whether Trump would take action before that happens.

“I’m not going to set deadlines on behalf of the president of the United States,” she said.

In recent weeks, the United States has moved warships to the Indian Ocean while Trump warned Iran over the killings and detainments of thousands of protesters against the Iranian regime.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has an interest in Iran drawing down its missile capabilities as well. Israeli forces have been on alert over the possibility of an open conflict as tensions have continued to heighten.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio is slated to meet with Netanyahu in Israel on Feb. 28, to provide an update on the negotiations with Iran.

The United States launched strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities in June, causing what Iranian officials called “serious and significant damage.”

Feb. 18 (Asia Today) — South Korea faces mounting strategic pressure as rivalry between the United States and China intensifies across the Indo-Pacific, raising questions about how Seoul should balance its security alliance with Washington and its economic ties with Beijing.

Analysts say the regional balance of power is entering a new phase. U.S. carrier strike groups continue to patrol the Western Pacific and longstanding alliances remain intact. Yet some experts argue Washington’s long-term strategy integrating economic, diplomatic and industrial policy lacks consistency.

In the March-April issue of Foreign Affairs, U.S. Indo-Pacific strategist Jack Cooper wrote that while American military power remains strong, its broader strategic integration has weakened. In an article titled “Asia After America,” he argued that policy shifts between administrations and the U.S. withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership have left gaps in regional economic leadership.

Cooper said the issue is not U.S. withdrawal but uncertainty over long-term strategic continuity. For allies, he wrote, the question is who shapes the regional order beyond crisis intervention.

Meanwhile, China has continued expanding its footprint through militarization of artificial islands in the South China Sea and sustained military activity near Taiwan. Beijing is also deepening regional economic integration through the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership and the Belt and Road Initiative, often referred to as the New Silk Road.

South Korea sits at the center of these tensions. Its security rests on its alliance with the United States, while China remains its largest trading partner. Key sectors such as semiconductors, batteries and artificial intelligence are directly exposed to U.S.-China competition.

Jung Seong-jang, vice president of the Sejong Institute, said in an interview that a Taiwan contingency could directly affect South Korea by disrupting critical sea lanes of communication.

A 2023 report by the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy found that 33.27% of South Korea’s maritime trade passes through or near the Taiwan Strait. The institute estimated that disruption of major shipping routes in the area could cause economic losses of about 445.2 billion won ($334 million) per day, based on current exchange rates.

Jung cautioned that direct South Korean military involvement in protecting sea lanes could heighten tensions with China, while North Korea might exploit regional instability to escalate provocations.

Joo Eun-sik, head of the Korea Institute for Strategic Studies, outlined several policy recommendations.

First, he called for deeper integration of the U.S.-South Korea alliance, including coordinated planning in maritime security, missile defense, space and cyber domains to strengthen deterrence against so-called gray-zone threats.

Second, he urged a combined economic and security strategy, strengthening supply chain cooperation and expanding investment in strategic technologies. He said South Korea’s defense industry should function not only as an export sector but as part of a broader strategic network.

Third, he emphasized maritime capabilities, describing sea routes from the Strait of Malacca through the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait as vital to South Korea’s economy. Expanding blue-water naval operations, submarine forces, maritime patrol and unmanned systems, he said, is essential.

Finally, he highlighted the need to build strategic autonomy within the alliance framework by investing in independent intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities, space monitoring systems and layered missile defense.

Analysts say the Indo-Pacific order remains unsettled. Whether South Korea becomes a passive bystander or an active architect of its own strategy may depend on how effectively it integrates security, industry and technology into a coherent national plan.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260218010005435

Feb. 17 (UPI) — Peru’s Congress convened Tuesday in an extraordinary session to debate seven censure motions against interim President Jose Jeri — a move that could remove him from office less than two months before general elections and deepen the country’s ongoing political instability.

Jeri, who also serves as head of Congress, would automatically lose the presidency if lawmakers vote to oust him from that parliamentary post. He has denounced what he calls a plot against him and an intention by enemies to destabilize the country.

Jeri assumed the presidency in October after the removal of Dina Boluarte. However, investigations into Jeri’s conduct and declining public support have weakened his political standing, according to local newspaper La Republica.

According to local media reports, the current crisis escalated after reports that the president held unregistered meetings, not listed on his official agenda, with two controversial Chinese businessmen.

One reportedly holds multimillion-dollar state contracts and has been linked to construction firms accused of securing public works through bribes. The other has faced legal proceedings for trafficking illegal timber from the Amazon region.

Prosecutors have also opened a preliminary investigation into alleged influence peddling involving the hiring of nine young women in public institutions after meetings with Jeri at the presidential palace.

Those allegations enabled opposition lawmakers to gather 78 signatures to present a censure motion against him as congressional president — a step that would automatically remove him from the presidency.

Under congressional rules, a simple majority is required to approve the censure motion, RPP Noticias reported.

Peru has experienced marked political volatility over the past decade. Six recent presidents have faced removal proceedings or imprisonment, reflecting a pattern of institutional instability.

Analysts often cite the repeated use of constitutional mechanisms such as presidential vacancy on grounds of “moral incapacity” and censure votes against congressional leadership, factors that have made the presidency unusually fragile.

Political calculations ahead of Tuesday’s vote suggest limited support for the 39-year-old president. Most political blocs have expressed opposition to him continuing in office, with the exception of Fuerza Popular, the party associated with right-wing presidential candidate Keiko Fujimori.

Peru’s fragmented Congress includes about a dozen political blocs whose members frequently split during votes, leading analysts to caution that the outcome remains uncertain.

Jeri’s party, Somos Peru, is expected to attempt a procedural delay by requesting a constitutional review on whether a censure motion applies to an interim president. According to El Comercio newspaper, the Constitutional Commission could take about two weeks to issue an opinion, which might give Jeri time to secure additional political backing.

If Jeri is removed, Congress would elect a successor from among its members. That person would become Peru’s eighth president in a decade and oversee the transition toward general elections scheduled for April.

Feb. 9 (Asia Today) — A power struggle over nomination authority within South Korea’s conservative People Power Party intensified Monday as Seoul party chair Bae Hyun-jin faced possible disciplinary action ahead of the June 3 local elections.

Tensions escalated after the party’s central ethics committee initiated disciplinary proceedings against Bae, while the Seoul city party’s ethics body launched a separate case involving a conservative YouTuber. The parallel moves have fueled an open clash between the party leadership faction and lawmakers aligned with former leader Han Dong-hoon.

Senior vice chairpersons of the Seoul party rejected the central committee’s action, warning against undermining a city chair elected by delegates across Seoul. They denied allegations that Bae led a signature campaign opposing Han’s expulsion from the party.

Those accusations were raised by Lee Sang-gyu, who filed the ethics complaint against Bae. He dismissed the denials as false, accusing critics of trying to shield what he described as undemocratic procedures and abuse of authority.

Local media reported that Bae confronted party leader Jang Dong-hyuk during a National Assembly session, pressing him on whether the central ethics committee’s intervention reflected his intent and asking whether he supported suspending her duties as Seoul party chair.

The dispute has raised speculation that severe disciplinary action against Bae could reshape the party’s nomination landscape ahead of the local elections, turning the ethics process into a broader struggle for control. Some party officials, however, suggested the leadership may seek to de-escalate.

Jang Ye-chan, a deputy director at the party-affiliated Yeouido Research Institute, said prolonged disciplinary proceedings would only increase the leadership’s burden. He predicted the leadership would avoid sanctioning Bae and instead pivot toward a message of unity and reform.

A Seoul party official offered a contrasting view, saying disciplinary action was likely. The official alleged Bae pressured party members by leveraging nomination authority ahead of the local elections and said internal discord had grown within the city party organization.

Separately, the People Power Party confirmed the expulsion of former supreme council member Kim Jong-hyuk, a figure associated with the pro-Han faction. The central ethics committee had issued a recommendation last month urging him to leave the party, triggering automatic expulsion under party rules. Kim said he would pursue legal action against the party leadership and the ethics committee.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260210010003400