[JumpCrisscross]

> 2019 is a good example of UAE using it's heft

This is not projecting power, it's the UAE (and Qatar) playing their aspirational roles as the new Davos/Switzerland for diplomacy.

Pakistan is definitely more anti-peace than India. But while Islamabad undermines peace, New Delhi is mostly uninterested in it.

[alephnerd]

> Pakistan is definitely more anti-peace than India. But while Islamabad undermines peace, New Delhi is mostly uninterested in it.

That's a framing I agree with.

> This is not projecting power, it's the UAE (and Qatar) playing their aspirational roles as the new Davos/Switzerland for diplomacy.

Sure, but in India-Pakistan relations, they (UAE and KSA, not Qatar) are increasingly the only mediators with whom both parties can negotiate offramps.

Large pole countries don't have the same heft they may have had 15-20 years ago, and even the Russian-Ukraine War has shown that power differentials are not that significant between major powers and regional powers, and why multilateralism is critical (and a major reason I dislike Trump - I primarily only agree with his tariff policy, nothing else).

[JumpCrisscross]

> in India-Pakistan relations, they (UAE and KSA, not Qatar) are increasingly the only mediators with whom both parties can negotiate offramps

Only the most minor ones. Anything significant requires an outside security guarantar.

> Large pole countries don't have the same heft they may have had 15-20 years ago, and even the Russian-Ukraine War has shown that power differentials are not that significant between major powers and regional powers

Russia was trying to replicate America's offensive successes in Afghanistan and Iraq. (What Devereaux calls the modern system [1].) Moscow couldn't even achieve air superiority. (America got supremacy in hours.) Russia's invasion of Ukraine showed that Russia isn't operating a modern, combined-arms military.

Great powers have always overestimated their power. That doesn't mean it's not there at all.

[1] https://acoup.blog/2020/03/20/collections-why-dont-we-use-ch...

[cheema33]

> I dislike Trump - I primarily only agree with his tariff policy, nothing else.

Just out of curiosity, what about this tariff policy do you like?

[alephnerd]

We spent several billions of dollars rebuilding a supply chain in automotive, energy, and semiconductor inputs (not just chips but the associated materials, processing, and gases used in fabrication) via the IRA, IILA, and CHIPS Act.

We need to incentivize American manufacturers to utilize that supply chain instead of co-mingling foreign inputs in an attempt to maximize margins while having taken advantage of the tax and cash incentives used when availing the aforementioned benefits during the Biden admin.

Tariffs are the easiest way to allow the American ecosystem to actually redevelop and stick, instead if wisping away due to malicious compliance. The Biden admin even considered adding similar barriers, but decided against it because they didn't want to risk a protracted trade war during a competitive election cycle.

Furthermore, most consumer goods and a number of industrial goods that would hurt the "average American's" pocketbook have alternative supply chains like Philippines, Brazil, Turkiye, India, Mexico etc that have now been made cost competitive compared to Chinese inputs.

[cheema33]

You are suggesting that we should artificially raise prices of things to allow local industries to build and grow?

You are entitled to your opinion and I will disagree with it. This strategy will not work. People do not want to pay higher prices and will build system that work around the artificial barriers. People will even pay the 30% of so tariffs that are currently in place on China than to build the same products here. It is cheaper that way.

Also, it takes many years to build the infrastructure to build the stuff you are trying to in-source. Tariff policy changes by the month if not sooner. Investors are not lining up to build factories in the US.