Who’s in Charge of the IDF? | Why the South China Sea Matters, and more

Over the last six months, China has launched anti-dumping investigations into European pork and brandy, while Chinese state media reports have hinted that dairy products and other items might also be on the table. The Chinese Ministry of Commerce has made no explicit connection between the investigations and Europe’s EV restrictions, but trade experts say these are among the products China might target if it chooses to retaliate with its own tariffs in the coming months. 
The impending showdown is the latest front in a growing worldwide confrontation with China over its export of cheap clean energy products. The tide of exports, from solar panels to electric vehicles, has allowed countries to lower emissions at a discount, but at the same time, it has threatened domestic manufacturing from the United States to Germany and beyond. 
How China responds to the EU’s tariffs in the coming months will be an important indicator in its efforts to head off this wider barrage of trade challenges. China is trying to keep the EU, its second-largest trading partner, and other countries from following the protectionist path paved by the United States. 
China likely saw the United States as a “lost cause” when it came to responding to EV tariffs imposed by the Biden administration in May, said Gregor Sebastian, a senior analyst at Rhodium Group based in Berlin. But the EU has taken a more moderate approach, with the preliminary tariffs capped at 48 percent rather than the 100 percent set by the United States. China is still hopeful that it can maintain some market access in the EU, and it now has until November, when the tariffs are set to be finalized, to negotiate. 

Why the South China Sea Matters  (Wilson Beaver and Maria Victoria Almeida Vazquez, National Interest)
Clashes between the China Coast Guard and the Philippine Navy escalated in June. Philippine officials announced late last month that Chinese personnel attacked dinghies attempting to provision Philippine troops at the disputed Second Thomas Shoal in the South China Sea.
If China succeeded in dominating the South China Sea, the consequences would be immense: Beijing could potentially choke off trade and shipments to Japan, control access to technologies crucial to U.S. economic activities (especially microchips), and project power deep into the Pacific.
The economic significance of the South China Sea cannot be overstated. As one of the busiest maritime routes in the world, it serves as a vital artery for international trade, facilitating the flow of 64 percent of total goods discharged worldwide in 2022. Any disruption to the free passage of ships through these waters would have far-reaching consequences for the global economy, affecting not only the countries directly involved in the dispute but also the broader international community.
Any attempt by China to restrict access or assert control over the South China Sea would directly impact U.S. economic interests, potentially leading to higher shipping costs, supply chain disruptions, and increased market volatility. South China Sea trade accounts for 5.72 percent of all trade in goods for the United States. Safeguarding freedom of navigation in the South China Sea is essential to protecting American prosperity and maintaining its leadership role in the global economy.
While neighboring countries adhere to their internationally recognized Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) for their maritime claims, China asserts sovereignty over a broad swathe of ocean in the South China Sea encompassed by the “nine-dash line.” In 2016, an international tribunal in The Hague ruled against China’s claims, stating that it cannot claim rights to resources in the South China Sea that lie within the EEZs of other coastal states like the Philippines and Vietnam. China rejected the ruling and promptly threatened military force against Vietnam for drilling within its EEZ.

Will Botched State Department Diplomacy Lead to a Third Congo War?  (Michael Rubin, National Interest)
The deadliest conflict of the twenty-first century has not been in Ukraine, Gaza, Libya, Afghanistan, or Sudan but rather in the Democratic Republic of Congo. By some estimates, the Second Congo War (1998-2003) caused more than 350,000 violent deaths and upwards of five million excess civilian deaths. Even if the real number is only half that much, as some suggest, the sum of deaths is still an order of magnitude greater than the 2003–2005 Darfur slaughter. Today, State Department and UN policies fan the flames of conflict and threaten to reignite war.