Recently a question of the form "Why is country X against project Y of country Z" was closed (and now deleted by its maker) as off topic as requiring non-public sources.
That we shouldn't guess is certainly true, but perhaps referencing the informed guesses of others wouldn't be wholly bad.
Now I'd not like this become a propaganda platform, and voting based on what viewpoint a voter promotes is an issue here, but I would think linking to professionals' interpretations of events or position changes would help make sense of the workings of politics.
Emerging issues may have less meaningful official statements and less studied unofficial analysis, but I would presume most issues that end up here have someone seriously looking at them, and quite possible publicly releasing their opinion hopefully with notes on how they came to those conclusions.
When a major player makes what is presumably a considered move some external evaluation of motives and potentials seems a reasonable way to proceed.
I'm slightly uncomfortable with this closure, but more I'm not clear how anything can be explained without using external views to guess motivations for actors who may not be trusted to self report.