Putin is "thinking about running for re-election".
This is almost comical. He discusses a few issues, including the train bombing and the WTO, during a "live" Q&A session.
Article.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Pakistan's Navy HQ Tagged by Suicide Bomber
here
Surprising last paragraph, added it seems as an afterthought:
"On Tuesday, a provincial politician was killed in a suicide attack in the Swat valley as the army continued its offensive against the Taliban."
This makes me wonder if the Taliban is finally starting to begin to target local "collaborators" instead of limiting themselves to attacking Punjabi-dominated cabals within the Pakistani government.
More about the murdered politician here
Surprising last paragraph, added it seems as an afterthought:
"On Tuesday, a provincial politician was killed in a suicide attack in the Swat valley as the army continued its offensive against the Taliban."
This makes me wonder if the Taliban is finally starting to begin to target local "collaborators" instead of limiting themselves to attacking Punjabi-dominated cabals within the Pakistani government.
More about the murdered politician here
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Outsmart at the dinner table
Does anyone else have the problem of a belligerent family member that always gets you riled up over the holidays? Well Foreign Policy has come to the rescue with a guide to policy questions that you might be attacked on over a nice dinner.
Most of it is pretty good but the section on health care reform leaves a bit to be desired. I think they should probably stick to foreign policy....
Most of it is pretty good but the section on health care reform leaves a bit to be desired. I think they should probably stick to foreign policy....
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
"The notion that we must be adversaries is not predestined. ...Given that interconnection, power in the 21st century is no longer a zero-sum game. One country's success need not come at the expense of another. And that is why the United States insists we do not seek to contain China's rise. On the contrary we welcome China as a strong and prosperous and successful member of the community of nations."
Monday, November 16, 2009
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Taliban/Al-Qaida Power Flip in Afghanistan
The most interesting thing:
Muhammad Omar (I hesitate to call him a mullah) promised the following:
"We assure all countries that the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, as a responsible force, will not extend its hand to cause jeopardy to others"
In other words, he strictly removes himself and his movement from a jihadi movement, and is essentially playing to the popular mood in Afghanistan, namely "We want our country back."
With the way Dear Leader has been conducting himself and the war effort lately, he seems likely to strike a chord.
Muhammad Omar (I hesitate to call him a mullah) promised the following:
"We assure all countries that the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, as a responsible force, will not extend its hand to cause jeopardy to others"
In other words, he strictly removes himself and his movement from a jihadi movement, and is essentially playing to the popular mood in Afghanistan, namely "We want our country back."
With the way Dear Leader has been conducting himself and the war effort lately, he seems likely to strike a chord.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Small Examples of Moving Forward
So I know this doesn't directly relate (although relevant) to our topics, but it is a long-term interest of mine. The New York Times had an article today on Iraq's first Elite Corps of female police officers.
For those of you who have explored post-conflict reconstruction, one of the most critical components is how the country constructs its security sector (police, military, etc.) Often, it is these institutions that were at the forefront of the abuses that occurred during the conflict. For conflicts defined by sectarian divisions, deciding which side gets the guns is particularly critical, and can make or break peace agreements (example: Zimbabwe's civil war). Further, how security sector reform is implemented has long-term impact on how social and political factors are shaped post-conflict: when you can keep the peace effectively (and appropriately), there is a great chance that countries plagued with conflict will not devolve back into it, or so the standard literature goes.
Interestingly, successful cases of security sector reform, such as South Africa, have been pointed to as strong examples of the importance of integrating women into security forces. As the article above mentions, there are huge benefits, particularly in developing world cultures, such as being able to work with children and women in a different capacity. While this includes having women not only in security forces but in decision-making positions on security related issues--it is also associated with advancing social goals, that a man's world in these post-conflict countries can be penetrated by women, an often marginalized group in this area.
Anyway, just food for thought on post-conflict SSR in general, and also for how the United States continues its efforts with the provincial reconstruction teams in Iraq and Afghanistan and training police and military.
For those of you who have explored post-conflict reconstruction, one of the most critical components is how the country constructs its security sector (police, military, etc.) Often, it is these institutions that were at the forefront of the abuses that occurred during the conflict. For conflicts defined by sectarian divisions, deciding which side gets the guns is particularly critical, and can make or break peace agreements (example: Zimbabwe's civil war). Further, how security sector reform is implemented has long-term impact on how social and political factors are shaped post-conflict: when you can keep the peace effectively (and appropriately), there is a great chance that countries plagued with conflict will not devolve back into it, or so the standard literature goes.
Interestingly, successful cases of security sector reform, such as South Africa, have been pointed to as strong examples of the importance of integrating women into security forces. As the article above mentions, there are huge benefits, particularly in developing world cultures, such as being able to work with children and women in a different capacity. While this includes having women not only in security forces but in decision-making positions on security related issues--it is also associated with advancing social goals, that a man's world in these post-conflict countries can be penetrated by women, an often marginalized group in this area.
Anyway, just food for thought on post-conflict SSR in general, and also for how the United States continues its efforts with the provincial reconstruction teams in Iraq and Afghanistan and training police and military.
Russia and the GDR
I was sorry to miss the Russia presentation on Sunday, considering its perfect timing with the 20th Anniversary of the Fall of the Berlin Wall.
Last night I participated in a celebration with the German Department, where we had a panel of guests from Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic and other nations on both sides of the former Iron Curtain.
After listening to these speakers, it is really just unbelievable how much everything has changed. In middle of the 20th Century, the Soviet Union violently quelled many uprisings in Eastern Europe. Yet on November 9, 1989, not a single shot was fired.
Much credit is given to Gorbachev's glasnost and perestroika. In fact, in the 80s, the Soviet Union grew to be much more liberal and forgiving than the GDR State. When Gorbachev visited the GDR earlier in '89, the people chanted, "Gorbi! Gorbi!" Gorbachev himself was unwilling to back Honecker's hard-line policies.
And so we saw a peaceful revolution in East Germany. But I think that had much more to do with the struggles and sacrifices of the people over the course of 50 years, rather than the policies of Gorbachev.
I guess I am just rambling on about history, but as a German major, I love this stuff. Sure, Russia still has major issues, but the changes that have happened there in the past 20 years are incredibly remarkable. Hooray for democracy.
Last night I participated in a celebration with the German Department, where we had a panel of guests from Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic and other nations on both sides of the former Iron Curtain.
After listening to these speakers, it is really just unbelievable how much everything has changed. In middle of the 20th Century, the Soviet Union violently quelled many uprisings in Eastern Europe. Yet on November 9, 1989, not a single shot was fired.
Much credit is given to Gorbachev's glasnost and perestroika. In fact, in the 80s, the Soviet Union grew to be much more liberal and forgiving than the GDR State. When Gorbachev visited the GDR earlier in '89, the people chanted, "Gorbi! Gorbi!" Gorbachev himself was unwilling to back Honecker's hard-line policies.
And so we saw a peaceful revolution in East Germany. But I think that had much more to do with the struggles and sacrifices of the people over the course of 50 years, rather than the policies of Gorbachev.
I guess I am just rambling on about history, but as a German major, I love this stuff. Sure, Russia still has major issues, but the changes that have happened there in the past 20 years are incredibly remarkable. Hooray for democracy.
Monday, November 9, 2009
More walls, more falls?
BBC's special report on the walls that still stand.
How do y'all feel about the wall between the US and Mexico? As students of international relations, I feel that we have a different, more in depth understanding of the factors that go into these walls that still exist... I spoke to a few co-workers at RHRC about the US-Mexico wall and they ALL replied with "but of course, without that wall, how would we keep them out?"
Just food for thought...
How do y'all feel about the wall between the US and Mexico? As students of international relations, I feel that we have a different, more in depth understanding of the factors that go into these walls that still exist... I spoke to a few co-workers at RHRC about the US-Mexico wall and they ALL replied with "but of course, without that wall, how would we keep them out?"
Just food for thought...
The Berlin Wall fell... but there are still more.
So today is the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. Go on any news website and they have a plethora of pics from all over Europe. Huzzah!
While I'm happy for Berlin/Germany/Europe, this made me think of is this exhibit that the ICRC put on last fall. I had the opportunity to see it, and was amazed at how much I learned. They created a maze-like exhibit and all pictures and such were placed on walls. Take a look, and maybe you'll be inspired to look up more info about the highlighted walls/conflicts.
While I'm happy for Berlin/Germany/Europe, this made me think of is this exhibit that the ICRC put on last fall. I had the opportunity to see it, and was amazed at how much I learned. They created a maze-like exhibit and all pictures and such were placed on walls. Take a look, and maybe you'll be inspired to look up more info about the highlighted walls/conflicts.
Communist One-Two
Hitchens: Let's Not Get Sentimental About Communism
Thesis Paragraph:
This 20th anniversary has seen yet another crop of boring articles about how so many people, especially in former East Germany, are supposedly "nostalgic" for the security of the old Stalinist system. Such sentimental piffle—which got a good airing in that irritating movie Good Bye Lenin!—would not long survive a reading of another new book: Revolution 1989: The Fall of the Soviet Empire, by Victor Sebestyen. Making effective use of archives opened since the collapse of the Berlin Wall, Sebestyen describes the day in late October 1989 when the head of State Planning in the German Democratic Republic, Gerhard Schürer, presented the party leadership with the unvarnished economic news. "Nearly 60 per cent of East Germany's entire economic base could be written off as scrap, and productivity in mines and factories was nearly 50 per cent behind the West." Even more appalling was the 12-fold increase in the GDR's national debt—a situation so grotesque that it had been classified as a state secret lest loans from Western creditors dry up. "Just to avoid further indebtedness," wrote Schürer, "would mean a lowering next year of living standards by 25 to 30 per cent, and make the GDR ungovernable." So the wall came down just before the hermetic state that it enclosed would have imploded. I doubt that there would have been much "nostalgia" for that.
Applebaum: Did Anti-Communists Really End Communism?
Thesis Paragraph:
Everything comes around again, in the end; every debate needs to be held twice. For the past few years, the Russians have been conducting an extraordinary national argument about whether Stalin was bad, a question one would have thought was settled long ago. And now, to celebrate the 20thanniversary of 1989, we have two books, both by eminent historians, both seeking to start an argument about whether there was an anti-Communist opposition in Central Europe. In Uncivil Society Stephen Kotkin, a Soviet historian at Princeton, makes an unusually strident version of the case that there was not. Konstantin Pleshakov, a Soviet historian at Mount Holyoke, presents a milder and more complicated version in There Is No Freedom Without Bread.
Thesis Paragraph:
This 20th anniversary has seen yet another crop of boring articles about how so many people, especially in former East Germany, are supposedly "nostalgic" for the security of the old Stalinist system. Such sentimental piffle—which got a good airing in that irritating movie Good Bye Lenin!—would not long survive a reading of another new book: Revolution 1989: The Fall of the Soviet Empire, by Victor Sebestyen. Making effective use of archives opened since the collapse of the Berlin Wall, Sebestyen describes the day in late October 1989 when the head of State Planning in the German Democratic Republic, Gerhard Schürer, presented the party leadership with the unvarnished economic news. "Nearly 60 per cent of East Germany's entire economic base could be written off as scrap, and productivity in mines and factories was nearly 50 per cent behind the West." Even more appalling was the 12-fold increase in the GDR's national debt—a situation so grotesque that it had been classified as a state secret lest loans from Western creditors dry up. "Just to avoid further indebtedness," wrote Schürer, "would mean a lowering next year of living standards by 25 to 30 per cent, and make the GDR ungovernable." So the wall came down just before the hermetic state that it enclosed would have imploded. I doubt that there would have been much "nostalgia" for that.
Applebaum: Did Anti-Communists Really End Communism?
Thesis Paragraph:
Everything comes around again, in the end; every debate needs to be held twice. For the past few years, the Russians have been conducting an extraordinary national argument about whether Stalin was bad, a question one would have thought was settled long ago. And now, to celebrate the 20thanniversary of 1989, we have two books, both by eminent historians, both seeking to start an argument about whether there was an anti-Communist opposition in Central Europe. In Uncivil Society Stephen Kotkin, a Soviet historian at Princeton, makes an unusually strident version of the case that there was not. Konstantin Pleshakov, a Soviet historian at Mount Holyoke, presents a milder and more complicated version in There Is No Freedom Without Bread.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Obama's Report Card
A NY Times article from today celebrating/scoring Obama's election anniversary.
Skip down to the Nukes bit... I think (opinion, opinion!)... that this bit: "President Obama came into office with a plan to move toward zero American nuclear weapons – as long as he can persuade the rest of the world to move with him..." is ridiculous. Call me a bit of a realist, but why would anyone, ANYONE ever get rid of their nukes? Does anyone actually think this is a good idea? Also, could this platform have influenced the actions of the Iranis and North Koreans these past few months? Both have stepped up their nuclear activity; is this because they think they can get away with it with Obama? Scary.
Skip down to the Nukes bit... I think (opinion, opinion!)... that this bit: "President Obama came into office with a plan to move toward zero American nuclear weapons – as long as he can persuade the rest of the world to move with him..." is ridiculous. Call me a bit of a realist, but why would anyone, ANYONE ever get rid of their nukes? Does anyone actually think this is a good idea? Also, could this platform have influenced the actions of the Iranis and North Koreans these past few months? Both have stepped up their nuclear activity; is this because they think they can get away with it with Obama? Scary.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Monday, November 2, 2009
The U.N.'s Shameful Complicity in this Year's Corrupt Afghan Elections
An excellently opinionated article with which (witness TJ and Angela!) I completely agree.
By Christopher Hitchens.
Brilliant concluding quote:
"...but there is one thing that did disfigure South Vietnam and is essential to avoid in any case: the commitment of American forces to a government that contrives to be both enriched and bankrupt at the same time and makes its own people want to spit."
By Christopher Hitchens.
Brilliant concluding quote:
"...but there is one thing that did disfigure South Vietnam and is essential to avoid in any case: the commitment of American forces to a government that contrives to be both enriched and bankrupt at the same time and makes its own people want to spit."
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Challenge
I challenge you people (YOU PEOPLE!) to convince me of the following:
The United States has a responsibility to commit manpower to peacekeeping efforts worldwide, regardless of whether or not it precipitated the non-peaceful conditions to begin with.
I offer the following statements (without proof) for my argument to the contrary:
1) Any peacekeeping efforts by the U.S. would need to be paid for
2) Only U.S. taxpayers or semipermanent consumers can pay for sustained U.S. peacekeeping efforts
3) The only responsibilities the U.S. governing apparatus inherently has are to its taxpayers or semipermanent consumers.
4) If the U.S. governing apparatus precipitates any non-peaceful conditions, it adds to that list of responsibilities.
5) Otherwise, it doesn't.
6) If the U.S. government indeed commits manpower to peacekeeping efforts, the need of which it did not precipitate, such commitment is extraneous and ancillary to its real responsibilities.
7) I am awesome, and therefore am correct.
Kidding. But for real, 1-6.
Done.
The United States has a responsibility to commit manpower to peacekeeping efforts worldwide, regardless of whether or not it precipitated the non-peaceful conditions to begin with.
I offer the following statements (without proof) for my argument to the contrary:
1) Any peacekeeping efforts by the U.S. would need to be paid for
2) Only U.S. taxpayers or semipermanent consumers can pay for sustained U.S. peacekeeping efforts
3) The only responsibilities the U.S. governing apparatus inherently has are to its taxpayers or semipermanent consumers.
4) If the U.S. governing apparatus precipitates any non-peaceful conditions, it adds to that list of responsibilities.
5) Otherwise, it doesn't.
6) If the U.S. government indeed commits manpower to peacekeeping efforts, the need of which it did not precipitate, such commitment is extraneous and ancillary to its real responsibilities.
7) I am awesome, and therefore am correct.
Kidding. But for real, 1-6.
Done.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Thursday, October 29, 2009
"Why Pakistani Women are Coming to the U.S. to Give Birth"
Details the interesting, and oft-harrowing process of squeezing the kid out in the U.S. as opposed to Pakistan.
Fascinating.
Fascinating.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Belated response to Preventing Genocide
Of all the articles assigned, I found the Economist article the most interesting. It also raised many questions that I had also thought of when I first heard of R2P - including the possibility that countries such as the U.S. could use R2P as an excuse to intervene in other countries. Humanitarian intervention has been perverted to such a point, and R2P stands to be used in similar manners.
How does one further define R2P without becoming to explicit? The "delicate" terms that were put forth by Gareth Evans and others are delicate because they are also very vague - when is it ok to intervene? When a certain amount of people have died? Before people are killed? There are too many variables here to set one answer to the equation. There are no guidelines to when an intervention is needed, but there is little doubt after the fact when one was called for. Rwanda? Yes. The former Yugoslavia? Yes. Name countless others, and yes, there should have been something done. But by who?
One final question, in a post filled with questions, is towards the title "Right" to protect. Whose rights are we protecting through this measure?
How does one further define R2P without becoming to explicit? The "delicate" terms that were put forth by Gareth Evans and others are delicate because they are also very vague - when is it ok to intervene? When a certain amount of people have died? Before people are killed? There are too many variables here to set one answer to the equation. There are no guidelines to when an intervention is needed, but there is little doubt after the fact when one was called for. Rwanda? Yes. The former Yugoslavia? Yes. Name countless others, and yes, there should have been something done. But by who?
One final question, in a post filled with questions, is towards the title "Right" to protect. Whose rights are we protecting through this measure?
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Balmy relations between China and NK
Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's recent visit to North Korea, replete with an alarmingly intimate embrace with Dear Leader Kim Jong Il, signals warming relations between China and the North. The implications for China-North Korea trade are clear, but the implications for U.S.-China security can only be speculated upon.
Friday, October 23, 2009
AfPakIn?
Indian Ambassador to the UN Hardeep Puri has qualms about "enlarging the canvass" to include India in Afghan-Pakistani relations.
Monday, October 19, 2009
"Why on Earth Would We Wait to Disarm Iran?"
Hitchens' thesis paragraph, as nearly as I can pin it, is the following:
"I have never been present for any discussion of any measures that could even thinkably be taken against Tehran that does not focus obsessively and exclusively on the possibly calamitous outcomes. Israel hits Iran and—well, you fill in the rest. The target sites are, anyway, too much dispersed and too deeply buried. You know how it goes. Apparently, nothing can be done that does not make a bad situation worse. It is as if there could be a worse outcome than the nuclear armament of a lawless messianic state that tore up every agreement it signed even as it bought further time while signing it."
The rest is a very worthwhile read.
"I have never been present for any discussion of any measures that could even thinkably be taken against Tehran that does not focus obsessively and exclusively on the possibly calamitous outcomes. Israel hits Iran and—well, you fill in the rest. The target sites are, anyway, too much dispersed and too deeply buried. You know how it goes. Apparently, nothing can be done that does not make a bad situation worse. It is as if there could be a worse outcome than the nuclear armament of a lawless messianic state that tore up every agreement it signed even as it bought further time while signing it."
The rest is a very worthwhile read.
African "Good Governance Prize" Not Awarded This Year
Maybe I'm really cynical, but I find it really amusing that there is a prize for African leaders whose requirements are spelled out in the article as follows:
"Now in its third year, the prize is given to a democratically elected leader from sub-Saharan Africa who has served their term and then left office."
And guess what? The committee didn't think anyone this year was qualified enough.
Article.
"Now in its third year, the prize is given to a democratically elected leader from sub-Saharan Africa who has served their term and then left office."
And guess what? The committee didn't think anyone this year was qualified enough.
Article.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Article on Afghanistan
Article Here
This is a good article about the current debate in the White House on Strategy in Afghanistan.
Maldives and Climate Change
Article.
The Maldives government, in an attempt to draw attention to climate change problems, held a cabinet meeting in scuba gear at the bottom of a lake. The Maldives are among the lowest countries on Earth, and may be submerged from global warming within our lifetime. The Cabinet signed a CO-emission regulation document to promote action towards change.
The Maldives government, in an attempt to draw attention to climate change problems, held a cabinet meeting in scuba gear at the bottom of a lake. The Maldives are among the lowest countries on Earth, and may be submerged from global warming within our lifetime. The Cabinet signed a CO-emission regulation document to promote action towards change.
America's responsibility
I believe that the international drug trade is the most threatening global crime in our times. It is truly shocking the amount of devastation that Mexico has suffered to supply America's drug habits. Instead of focusing on cutting down supply, I think the US should work harder to cut down on demand. "Just say no" is obviously not working. There are tons of college students who smoke marijuana for recreation purposes. Do any of these students know that someone has probably died in order to get them high? Probably not. Students are not thinking about it, but they should. I think we really need to raise awareness about the tragic events that are going on in Mexico. Enjoying illegal drugs costs lives.
Gregor has suggested legalization as a possible solution to many of these problems. I do agree that this would be a successful way to cut down on the drug trade. We all know that marijuana isn't any more dangerous than alcohol. If people could grow it privately and legally, we would certainly reduce our demand for Mexican marijuana.
However, legalizing prostitution is a drastically different concept. Women should not have to sell their bodies to make money. Society cannot condone the practice. Sure, men can enjoy themselves in the Red Light district in Amsterdam, but is that truly a model society? I find it utterly tragic.
I hope that international organizations manage to step up the fight against sex trafficking. I had no idea that thousands of victims are trafficked into the United States. This is absolutely horrifying. It disappoints me that there are citizens of this country who desire sex slaves.
Gregor has suggested legalization as a possible solution to many of these problems. I do agree that this would be a successful way to cut down on the drug trade. We all know that marijuana isn't any more dangerous than alcohol. If people could grow it privately and legally, we would certainly reduce our demand for Mexican marijuana.
However, legalizing prostitution is a drastically different concept. Women should not have to sell their bodies to make money. Society cannot condone the practice. Sure, men can enjoy themselves in the Red Light district in Amsterdam, but is that truly a model society? I find it utterly tragic.
I hope that international organizations manage to step up the fight against sex trafficking. I had no idea that thousands of victims are trafficked into the United States. This is absolutely horrifying. It disappoints me that there are citizens of this country who desire sex slaves.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Global Crime
As I was unable to attend the meeting on Sunday, I will share my thoughts on Global Crime on the blog.
First things first, I would like to say that America is not just a victim of global crime, it is also a cause of some things. Before I say any of this, I would like to stress that I do not advocate any of the following things, but they must be taken into account when considering Global Crime.
Drugs...
We read a lot about Colombia and cocaine. We read that the US is fumigating coca fields and doing everything it can to eradicate the crop at its source. However, US attempts at fumigation rob farmers of their livelihood, and antagonize others as they resent foreign intervention into one of their customs and traditions. Ever since 1961, when the UN outlawed coca exports, the US has done what it can to eradicate cocaine production...but in actual fact, US attempts have led to contrary. We are trying to stop global crime, but our efforts are contributing to it. We need other ways to help out these areas that are producing narcotics that are dispersed around the world.
Trafficking...
The scale of this growing crime is disturbing. We need to provide something, anything, that would provide some alternative to those that a. are doing the trafficking and b/ being trafficked. I know this can be seen as a stupid thing to say, but I cannot provide another alternative. I know it is only a film, but Taken gives you an idea of what is going on in human trafficking. It is incredibly worrying the extent to which this crime is disrupting society. It is all good and well saying that we need international cooperation to stop this, but is that really going to happen? Does the UN have the power to implement harsh punishments?
This may be a ridiculous statement, but some of these crimes would not be an issue if they were legalized. Before you view me as crazy, I am not condoning the legalization of child trafficking, but for some issues, like some drug use and prostitution, there are ways round it. Look at the pragmatism of the Dutch in legalizing prostitution and marijuana in Amsterdam...drug abuse and underground prostitution has dramatically decreased since implementation. In our increasingly more global community, some things will have to change, or global crime will continue to rise...
These issues are too large for the opinion of one man, and I regret that I was not at the meeting to discuss these further...it looks like it was a great presentation...good job guys.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
This illiterate argues for a pull-out of Afghanistan
The link is here.
I quote directly from the beginning of the article:
I quote directly from the beginning of the article:
Yes, Afghanistan is deteriorating fast and in need of urgent attention. But figuring out what to do in Central Asia is simple: Leave. Now.
Its true, I'm very biased on the Afghanistan issue. But regardless, its not difficult to agree that the U.S. can't waltz merrily about the world, tearing delicate societies apart, blasting infrastructure to pieces, rendering over a third of a country's arable land unlivable, destabilizing governments, creating near-unprecedented refugee crises, and bail immediately once the domestic political situation makes it advisable.
That's the Dwight Eisenhower/John Kennedy/Ronald Reagan/George Bush approach. That's the "oh goody I went to Harvard and I'm a major decision maker, so I get to play with people like chess pieces!" approach. That's the approach that made the U.S.'s moral-high-ground argument against the Soviet Union laughable. Much of sub-Saharan Africa is a destabilized mess because of the CIA's meddling in the region. Egypt, Poland, Libya, and the entire South American continent, the Carribbean, and Central America are still struggling to recover from the body blows that the U.S. dealt them.
If you broke it, you buy it.
Or rather, if you break something, and you don't buy it but put it quietly back on the shelf, you are a scumbag.
Afghanistan is not something that can be put back on the shelf quietly. Not anymore.
The U.S. singlehandedly saved Afghanistan from the Soviets. Without U.S. assistance, the Russians would either have been beaten to a bloody defeat, or the country would have gone down in flames. Either way, the provision of stinger missiles, black ops training, food, and various munitions made the (7th!) Afghan war against foreign incursion much less costly than it should have been.
Immediately after, the U.S. left Afghanistan to rot. That rot came back and bit it firmly, in various militant attacks against both civilian and military installations.
The U.S. decided to come back. Initially, it utterly broke the country down, from the bottom up, and set up a forgivably shaky framework for governance. Subsequently, due largely to Bush's idiocy, the country's heart was broken again.
In effect, the U.S. military burnt down a family's house, threw up a tarp to keep out the rain, then ran off to beat up a kid for his lunch money instead of finishing the construction. Now, Terence Samuel proposes that the U.S. look at the miserable family inside and say, "Sorry, I gotta go home now. Good luck!"
Are you serious?
Afghanistan is not Iraq, it will only become Vietnam if the public ignorantly turns on it with the same remarkable insanity that they showed in electing Bush twice, and militaries worldwide need to finish what they start.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Berlusconi
The most persecuted man ever?
The controversial tycoon Prime Minister of Italy has had another run in with the press...and another gaffe. What else do you expect?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8300184.stm
I love this page...Berlusconi...in his own words...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8296830.stm
My favorite being...
In an interview with gossip magazine Chi, Mr Berlusconi denies he pays for sex, adding:
"I never understood where the satisfaction is when you're missing the pleasure of conquest."
Great article from Michael Scheuer
Yaniv has worked wonders to secure Michael Scheuer for next semester. Read this article, and you will agree, that we have a great speaker lined up.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/10/12/go_big_or_go_home?page=0,0
Scheuer's article says how the war in Afghanistan has transformed from what it first was. Now, he says, more and more Afghans are fighting to get rid of the occupying forces. Now, it is a fight to free the nation from unwanted occupants.
A year ago, we were talking about withdrawing troops from the war in Afghanistan. Now, the US is requesting more troops in Afghanistan, and today, the UK sent 500 more troops. Gordon Brown is claiming that by sending more, we will help our allies and help build a 'safer Britain'.
The long and short of this article is that we have screwed up bigtime in Afghanistan, and that there will be worse to come because of it.
Czech-Mate?
When Ireland said 'yes' to the Reform Treaty last week, there was jubilation in Brussels. Finally, the last member state that had shot it down was now behind it. Implementation must be close. As Alex said in his blog, Poland and the Czech Republic have to ratify the Treaty. Poland, last saturday, signed the treaty and celebrated the occasion with a lovely ceremony. One down, one to go.
The Czechs are bound to sign it. Wrong.
The Czech President, Vaclav Klaus, the notorious Eurosceptic, is delaying the process as much as he possible can. Afraid of what might happen, Klaus has added in a footnote about Property Rights to the treaty. He wants Germans to give up any right to property in Czech territories; rights that have been there since the formation of the Czech Republic after the War. One would think that this tactic should have been brought up in negotiations, but Klaus is fighting for dear life to delay the treaty.
Why?
First, he is afraid of a more powerful Europe. Secondly, it can be argued that he is waiting for the British elections of 2010. David Cameron has come out and said that if elected, he will put the Reform Treaty to a referendum, and I think that if this were to happen, it would be voted down, thus delaying the Reform Treaty once more. That said, I think that David Cameron is only saying this to gain support from the eurosceptic Tories, and he hopes that the Reform Treaty will be ratified by all 27 member states before the election.
Either way, Klaus' decision to add the footnote is hindering the EU's implementation of the Lisbon Treaty, and shows the difficulties in getting 27 culturally, historically and ideologically different countries to agree on a treaty that affects them all.
What is the EU going to do to get Klaus on their side and to sign his name onto the treaty...?
Monday, October 12, 2009
Suicide Capital of the World
Not an argumentative piece, so not much analysis. Essentially a summary of the situation in Greenland, now the world's suicide capital.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Pakistani Army Storms its 'Pindi HQ
A lot of my family, on my mother's side, is involved in the Indian military in some capacity, in both administrative sectors and deployable sectors. Naturally, I'm biased. Regardless, this is terrifying. Indian media, of course, reports stories of how Pakistan is slipping and falling frequently, but the volume of stories making its way into the North Atlantic media is a little stunning. It's eerie how the government's collapse is closely mirroring that which was predicted for it shortly after partition. Anyway.
BBC Story Here
BBC Story Here
Friday, October 9, 2009
Nobel Peace Prize
I'm sure most people have already heard the news, but for those that haven't, Obama just won the Nobel Peace Prize.
Article.
Article.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Poll: Americans Don't Know What They Want in Afghanistan
I despise the use of the word "Americans" to depict residents of the U.S. Anyhoo.
Agence France Presse
Agence France Presse
Iran Seeks the 'Japan' Option
A fairly convincing argument related to the facts surrounding Iran's nuclear experimentation. Summary given by "The Slatest" below:
It's possible that Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was insincere when he forbade atomic weapons as un-Islamic. Khamenei's fatwa is just one of the many seemingly contradictory pieces of the Iranian nuclear puzzle: Tehran vehemently denies that it's building a nuclear weapon, while the United States, Israel, and others point to previously hidden facilities as evidence Iran is lying. Salon commentator Juan Cole says a single hypothesis "explains all the anomalies elegantly and concisely." Iran seeks nuclear latency, also known as the "Japan option," Cole argues. That is, Iran (like Japan) doesn't want the bomb, but just the threat of being able to build one quickly. The strategy secures energy independence, "would help fend off aggressive attempts at regime change by the Western powers or Israel," and, "conveniently for Khamanei," violates neither Islamic law nor the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Moreover, it lets Mahmoud Ahmadinejad deny he's building a bomb without technically lying.
Link here
It's possible that Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was insincere when he forbade atomic weapons as un-Islamic. Khamenei's fatwa is just one of the many seemingly contradictory pieces of the Iranian nuclear puzzle: Tehran vehemently denies that it's building a nuclear weapon, while the United States, Israel, and others point to previously hidden facilities as evidence Iran is lying. Salon commentator Juan Cole says a single hypothesis "explains all the anomalies elegantly and concisely." Iran seeks nuclear latency, also known as the "Japan option," Cole argues. That is, Iran (like Japan) doesn't want the bomb, but just the threat of being able to build one quickly. The strategy secures energy independence, "would help fend off aggressive attempts at regime change by the Western powers or Israel," and, "conveniently for Khamanei," violates neither Islamic law nor the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Moreover, it lets Mahmoud Ahmadinejad deny he's building a bomb without technically lying.
Link here
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Not Foreign Policy, but...
Is it better to be feared or loved?
So the world, in general, loves Obama. But that doesn't necessarily mean our image in the world has that much improved according to Foreign Policy. I think we have a long way to go to regain our status in the world after 9/11 and no new President could immediately wipe away bad feelings of Iraq and Afghanistan. I like this analysis though because it analyzes the complexity of our "standing" or image in the world, not boiling it down to a simple change in leadership.
Monday, October 5, 2009
European Union President
So, the Lisbon Treaty was ratified by the Irish yesterday. This leaves the Czechs and the Poles as the only states who haven't ratified. For those who aren't aware, the Lisbon Treaty will establish two major things: a President of the European Union position, and a single foreign affairs office. This is massive news, because the EU has been crippled by a lack of common foreign policy, something this aims to reverse. And the so-far most talked-about candidate? None other than Tony Blair.
Article.
Article.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Special Envoys
Because I was sadly unable to attend Great Decisions with everyone last Sunday, I want to share my thoughts on Special Envoys.
I think Special Envoys are useful only when the official capacity of the State Department or other Bureau is unable to address certain concerns. For example, there is no U.S. Ambassador to North Korea, for obvious political reasons. However, because interaction between the US and North Korea is necessary and inevitable, it makes sense to have a Special Envoy who can stay on top of everything.
However, Special Envoys are likely to complicate diplomacy in places where multiple outlets for communication already exist, such as in the Middle East. For good reason, many State Department officials feel that their toes are being stepped on. Early in his campaign and in his Presidency, Obama promised to bolster the number of diplomats in the State Department. And I think that is where he should be concentrating his resources. Working around the State Department only weakens its strategic abilities.
Lastly, the special interest Special Envoys are absolutely silly. A Climate Change Envoy? Seriously? This seems like a waste of resources. Any interest group can come along and demand a Special Envoy. How about Special Envoy to the Elderly Citizens of the World? I can see the AARP pressing for that one. Or Special Envoy to Women’s Independence? Perhaps a suggestion from NOW. Political ties, webs, and organization already exist for special interest groups. Obama shouldn’t be giving into these groups, even if it sounds nice and friendly on the nightly news.
I hope that Obama can limit his envoys to the places where they are really needed. However, at the rate he’s going, this is unlikely. I hope that Clinton can learn to hold her ground.
I think Special Envoys are useful only when the official capacity of the State Department or other Bureau is unable to address certain concerns. For example, there is no U.S. Ambassador to North Korea, for obvious political reasons. However, because interaction between the US and North Korea is necessary and inevitable, it makes sense to have a Special Envoy who can stay on top of everything.
However, Special Envoys are likely to complicate diplomacy in places where multiple outlets for communication already exist, such as in the Middle East. For good reason, many State Department officials feel that their toes are being stepped on. Early in his campaign and in his Presidency, Obama promised to bolster the number of diplomats in the State Department. And I think that is where he should be concentrating his resources. Working around the State Department only weakens its strategic abilities.
Lastly, the special interest Special Envoys are absolutely silly. A Climate Change Envoy? Seriously? This seems like a waste of resources. Any interest group can come along and demand a Special Envoy. How about Special Envoy to the Elderly Citizens of the World? I can see the AARP pressing for that one. Or Special Envoy to Women’s Independence? Perhaps a suggestion from NOW. Political ties, webs, and organization already exist for special interest groups. Obama shouldn’t be giving into these groups, even if it sounds nice and friendly on the nightly news.
I hope that Obama can limit his envoys to the places where they are really needed. However, at the rate he’s going, this is unlikely. I hope that Clinton can learn to hold her ground.
Legalize Cannabis, Reduce Violence?
The debate over legalizing cannabis (pot, weed, marijuana)—is not a new one. Several states have legalized the drug for medical purposes, but what happens when cannabis is legalized for everyone? This BBC article http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8275794.stm illustrates the growing cannabis culture in California and the fight for and against legalizing the drug. However, what I find most intriguing about the article was this statement from Richard Lee, a California man who runs Oaksterdam, a facility which explores cannabis in the medical industry and educates people about cannabis "According to some estimates, the Mexican cartels get 60-70% of their money - their profit - from cannabis…So if we cut that out of the equation then theoretically 60-70% of the violence they perpetrate would be cut out, because they'd have less money for the guns and weapons and ammunition to kill people and to spend on bribing officials and all the rest.” While this is by no means a verified fact, but perhaps a hasty assumption to make—it does bring to light an interesting question—can the legalization of drugs actual make violence go down? Can the legalization of cannabis in the United States mitigate the effects of drug cartels in Mexico and South America? What does the legalization of a formerly illegal drug do to drug cartels worldwide?
Image from: http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/uploadedImages/News/Chicago/Images/Science/DSC00987.JPG
Thursday, October 1, 2009
China's 60th anniversary celebrations
CCTV, China's state-sponsored media network, has comprehensive multimedia coverage of Beijing's monumental celebrations for the Communist Party's 60th anniversary.
As part of extravagant military and civilian parades to Tiananmen Square, China marched thousands of troops with pristine coordination, rolled hundreds of tanks and other heavy artillery, and drove dozens of intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear payloads to the United States through the main thoroughfare of Beijing. Says David Shambaugh, China expert with the Brookings Institute: "This is really, from a public relations standpoint, a major mistake on the part of the Chinese government. But this is not being done for the outside world; this is being done for the internal audience."
Looks like the propagandist, opportunist, exploitative Party of Mao's era is still alive and well.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Taliban Archived Statements
This article is purporting that the analysis and statistical information on the Taliban, while useful, could use a supplement in terms of a more motive/psychological based look at the issue. They bring up the problem of reporting accuracy for both sides of the conflict as reporters that could most appropriately assess the Taliban's self perception (the reporters in the conflict area) are mum for fear of physical harm. The article creates an archive of statements taken from insurgents themselves maybe in hopes of clarifying or increasing understanding of the 'other' side's position. Is the assessment of intention via the stories told by a select view insurgents really all that valuable? Or is it more important from a humanistic view point than a foreign policy one?
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
"The One Thing Iran is Actually Afraid of"
Note: I really despise how people confuse the actions of a nation's government for its people. U.S. media are especially terrible at avoiding this (not insignificant) distinction. There's no fundamental difference in the people of the stretch of land between Tehran and Dhaka, or Kathmandu and Kandy, but if you listen to the choice of vocabulary on the part of the media it would seem as though we were all worlds apart. Anyway.
Applebaum attempts to argue that there are, in fact, two Irans, and the people who care about one "don't care about the other." Well that may be true, but the number is certainly higher than two if so, and Applebaum herself would definitely call into the category of someone who cares about only two of the three.
She goes on to argue that the worst fear of Iran is a sustained, well-orchestrated human rights campaign. I don't really believe her, or her conclusions regarding what we should do with that "information", but judge for yourself.
Applebaum attempts to argue that there are, in fact, two Irans, and the people who care about one "don't care about the other." Well that may be true, but the number is certainly higher than two if so, and Applebaum herself would definitely call into the category of someone who cares about only two of the three.
She goes on to argue that the worst fear of Iran is a sustained, well-orchestrated human rights campaign. I don't really believe her, or her conclusions regarding what we should do with that "information", but judge for yourself.
Monday, September 28, 2009
"The Terrible Consequences of Egypt's Swine Slaughter"
For those who have never been, Cairo has a lot of trash. A lot of it. And, remarkably, most of that trash remains organic. Pigs tend to eat organic trash and convert it to flesh, in fact they do this at a rate faster than any other land mammal. Egypt's government recently ordered that all pigs be slaughtered to prevent the spread of swine flu. The natural, albeit incidental, consequences of that decision are chronicled here.
Hitchens' sectarian analysis is particularly interesting, and as usual, he does not let the opportunity to rail against religion slide.
Hitchens' sectarian analysis is particularly interesting, and as usual, he does not let the opportunity to rail against religion slide.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Clashes in the Holy City
In the realm of conflict resolution (and going off of Maryam's earlier post), I'm sure many of you are familiar with how the second intifada, also known as the Al-Aqsa Intifada, started after Ariel Sharon visited Al-Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount, leading to violent clashes in 2000. With the start of Yom Kippur, this does not bode well for the peace process. Jerusalem is a giant tinderbox of latent tension, and while a small incident, those have demonstrated to be just the spark needed in the past.
Just around the corner from where I lived this summer, the family that I grew very close with lives along the walls of the Al-Haram al-Sharif, and have been in the middle of this since the British mandate. Listening to their experiences, these kinds of events puts everyone on edge immediately with a particular fear of retaliation on innocent individuals. With the increasing settlements and land seizures in East Jerusalem/West Bank and US policy reversal, there is concern that the dragging/non-existent peace negotiations may come too late---thoughts? Did Obama make the right decision in reversing his settlement freeze precondition? Or does what we do even really matter? Some argue that the Second Intifada was furthered by Arafat walking out of the Camp David talks- does the example of Clinton's failure (and the potential for Obama's success now) demonstrate the US role could be significant? Or does that example do the exact opposite?
Update Here
A government shut-down of the Internet?
Despite questionable relevance to foreign policy as we define it, this interesting article from MSNBC raises a conundrum that I'm sure all political-minded constituents of Great Decisions would enjoy -- the possible government shut-down of the Internet in the face of an unprecedented security emergency. At first glance, such a transgression would slap the face of freedom, liberty, and everything we hold dear. But with the risk of cyber attack increasing in probability and severity every day, a national security takeover of vulnerable websites seems more rational than before.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33038143/ns/technology_and_science-security
And yes, I have nothing better to do at 4 am.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33038143/ns/technology_and_science-security
And yes, I have nothing better to do at 4 am.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Qaddafi
May I just say.....
Congratulations.
Regardless of accuracy, Qadafi was very entertaining.
Foreign Policy compiled a top ten list of crazy U.N. moments.
I'm very proud Krishna Menon is up there with his rather epic filibuster on Kashmir.
Encounter them here
Also
"Do Not Mess With the Giant Squid"
Also
Bidenisms: A continuing list (modelled after Bushisms)
Also
Does anyone else think Ahmadinejad is one of the best gesticulators , gesturers, and body-language artists of all time? The man is mesmerizing.
I also suspect he's vastly more intelligent than many over here give him credit for.
Ok halftime's over, go heels!
Congratulations.
Regardless of accuracy, Qadafi was very entertaining.
Foreign Policy compiled a top ten list of crazy U.N. moments.
I'm very proud Krishna Menon is up there with his rather epic filibuster on Kashmir.
Encounter them here
Also
"Do Not Mess With the Giant Squid"
Also
Bidenisms: A continuing list (modelled after Bushisms)
Also
Does anyone else think Ahmadinejad is one of the best gesticulators , gesturers, and body-language artists of all time? The man is mesmerizing.
I also suspect he's vastly more intelligent than many over here give him credit for.
Ok halftime's over, go heels!
Thursday, September 24, 2009
"Is Afghanistan the New Africa?"
An intriguing, if short, look at how foreign aid and not-so-well-founded "optimism" tends to rule the public accounts of Afghanistan's development, or lack thereof.
here
here
Russia on Iran
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/24/russia-agrees-to-possible_n_298219.html
It looks like Russia is now open to sanctions on Iran. Wow, that was fast.
It looks like Russia is now open to sanctions on Iran. Wow, that was fast.
"Taliban Expand into Afghanistan"
There's no real analysis here, just straight news reporting.
O Obama, where art thou?
One thing oft pointed out about the Taliban though, at least by subcontinental media, was that if you were the average nonwhite bearded male, there was a lot of safety and security present under the Taliban which is now, sadly, lacking under Karzai's ineffective governance.
Justice was swift, and if harsh, at least was prompt enough to allay any wounded feelings. Travelling also was very easy; the roads were all perceived to be safe and people often had no compunction about taking random travellers into their home.
Nowadays, all those things are gone. Of course, so are the random beheadings, stonings, beatings and rapes of women, burnt houses in the middle of the night, lynched journalists, etc.
But, for the average nonwhite bearded male (who makes the decisions in Afghanistan after all?), things must have seemed way better before the U.S. invaded.
O Obama, where art thou?
One thing oft pointed out about the Taliban though, at least by subcontinental media, was that if you were the average nonwhite bearded male, there was a lot of safety and security present under the Taliban which is now, sadly, lacking under Karzai's ineffective governance.
Justice was swift, and if harsh, at least was prompt enough to allay any wounded feelings. Travelling also was very easy; the roads were all perceived to be safe and people often had no compunction about taking random travellers into their home.
Nowadays, all those things are gone. Of course, so are the random beheadings, stonings, beatings and rapes of women, burnt houses in the middle of the night, lynched journalists, etc.
But, for the average nonwhite bearded male (who makes the decisions in Afghanistan after all?), things must have seemed way better before the U.S. invaded.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Just War Theory in Afghanistan
Counter Insurgency
General Petraeus released a document a few years ago outlining the areas of contention that needed attention if America was going to win 'hearts and minds' in Iraq. It seems with the continued problem of insurgency in Afghanistan and Iraq, there hasn't been much progress made on that front, and it is doubtful that there is advancement forthcoming with the right resource allocation. This seems to give credence to Mike Walzer's philosophy on Just War that explicitly states foreigners are not to trifle with other nations' territorial integrity or political sovereignty on the grounds that legitimacy cannot be forced by outsiders, but must be an internal struggle for self determination. With that in mind, does intervention seem like it could breach this right to self determination under certain circumstances?
Russia backs down about Iranian sanctions.
Article!
So, it seems that what we talked about last weekend came to fruition. The Russians made an unofficial statement that they were ready to examine Iran and punitive measures. This isn't a diplomatic commitment, but it is a "we are on the same page and willing to move forward with this". Technically, they said that sanctions are sometimes inevitable and that if incentives don't work, the Russians may need to adopt tougher measures. Looks like Obama's gesture wasn't in vain.
So, it seems that what we talked about last weekend came to fruition. The Russians made an unofficial statement that they were ready to examine Iran and punitive measures. This isn't a diplomatic commitment, but it is a "we are on the same page and willing to move forward with this". Technically, they said that sanctions are sometimes inevitable and that if incentives don't work, the Russians may need to adopt tougher measures. Looks like Obama's gesture wasn't in vain.
Obama drops demand that Israel freeze settlements.
See the Article here
Remember my post about how negotiations in Israel/Palestine would be stalled because neither side is backing down on the issue of settlements?
Well it appears Obama is trying to set a precedent, this time siding with the Israelis. Guess he realized nobody cares what he wants....
Personally, I am upset. I don't think we should have caved. What does this say about us????
Remember my post about how negotiations in Israel/Palestine would be stalled because neither side is backing down on the issue of settlements?
Well it appears Obama is trying to set a precedent, this time siding with the Israelis. Guess he realized nobody cares what he wants....
Personally, I am upset. I don't think we should have caved. What does this say about us????
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Monday, September 21, 2009
"Mobilizing the Will to Intervene"
In an interview with Lt. Gen. Romeo Dallaire, Foreign Policy unearths some serious issues underlying our involvement in international conflicts. Lt. Gen. Daillaire was the head of the UN peacekeeping mission in Rwanda in 1994 and now advocates strongly for intervening in international conflicts (like Rwanda) to protect civilians of all nations. He believes that due to the globalizing effect that intra-country or intra-region conflict can have on international security (like leaving space for terrorist cells to establish themselves) and different rules of engagement that have militaries engaged in something other that the classic use of force, that we need mobilize the international community to intervene in these crises like genocide and civil war. But for these types of interventions we need militaries and commanders trained in methods of anthropology, sociology, and philosophy so that they can understand the complexity of the problem and employ adapted forms of force. And just as important, we need countries on the UN Security Council to stop being so isolationist and believe that the problem's just between "those guys" because Lt. Gen. Dallaire says "..in this era, that stuff moves, and it will affect us."
To me this question of intervention is incredibly interesting and so understandably controversial. In general, I do believe that we live in a different world now and another country's war will affect everyone in the end. But I'm also torn about what this means for national sovereignty and allowing a country to clean up its own messes and grow from them. We certainly had to do that and we are stronger and more unified because of it. And where do you draw the line about how extensive the intervention will be? Obviously Iraq brings up this question; how much resources do you have to commit to for rebuilding purposes and how we will sustain this? And then finally why are we really intervening? Lt. Gen. Dallaire is not shy to admit that it really comes down to protecting one's own national interests but wouldn't that inevitably affect our decisions on what areas get preference--who are we going to decide is more worth our while to save--civilians in the DRC or those is Afghanistan?
Sunday, September 20, 2009
As promised, the link to the Tea Party People
T-Baggers. Ignorance mixed with fear is not a good combo.
Europe
I have noticed that the vast majority of the blogs tend to focus on American foreign policy, so I thought that I would share some thoughts regarding events in Europe.
Turkey is still in the process of obtaining membership to the European Union. This prolonged attempt in itself is huge, because it again redefines Europe politically and geographically. Many are skeptical towards European expansion further east for a variety of reasons, but religion arguably stands out. Although Turkey is a secular country without an official state religion, the majority of the country is Muslim. You may ask where am I going with this...but accepting Turkey could have major implications on EU legislation in other countries. I am neither for or against Turkish integration, purely because I am not knowledgeable enough to make a rational judgement, but from what I do know, it raises issues for the EU as a body itself.
Originally, the EU comprised of 6 countries. Now it has 27. 3 more are in the process of integrating. If the EU continues to push east, where do the boundaries end? Surely if Turkey (which is more in Asia than Europe, geographically) has a legitimate claim to being part of the EU, so does the likes of Morocco, Libya and Algeria as they only separated from mainland Europe by a few hundred miles of the Mediterranean? Surely Russia has a legitimate claim for being within the geographical boundaries of 'Europe'?
If religion plays apart in the decision, then surely Muslim countries in the region have a claim to join as well? I have no problem with religion, let me stress that point. But how can the European Union be united if some countries, like France, do not have the same rights for Muslims in their country than others.
For example, take headscarves. Since 2004, donning a headscarf in a French state school was banned. If Europe really was united....we would have the same laws and expectations. But arguing this is arguing for further European expansion, something that skeptics such as myself strongly dispute.
This blog could go on and on, but I will refrain. In short, will there really be benefits to further EU expansion?
A Tale of Two Cities: Two Human Trafficking Cases
In this recent New York Times article, http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/09/17/world/AP-EU-Netherlands-Human-Trafficker.html?scp=5&sq=human%20trafficking&st=cse the escape of a notorious human trafficker is causing a frenzy in the Netherlands. Saban Baran, on a week leave to visit his family, escaped from authorities and is now at large. Baran has been convicted of multiple accounts of human trafficking for forcing women into prostitution. Authorities concede that allowing him to leave was a terrible mistake—and public outcry has become intense. Judges only officially revoked Baran’s week leave after he had fled. Although this is one incident in the very large and broad issue of global crime it begs the question of how these situations are being handled at a local and national level.
However, in contrast to the Baran situation, the New York Times came out with another article on the same day http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/09/17/world/AP-ML-Egypt-US-Adoption.html?scp=10&sq=human%20trafficking&st=cse. This article discussed the illegal adoption of Egyptian children. Under Islamic Law, adopting children is illegal for Muslims, however, some Christians do adopt Egyptian children. Two couples attempted to adopt children and did so by forging documents. Eventually they were detained under charged of human trafficking and forgery. Was this case treated reasonably? Should these two couples, attempting to adopt children, be charged under similar child trafficking laws that Saban Baran was subjected to?
These two articles present sharp contrasts and perhaps cracks within the criminal justice system. One article tells the story of a man convicted of human trafficking of over 100 women, another presents two couples trying to adopt children. At the root of the issues is the local government and its rulings. Are local governments handling the human trafficking situations in an effective way? In order to effectively mitigate global crime, the crime within countries must be addressed first.
However, in contrast to the Baran situation, the New York Times came out with another article on the same day http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/09/17/world/AP-ML-Egypt-US-Adoption.html?scp=10&sq=human%20trafficking&st=cse. This article discussed the illegal adoption of Egyptian children. Under Islamic Law, adopting children is illegal for Muslims, however, some Christians do adopt Egyptian children. Two couples attempted to adopt children and did so by forging documents. Eventually they were detained under charged of human trafficking and forgery. Was this case treated reasonably? Should these two couples, attempting to adopt children, be charged under similar child trafficking laws that Saban Baran was subjected to?
These two articles present sharp contrasts and perhaps cracks within the criminal justice system. One article tells the story of a man convicted of human trafficking of over 100 women, another presents two couples trying to adopt children. At the root of the issues is the local government and its rulings. Are local governments handling the human trafficking situations in an effective way? In order to effectively mitigate global crime, the crime within countries must be addressed first.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Friday, September 18, 2009
Updated Missile Defences in Europe
So, big news today. Obama has announced that he's canceling the US plans to extend the antiballistic missile shield into Eastern Europe. The Russians have responded to this with exceptional enthusiasm, with Putin repeatedly praising Obama and the new policy. Presumably, this is a concession made with the intention of improving relations with Russia, especially to nudge Russia closer to backing US sanctions against Iran, which the Russians have been consistently resisting. Russian refusal to condemn Iran for their nuclear program has drawn fire from the US, and it would seem that the US is willing to take the first step, in hopes that the Russians will match this.
Article!
Also, the new NATO Secretary General made a speech recognizing Russia as a major partner in future strategic talks, and had proposed that NATO and Russia conduct a joint review of vulnerability and pool their resources to combat threats. All of this seems to revolve around an attempt to either disarm or at least protect against the Iranian threat, which the Russians still refuse to publically recognize.
Also, article.
Article!
Also, the new NATO Secretary General made a speech recognizing Russia as a major partner in future strategic talks, and had proposed that NATO and Russia conduct a joint review of vulnerability and pool their resources to combat threats. All of this seems to revolve around an attempt to either disarm or at least protect against the Iranian threat, which the Russians still refuse to publically recognize.
Also, article.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
TED Talks: Hans Rosling on the Developing World
If you haven't heard of TED talks you should really check them out. Hans Rosling, a Swedish professor at the Karolinska Institute and Director of the Gapminder Foundation, uses data sets and amazing visuals to deconstruct our notions of the developing world and challenge our generation to change our mindsets. Even if this is not your field, he is very entertaining and I would suggest watching!
Obama and China: A marriage of protectionism?
The Council on Foreign Relations reports on the recent decision by the Obama administration to ratchet up tariffs against entry-level tires from China. Cornell's Eswad Prasade presages that the move may commence a "full-blown trade war" between the powers -- a frightening scenario considering that both countries are only recently mending the wounds of the financial crisis. From the other side of the fence, some experts believe that Obama may be preparing to open up trade at later dates: "Four previous U.S. presidents each made moves to protect domestic industries at the outset of their administrations before later pursuing free trade agendas."
Apologies, but these are hilarious
If you don't already, definitely hit up the Onion as often as possible and view the videos.
U.S. Condemned for Pre-Emptive Use of Hillary Clinton Against Pakistan
Study: Multiple Stab Wounds Harmful to Monkeys
Americans Observe 9/11 By Trying Not to Masturbate
U.S. Condemned for Pre-Emptive Use of Hillary Clinton Against Pakistan
Study: Multiple Stab Wounds Harmful to Monkeys
Americans Observe 9/11 By Trying Not to Masturbate
"Who's Stupid Now?"
Short enough to quote directly. The full story is here
Stories like this from the Associated Press drive me nuts. The Afghan army is "hard to train." Why? Because the soldiers are illiterate. Pop quiz: How many of the Spartans at Thermopalye were literate? One reason armies have had officers is to ensure that for every 100 or so soldiers, there is someone who can decipher a map and read orders.
[excerpt from the quoted story]
Stories like this from the Associated Press drive me nuts. The Afghan army is "hard to train." Why? Because the soldiers are illiterate. Pop quiz: How many of the Spartans at Thermopalye were literate? One reason armies have had officers is to ensure that for every 100 or so soldiers, there is someone who can decipher a map and read orders.
[excerpt from the quoted story]
The average private soldier in Afghanistan does not need to be literate. Nor does he need diversity training, by the way. (FWIW, he probably has a lot more liberated attitude toward gays than does the average Marine recruit.)
He only needs the sort of literacy classes described in the AP article if his American trainers lack the imagination and historical knowledge to train him to be an Afghan, instead of an imitation American, soldier. If we are going to make any progress in dealing with failed states, we are going to have to learn to train across cultures. I mean, Gurkhas became one of the most feared entities in the British military establishment.
I suspect that Americans tend to think people who are illiterate are stupid. They are not, especially in a country like Afghanistan.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
The Changing Nature of Diplomacy
Discussed in FP recently was how much in the hole the Department of State is right now- which directly relates to the deployment of envoys. The point they focus heavily on is the militarization of diplomacy and foreign policy in general, and the serious implications of that. As the article hints, there are some advocating the end of our foremost diplomatic institution, which, huh, is kind of a big deal. Most would agree that on the ground people understanding the countries and people we interact with will never cease being a necessity- and that can't be done effectively through the Pentagon or special envoys, and people know that. They are hiring twice as many FSOs as they did last year and injecting more money, and there is re-concerted effort in understanding how we conduct our foreign policy. We don't have much of a choice - in the 20th century and the Cold War, being 'America' was enough in diplomacy. Now we actually have to work at it, and we can't afford to fail miserably--bureaucratic messes and inefficiency isn't going to cut it. Some would argue that the slowing of American preeminence in a increasingly multi-polar world makes good diplomacy a definite necessity. Can special envoys do that?
Sorry, the link wasn't working....
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/09/11/hitting_bottom_in_foggy_bottom
"Can We Bribe Our Way to Victory?"
An article examining an alternative approach to rapprochement with (at minimum) Pashtu citizens of Afghanistan...namely distributing cash to political leaders or already-established tribal leaders and using their existing system of disbursement to create a "victory" in Afghanistan for the U.S. forces there.
You can read the article here
You can read the article here
Will Iraqi elections be the answer?
This past Sunday we questioned U.S. troops role in establishing political security abroad. This article challenges the US assumption that intervention in Iraqi elections will play a positive role in resolving political tensions by revisiting US success in Lebanon, Iran and Afghanistan. Has Vice President Biden over simplified Iraqi political structure in assuming that national elections will solve many of the unresolved security issues?
FedEx Global Education Center Event Tonight:
If you are free I highly recommend going to see this documentary. Sarah Singh shares valuable insight on the historical, cultural and political turmoil that exists between India and Pakistan. Really interesting!
Wednesday, September 16 at 6:00 PM
Nelson Mandela Auditorium
New York Film-Maker Sarah Singh will be coming in person to Chapel Hill to speak about her award-winning documentary on the 1947 Partition of India and the creation of Pakistan: “THE SKY BELOW.” Followed by a screening of the film and a question and answer session. To create the documentary THE SKY BELOW, Sarah Singh traveled solo--without a crew-- across one of the world’s most volatile regions tracing culture, history, society and the politics of divide and rule.
THE SKY BELOW is a contemporary exploration of the creation of Pakistan and the 1947 Partition of the Indian Subcontinent, weaving together 5000 years of culture, while investigating the lingering after-effects of this six-decade old political divide, most tragically witnessed by Kashmir. With her life in the hands of strangers and sometimes gunmen, Singh traveled from the desert of Kutch to the snowy mountains of Kashmir; and from the seaside city of Karachi to the spare but volatile terrain of the Khyber Pass.
Syria starts to tackle sex trafficking
Syria attempts to combat the rise of sex trafficking
A correspondent for Anderson Copper on CNN reports on the legislation Syrian lawmakers are working on to fight international and domestic sex trafficking in their country. As the article reports, "if passed, it will be the first law of its kind in the Middle East."
For a country that America hates, way to go Syria!
I would like to point that each year 15-20,000 women and children are trafficking into the US and 100,000-300,000 are domestically trafficked within the US.
Yeah, it's a problem here. Don't even get me started on All Girls Staff right here on Franklin Street (formally University Massage but they had to change their name because they don't have a massage license. Can we say shady??). There have been reports not only of sex work, but of trafficked women from another "massage place" in Orange country, The Gentlemen's Club. And they have reports of trafficking women from abroad. Too bad our police don't want to get involved in this mess so they continuously refuse to investigate the business. Epic fail on public safety guys.
The issue at hand here is the framework in which sex work and sex trafficking is discussed. A lot of ignorant people will try to argue that sex workers in general choose their work and so should be held responsible. This is a problem because many Countries, even here in NC, don't legally differentiate between sex workers and sex workers who were trafficked. Can women who are trafficked give consent?
The answer is no. The UN definition is that for an adult victim, issues of consent are irrelevant if any threat to the victim is involved. Most sex workers are threatened, beaten and raped by their "pimps" and customers. And sex workers who are trafficked never receive a cent for their "work;" it all goes to their "pimp."
Another issue in the framework is the attention paid to this problem. There often isn't much context for the power hierarchies that cause these women to be in these situations in the first place. Most articles that discuss sex-trafficking (of which there are few) focus on its "criminal" activity or legislation (such as the article i'm giving you above). Most articles don't address global issues or lack of women's rights as frameworks for understanding why sex trafficking exists.
Keep your eyes peeled for news of this in the media. I put my money that you won't hear a thing....
A correspondent for Anderson Copper on CNN reports on the legislation Syrian lawmakers are working on to fight international and domestic sex trafficking in their country. As the article reports, "if passed, it will be the first law of its kind in the Middle East."
For a country that America hates, way to go Syria!
I would like to point that each year 15-20,000 women and children are trafficking into the US and 100,000-300,000 are domestically trafficked within the US.
Yeah, it's a problem here. Don't even get me started on All Girls Staff right here on Franklin Street (formally University Massage but they had to change their name because they don't have a massage license. Can we say shady??). There have been reports not only of sex work, but of trafficked women from another "massage place" in Orange country, The Gentlemen's Club. And they have reports of trafficking women from abroad. Too bad our police don't want to get involved in this mess so they continuously refuse to investigate the business. Epic fail on public safety guys.
The issue at hand here is the framework in which sex work and sex trafficking is discussed. A lot of ignorant people will try to argue that sex workers in general choose their work and so should be held responsible. This is a problem because many Countries, even here in NC, don't legally differentiate between sex workers and sex workers who were trafficked. Can women who are trafficked give consent?
The answer is no. The UN definition is that for an adult victim, issues of consent are irrelevant if any threat to the victim is involved. Most sex workers are threatened, beaten and raped by their "pimps" and customers. And sex workers who are trafficked never receive a cent for their "work;" it all goes to their "pimp."
Another issue in the framework is the attention paid to this problem. There often isn't much context for the power hierarchies that cause these women to be in these situations in the first place. Most articles that discuss sex-trafficking (of which there are few) focus on its "criminal" activity or legislation (such as the article i'm giving you above). Most articles don't address global issues or lack of women's rights as frameworks for understanding why sex trafficking exists.
Keep your eyes peeled for news of this in the media. I put my money that you won't hear a thing....
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
"My Ramadan World Tour"
Instead of critical analysis I'll copy and paste the author's last sentence, which sums up the gist of the article.
"Other than in Saudi Arabia, where the Quran is literally the law, in my travels I've found encouraging examples of societies fitting their own local needs to religious restrictions; a sign that pragmatism, if not secularism, is on the rise."
You can read the rest of the article here
"Other than in Saudi Arabia, where the Quran is literally the law, in my travels I've found encouraging examples of societies fitting their own local needs to religious restrictions; a sign that pragmatism, if not secularism, is on the rise."
You can read the rest of the article here
Monday, September 14, 2009
For laughs
My professor asked us today, "Does anyone know what major world event occurred in 1957 that changed US education for years to come, especially in relation to math and science?"
Someone goes, "Didn't we drop a big bomb around then??"
Professor: "You mean an atomic bomb? Like, in WWII?"
Student: "Ya!"
... which made me think of how Americans are pretty oblivious. (1957?!) Which in turn made me think of this map.
(The event was the launch of Sputnik and subsequent space race influenced emphasis on math and science in American public schools.)
Someone goes, "Didn't we drop a big bomb around then??"
Professor: "You mean an atomic bomb? Like, in WWII?"
Student: "Ya!"
... which made me think of how Americans are pretty oblivious. (1957?!) Which in turn made me think of this map.
(The event was the launch of Sputnik and subsequent space race influenced emphasis on math and science in American public schools.)
"Engaging With Iran Is Like Having Sex With Someone Who Hates You"
Christopher Hitches, a highly entertaining, if divisive, writer deigns to bless us with his opinions regarding the Obama "administration"'s attempts to engage in dialogue with Iran.
Link here
Link here
US Black Op in Somalia
The United States just sent in a special forces team to Somalia and killed a main leader of Al-Qaeda in the process.
To see the article, click here.
The Gangs of Baghdad - Role of Mercenaries in Today's World?
In today's NY Times, they reported on the trial of former Blackwater ruffians (formerly of Blackwater, perhaps still ruffians), who may or may not have been taking "justice" into their own hands during their stint in Iraq. These State Department hired individuals reportedly fired on unarmed civilians on multiple occasions. While this is horrible to hear, my question is, is anyone surprised?
The Blackwater case is a couple years old, yet the entire scenario raises important questions. What will the role of these outside forces be in the future? How can we regulate them? Should they be used at all?
We send mercenaries to a country where we're trying to win the "hearts and minds" of the locals, and are then surprised when it goes poorly. The Blackwater case and the fact that the US decided to use them at all makes me so very upset. What do you all think?
The Blackwater case is a couple years old, yet the entire scenario raises important questions. What will the role of these outside forces be in the future? How can we regulate them? Should they be used at all?
We send mercenaries to a country where we're trying to win the "hearts and minds" of the locals, and are then surprised when it goes poorly. The Blackwater case and the fact that the US decided to use them at all makes me so very upset. What do you all think?
Global Crime? Start "small"
In our increasingly globalized world, global crime is becoming a greater problem every day. Whether it is human trafficking or drug cartels, the influx of crime has been astounding. The United Nations Office of Drug and Crime began publishing this year an annual report on human trafficking. In addition, the office created a Convention against Organized Crime, that despite its ratification by member states, has still not been largely ineffectual. In fact, it seems, as of late, the United Nations has struggled with making any discernable progress with preventing organized crime—leading to the question, what international organizations can effectively deal with this problem? (see: http://www.un.org/News/briefings/docs/2009/090212_UNODC.doc.htm )
However, looking only holistically at the ever elusive international bodies that can provide solutions to global crime is a daunting and often impossible task. Instead, it is critical to look at the social and economic factors that contribute to global crime in the first place. This New York Times slideshow: (http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/07/29/world/20090729ARGENTINA_index.html?ref=americas) reminds us that global crime starts because of social and economic disparities and can often begin on the smallest of scales. Paco, an addictive drug which is a cheaper substitute to cocaine, is becoming rampant in parts of South America. The solution to crack down swiftly on drug cartels comes from judges and other officials who issue orders for raids. The slideshow also touches on the very individual aspect of the drug trafficking and notes the addictive cycle that users face—again emphasizing the contribution individuals have on the global crisis.
However, looking only holistically at the ever elusive international bodies that can provide solutions to global crime is a daunting and often impossible task. Instead, it is critical to look at the social and economic factors that contribute to global crime in the first place. This New York Times slideshow: (http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/07/29/world/20090729ARGENTINA_index.html?ref=americas) reminds us that global crime starts because of social and economic disparities and can often begin on the smallest of scales. Paco, an addictive drug which is a cheaper substitute to cocaine, is becoming rampant in parts of South America. The solution to crack down swiftly on drug cartels comes from judges and other officials who issue orders for raids. The slideshow also touches on the very individual aspect of the drug trafficking and notes the addictive cycle that users face—again emphasizing the contribution individuals have on the global crisis.
The New Israel Lobby
The New Israel Lobby
This is an extremely good article that takes this issue into depth. There really isn't much that I can say to introduce the topic that this article doesn't already. So if you don't know much about the issue, this article can guide you through it.
Basically, a big change in the "Israel Lobby" in the US is with the new J-street lobby that has moved to a new meaning of being pro-Israel that allows for criticism against Israel. Big moves. Let's see where it goes....
This is an extremely good article that takes this issue into depth. There really isn't much that I can say to introduce the topic that this article doesn't already. So if you don't know much about the issue, this article can guide you through it.
Basically, a big change in the "Israel Lobby" in the US is with the new J-street lobby that has moved to a new meaning of being pro-Israel that allows for criticism against Israel. Big moves. Let's see where it goes....
No settlement freeze - Netanyahu
No Settlement Freeze
Israeli has recently started up the path to peace talks last week after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Cairo. However, it doesn't seem promising. Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas has been insistent that he will not meet with any Israeli officials until Israel agrees to freeze its illegal settlements in the West Bank. Netanyahu though made it clear today that he would not freeze construction, but only try to scale it down.
US Mid-East envoy George Mitchell has arrived in the region on Saturday to help facilitate discussions but his participation may be useless if this stand-off continues. And it seems like the stand-off will continue since Netanyahu doesn't seem to be getting the hint that the US wants the settlements to stop. How will this hurt America's playing power in the region if they go into negotiations they know will be fruitless?
Just something to think about....
Israeli has recently started up the path to peace talks last week after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Cairo. However, it doesn't seem promising. Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas has been insistent that he will not meet with any Israeli officials until Israel agrees to freeze its illegal settlements in the West Bank. Netanyahu though made it clear today that he would not freeze construction, but only try to scale it down.
US Mid-East envoy George Mitchell has arrived in the region on Saturday to help facilitate discussions but his participation may be useless if this stand-off continues. And it seems like the stand-off will continue since Netanyahu doesn't seem to be getting the hint that the US wants the settlements to stop. How will this hurt America's playing power in the region if they go into negotiations they know will be fruitless?
Just something to think about....
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Russia is losing its grip
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/weekinreview/13levy.html?_r=1&scp=10&sq=russian&st=cse
Crossroads in Afghanistan
Thomas Friedman's column today in the NYT links together the situations in Iraq and Afghanistan by relating a story about bank robbers. What happened, he explains, is that people connected to the Iraqi vice president held up a bank for $4.3 million in cash. But, in a twist, some of the robbers were found, arrested, tried and convicted. Although the judicial process was less than perfect, Friedman notes that this might be a sign of a new political culture "of democracry and the rule of law." Iraqis, he says, are like battered children. They grew up under the brutality of Saddam and now, as many battered children do, have the potential to grow into battering adults. This bank robbery illustrates the conflict of two political cultures clashing. It's similar in Afghanistan. Afghanis grew up under the Russian occupation and then during the brutal Taliban rule.
These broad outlines raise many practical, logistical and philosophical questions about our presence in Afghanistan. Violence has spiked recently (See: : "A wave of attacks engulfs Afghanistan," NYT Sept. 13) and our troop levels are at an all-time high. But it still seems we don't have enough there to help secure peace so democratic institutions can flourish. We face similar questions in Afghanistan that we did in Iraq before the surge. Are we willing to commit thousands more troops in order to undertake a slow, painful and bloody nation building struggle? As Friedman points out, what we've accomplished in Iraq is "at a huge cost, we have given a chance for a more democractic political culture to emerge in the heart of the Arab-Muslim world." It seems more and more that we're going to need a surge-like increase in Afghanistan if we're going to even have a remote chance of success there.
There are doubts we're going to get it. First, as the NYT pointed out on Sept. 11 ("Obama is facing doubts in party on Afghanistan," A1), support is going to be hard to come by. Leading Democrats are questioning whether it's a good idea to send thousands more troops to help the painstakingly slow process of nation building. Another thing complicating the matter is that the American people don't really seem to be engaged on Afghanistan any more — and if they are, they're against sending more troops. The war ranks near the bottom of issues most important to people in tracking polls (Obama's squandered summer, NYT Sept. 13). And those who do have an opinion seem to be against sending more troops — a CNN poll released on Sept. 11 found that 57 percent of people oppose the war and oppose sending more soldiers (Obama's squandered summer, NYT Sept. 13).
We seem to be having some success in Iraq post-surge. Yes there's still violence, corruption and bloodshed, but we slowly seem to be helping Iraqis build democratic institutions. As the situation moderately improves there, it seems to be slipping away from us in Afghanistan. Should we remain committed there to the process of nation building? It almost seems that our position of limbo now is the most harmful. While we're wavering on whether to send more troops, the situation is deteriorating and violence is increasing. If we're going to commit, Friedman says, "President Obama has to be as committed to any surge in Afghanistan as President Bush was in Iraq, because Mr. Obama will have to endure a lot of bad news before things — might — get better."
Tough choices to make abroad as we're engulfed domestically by the economy and health care. These are mostly logisitcal questions so far. But there are deeper philosophical ones as well that I'm not sure we've sorted out about, among other things, the possibility of building democratic institutions. Many tough choices to come.
These broad outlines raise many practical, logistical and philosophical questions about our presence in Afghanistan. Violence has spiked recently (See: : "A wave of attacks engulfs Afghanistan," NYT Sept. 13) and our troop levels are at an all-time high. But it still seems we don't have enough there to help secure peace so democratic institutions can flourish. We face similar questions in Afghanistan that we did in Iraq before the surge. Are we willing to commit thousands more troops in order to undertake a slow, painful and bloody nation building struggle? As Friedman points out, what we've accomplished in Iraq is "at a huge cost, we have given a chance for a more democractic political culture to emerge in the heart of the Arab-Muslim world." It seems more and more that we're going to need a surge-like increase in Afghanistan if we're going to even have a remote chance of success there.
There are doubts we're going to get it. First, as the NYT pointed out on Sept. 11 ("Obama is facing doubts in party on Afghanistan," A1), support is going to be hard to come by. Leading Democrats are questioning whether it's a good idea to send thousands more troops to help the painstakingly slow process of nation building. Another thing complicating the matter is that the American people don't really seem to be engaged on Afghanistan any more — and if they are, they're against sending more troops. The war ranks near the bottom of issues most important to people in tracking polls (Obama's squandered summer, NYT Sept. 13). And those who do have an opinion seem to be against sending more troops — a CNN poll released on Sept. 11 found that 57 percent of people oppose the war and oppose sending more soldiers (Obama's squandered summer, NYT Sept. 13).
We seem to be having some success in Iraq post-surge. Yes there's still violence, corruption and bloodshed, but we slowly seem to be helping Iraqis build democratic institutions. As the situation moderately improves there, it seems to be slipping away from us in Afghanistan. Should we remain committed there to the process of nation building? It almost seems that our position of limbo now is the most harmful. While we're wavering on whether to send more troops, the situation is deteriorating and violence is increasing. If we're going to commit, Friedman says, "President Obama has to be as committed to any surge in Afghanistan as President Bush was in Iraq, because Mr. Obama will have to endure a lot of bad news before things — might — get better."
Tough choices to make abroad as we're engulfed domestically by the economy and health care. These are mostly logisitcal questions so far. But there are deeper philosophical ones as well that I'm not sure we've sorted out about, among other things, the possibility of building democratic institutions. Many tough choices to come.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Friday, September 11, 2009
"Iraq's New Surge: Murdering Gay People"
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/09/09/iraqs_new_surge_gay_killings
Thursday, September 10, 2009
The Musharraf I Know: My Friend, the Dictator
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/09/09/the_musharraf_i_know
"Bind your eyes and plug your ears! Here come the 9/11 anniversary stories!"
http://www.slate.com/id/2227796/
Also: Remembering 9/11: An Ambassador's Perspective
http://www.newsweek.com/id/214988
In the most recent Newsweek, State Department honcho Ryan Crocker assesses the current state of U.S. foreign policy in retrospect of that infamous day.
In the most recent Newsweek, State Department honcho Ryan Crocker assesses the current state of U.S. foreign policy in retrospect of that infamous day.
China: Expectations and Consequences
IMHO, China is mired by five major social, economic, and political predicaments:
1) A massive wealth disparity between socioeconomic classes
2) A massive population
3) Entrenched corruption at all levels of government
4) Perceived lack of human rights by the Western world
5) One-party rule by the Communist government
Above these obviously monumental issues is an even more severe umbrella problem: Any attempt to solve any one of these problems would likely exacerbate at least one other problem in the frightening list.
For instance, controlling population growth is unfeasible for China if the one-child policy is not perpetually enforced. China can either appease the West and allow its population to expand even further, or disregard complaints of human rights abuse and continue restricting family freedoms.
As another example, bridging the wealth divide requires the sort of bureaucratic clout that a single party -- operating efficiently with little political competition -- can best wield. Yet only a fleeting glance at municipal governments would attest that lack of such competition breeds graft and kleptocracy. Thomas Friedman touches on China's one-party dilemma in the following Times article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/opinion/09friedman.html?_r=1
In the face of international and domestic pressures pulling China in a multitude of directions, what is a burgeoning power to do?
1) A massive wealth disparity between socioeconomic classes
2) A massive population
3) Entrenched corruption at all levels of government
4) Perceived lack of human rights by the Western world
5) One-party rule by the Communist government
Above these obviously monumental issues is an even more severe umbrella problem: Any attempt to solve any one of these problems would likely exacerbate at least one other problem in the frightening list.
For instance, controlling population growth is unfeasible for China if the one-child policy is not perpetually enforced. China can either appease the West and allow its population to expand even further, or disregard complaints of human rights abuse and continue restricting family freedoms.
As another example, bridging the wealth divide requires the sort of bureaucratic clout that a single party -- operating efficiently with little political competition -- can best wield. Yet only a fleeting glance at municipal governments would attest that lack of such competition breeds graft and kleptocracy. Thomas Friedman touches on China's one-party dilemma in the following Times article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/opinion/09friedman.html?_r=1
In the face of international and domestic pressures pulling China in a multitude of directions, what is a burgeoning power to do?
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Russia!
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/28/world/europe/28crimea.html
A great article outlining Russia's conflict with Ukraine, one of the major issues plaguing Eastern Europe at the moment.
And in a completely different political tone, the Russians are promising to rebuild and reorganize the separatist Georgian territory with extensive economic aid:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/world/europe/13russia.html
A great article outlining Russia's conflict with Ukraine, one of the major issues plaguing Eastern Europe at the moment.
And in a completely different political tone, the Russians are promising to rebuild and reorganize the separatist Georgian territory with extensive economic aid:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/world/europe/13russia.html
Monday, September 7, 2009
Afghanistan and Iraq
Christopher Hitches, mild defense of the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq
http://www.slate.com/id/2227227/
http://www.slate.com/id/2227227/
Saudi Arabia
Another series of "Dispatches" from Slate, concerning various aspects of the Saudi education system and its effect on Saudi society and politics.
http://www.slate.com/id/2226874/entry/0/
http://www.slate.com/id/2226874/entry/0/
Albania
First three of a (hopefully) five-part Slate series called "Dispatches"; basically someone goes somewhere and writes about it. Interesting stuff about Albania.
http://www.slate.com/id/2226840/entry/2226841/
http://www.slate.com/id/2226840/entry/2226841/
Sunday, September 6, 2009
TOPICS
Topics Have Been Announced!!!
Also, to further push your competitive natures, those outside of the winners last Sunday can compete for next in line to choose their topic: the individual who writes the best post (before Sunday) on the topic they want will get it.
Special envoys
Special envoys can help bring attention and diplomatic muscle to resolve conflicts and global challenges but they also bring with them their own "special" problems. Will the Obama administration's reliance on special envoys increase the ability of the U.S. to deal with major international issues or complicate our diplomatic options?
Preventing genocide
Post-election rioting in Kenya in December 2007 brought pressure on Nairobi, from international and regional diplomats, to end tensions and avert bloodshed on a massive scale. What lessons can be learned from the intervention in Kenya? What does it mean for the UN's emerging “responsibility to protect” doctrine?
Global crime
From the booming sex trade in Eastern Europe, to online fraud syndicates in Africa and the drug cartels of Asia and Central America, crime is becoming increasingly organized and globalized. How can countries better protect citizens seeking the benefits of a globalized world from being exploited? What international actors can effectively fight global organized crime?
U.S.–China security relations
China's influence is growing, along with its military expenditures. How will this growth affect China's relations with its neighbors and with the U.S.? Will China's expanding military and economic power affect traditional U.S. roles and U.S. alliances in East Asia? How will countries like Japan, South Korea and India respond?
Global financial crisis
The global financial crisis that began in late 2007 revealed major deficiencies in the regulation of markets and institutions – all of which came perilously close to collapse. Emergency measures to prevent a full collapse of the global financial system have led to mixed results. How will governments and the world community respond to this challenge?
Russia and its neighbors
Russia's policy of maintaining a “sphere of influence” in former Soviet satellites has been challenged in recent years by movements against pro-Russia regimes. Russia has pushed back by cutting Ukraine's natural gas supply and intervening in Georgia's campaign in South Ossetia. Will Russia regain its traditional leadership role in the region?
The Persian Gulf
Now more than ever, the Persian Gulf region offers many difficult challenges to U.S. policymakers. How will Obama's direct appeal to Arabs and Muslims impact U.S. foreign policy in the region? What will the fallout of withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq be? Can the U.S. and its allies prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons?
Peacebuilding and conflict resolution
U.S. campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan have shown that military force alone cannot ensure peace in all conflicts. How can the U.S. successfully integrate the tools of peace building into its statecraft? At what point do poverty, disease and climate change threaten national security? What role can non-governmental actors play in supporting government led efforts?
Also, to further push your competitive natures, those outside of the winners last Sunday can compete for next in line to choose their topic: the individual who writes the best post (before Sunday) on the topic they want will get it.
Special envoys
Special envoys can help bring attention and diplomatic muscle to resolve conflicts and global challenges but they also bring with them their own "special" problems. Will the Obama administration's reliance on special envoys increase the ability of the U.S. to deal with major international issues or complicate our diplomatic options?
Preventing genocide
Post-election rioting in Kenya in December 2007 brought pressure on Nairobi, from international and regional diplomats, to end tensions and avert bloodshed on a massive scale. What lessons can be learned from the intervention in Kenya? What does it mean for the UN's emerging “responsibility to protect” doctrine?
Global crime
From the booming sex trade in Eastern Europe, to online fraud syndicates in Africa and the drug cartels of Asia and Central America, crime is becoming increasingly organized and globalized. How can countries better protect citizens seeking the benefits of a globalized world from being exploited? What international actors can effectively fight global organized crime?
U.S.–China security relations
China's influence is growing, along with its military expenditures. How will this growth affect China's relations with its neighbors and with the U.S.? Will China's expanding military and economic power affect traditional U.S. roles and U.S. alliances in East Asia? How will countries like Japan, South Korea and India respond?
Global financial crisis
The global financial crisis that began in late 2007 revealed major deficiencies in the regulation of markets and institutions – all of which came perilously close to collapse. Emergency measures to prevent a full collapse of the global financial system have led to mixed results. How will governments and the world community respond to this challenge?
Russia and its neighbors
Russia's policy of maintaining a “sphere of influence” in former Soviet satellites has been challenged in recent years by movements against pro-Russia regimes. Russia has pushed back by cutting Ukraine's natural gas supply and intervening in Georgia's campaign in South Ossetia. Will Russia regain its traditional leadership role in the region?
The Persian Gulf
Now more than ever, the Persian Gulf region offers many difficult challenges to U.S. policymakers. How will Obama's direct appeal to Arabs and Muslims impact U.S. foreign policy in the region? What will the fallout of withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq be? Can the U.S. and its allies prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons?
Peacebuilding and conflict resolution
U.S. campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan have shown that military force alone cannot ensure peace in all conflicts. How can the U.S. successfully integrate the tools of peace building into its statecraft? At what point do poverty, disease and climate change threaten national security? What role can non-governmental actors play in supporting government led efforts?
Friday, September 4, 2009
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Copenhagen 2009
As we all know, the U.N. Climate Change Conference will be held this December in Copenhagen. All around the world who are environmentally conscious hope that this round of negotiations will spur the cooperations of the U.S. and China, two major emitters of waste that were either uncooperative or exempt during the Kyoto negotiations. I anticipate that Copenhagen will be important for Great Decisions in the coming weeks and months.
Michael Levi of the Council on Foreign Relations wrote this pessimistic piece in the most recent issue of Foreign Affairs. I look forward to discussing with y'all the implications of regulating emissions in both industrialized and developing nations. Would levying the same degree of regulation on a developing country as, say, the United States be unfair?
Foreign Policy Association Blogs
Here's a collection of foreign policy blogs. There are several issues followed, for example, "Arctic News Roundup" (a favorite of mine) and "The Kurdish Issue."
http://foreignpolicyblogs.com/
According to the site, "Foreign Policy Blogs is the largest network of global affairs blogs. Staffed by professional contributors from the worlds of journalism, academia, business, non-profits and think tanks, the FPB network tracks global developments from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe and everywhere in between, daily. The FPB network is a production of the Foreign Policy Association."
I thought this could give us some ideas about how to follow and blog foreign policy issues.
http://foreignpolicyblogs.com/
According to the site, "Foreign Policy Blogs is the largest network of global affairs blogs. Staffed by professional contributors from the worlds of journalism, academia, business, non-profits and think tanks, the FPB network tracks global developments from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe and everywhere in between, daily. The FPB network is a production of the Foreign Policy Association."
I thought this could give us some ideas about how to follow and blog foreign policy issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)