Why America's War on Drugs Will Wane

For roughly four decades, a clear foreign policy rule set has existed between the United States and Latin America, centering largely on the question of counternarcotics. Starting with Richard Nixon's "war on drugs," an explicit quid pro quo came into existence: U.S. foreign aid (both civilian and military) in exchange for aggressive Latin American efforts to curb both the production and trafficking of illegal narcotics (primarily marijuana and cocaine).

Continue reading this week's New Rules column at WPR.

More back and forth on U.S.-China trade volleys

WORLD NEWS: "U.S. and China Ease a Range of Trade Restrictions: Beijing Allows Pork Imports, Washington to Let In Chickens, as Joint Commission Resolves Some Disputes Before Obama Visit," by James T. Areddy, Wall Street Journal, 30 October 2009.

WORLD NEWS: "Beijing Slams U.S. Tariffs in Growing Clash: China Calls Washington's Import Duties on Steel Pipe 'Abusive Protectionism,' as Both Sides Launch New Trade Probes," by Aaron Back and Patricia Jiayi Ho, Wall Street Journal, 7-8 November 2009.

WORLD NEWS: "New Friction and Vast Agenda Await Obama on China Trip," by Ian Johnson, Wall Street Journal, 7-8 November 2009.

Saw recently that the U.S. is set to slap some new tariffs on Chinese steel, so don't expect the back and forth to end with Obama's visit. But to call it a "trade war," as the WSJ does in the second piece, is a bit much.

Considering that the U.S. trade imbalance with China has shrunken from over $250B last year to about $150B this year, it's only natural that there is plenty of back and forth, with both sides putting on quite the show. To manage such a drop without a trade fight exploding out of control is a key "dog that did not bark" for Obama's first year.

But yeah, expect all sorts of sparks to continue. Compared to Bush, who frankly did not push the Chinese on anything, Obama will be less popular inside China, given the current agenda of "rebalancing."

As David Shambaugh argues in the third piece, this is the first summit where the dominant issues to be addressed aren't just bilateral but truly global. So, again, expect more friction as the relationship elevates in a big way this time around.

Revolutionary Guards: the latest expansion of power

WORLD NEWS: "Revolutionary Guards Extend Reach to Iran's Media: Planned News Agency Fits With Move to Dominate Accounts of Events; 'They Want to Control Public Opinion,'" by Farnaz Fassihi, Wall Street Journal, 4 November 2009.

More evidence that the mullahs aren't being allowed to run anything truly important as the Revolutionary Guards consolidate their putsch: the RGs are launching their own Associated Press-like entity that they will control completely.

Ahmadinejad, as a WSJ front-page analysis predicted years ago (I blogged it), has always been about making the RGs the new, independent power inside Iran, marginalizing the mullahs. As for his profound religiosity? Well, only Nixon can go to China, so only a totally religious leader like Ahmadinejad could pull off such a putsch.

We've got a lot in common

ARTICLE: Group Resists Korean Stigma for Unwed Mothers, By CHOE SANG-HUN, New York Times, October 7, 2009

Remember when we were told that Asian societies were so different from our own?

As usual, it turns out that urbanization and industrialization and modernization changes societies in ways more similar than different. Yes, the perceived "strength" of culture can delay change, but once it happens, it tends to look the same the world over.

Amazing yes? Because everywhere I go in this world I hear the same thing: we value family more than other societies, and other societies value life less than we do.

With invisible special envoys, not sure why/how Clinton must "reassert" role

WORLD NEWS: "Clinton Reasserts Her Role in U.S. Foreign Policy: Secretary of State's Profile Rises as Obama's 'Engagement' Diplomacy Comes Under Pressure; Shuttling Around the Mideast," by Jay Solomon, Wall Street Journal, 2 November 2009.

To me, this is idle gossip. Clinton, along with Gates, will be more hawkish than the rest of the cabinet, especially in combination. I think the administration needs that sort of push from the inside, because its instinct will always be to temporize when it can, given the strategic hand it was dealt by Bush-Cheney.

So I expect the harsher-line view to fail most of the time, for good reasons, but I see no reason to--on that basis--obsess over who's up or down.

Mueller on our nuclear obsession: an argument taken too far

BOOKSHELF: "Why Worry? (Atomic Obsession: Nuclear Alarmism From Hiroshim to Al-Qaeda by John Mueller), by Gabriel Schoenfeld, Wall Street Journal, 30 October 2009.

I like Mueller's stuff a lot, as a rule. He debunks fear-mongering better than just about any IR prof.

And I totally agree with the basic premise that we obsess far too much over the "increasing" proliferation of nukes (which has been magically "increasing" my entire life and we're still under ten nuclear powers), and that there's nothing magical or ultra-profound over a nuke bomb versus the myriad of other ways we kill people in this world (so no, one suitcase terror bomb will NOT change everything).

But Mueller appears to go too far in this analysis, basically saying that nukes are good for nothing: played no role in Japan's surrender, weren't important in the Cold War superpower standoff, etc. In his zeal to toss out the bathwater, he's chucked the baby as well.

The best reason not to fear nukes is that they work: they keep great-power war at bay. The only trick we face is managing the ascension of rogue powers into great-power status on this singular basis.

I got into this biz about 20 years ago, and all I heard was Iraq, Iran and North Korea! Twenty years later all I hear about is Iran and North Korea!

That is some crazy-ass proliferation all right--completely out of control!

The Chamber should represent U.S. business interests--as it sees fit

FRONT PAGE: "No Deal: Chamber Chief Battles Obama," by Stephen Power, Wall Street Journal, 30 October 2009.

While I don't agree with much of the Chamber's opposition to Obama, I think it's perfectly okay for the Chamber to play such a role, defending--in its own way--the interests of private-sector business.

If Thomas Donahue's leadership is widely perceived as unnecessarily obstructionist, then the Chamber will continue losing prominent members (Apple recently left), and that will create pressure for his removal.

But there is nothing wrong with not going along.

Susan in the NYT

ARTICLE: New York's Cabbies Like Credit Cards? Go Figure, By MICHAEL M. GRYNBAUM, New York Times, November 7, 2009

My sister-in-law Susan Barnett, the photographer artist, appears in a NYT story pic.

Military industrial complex needs to diversify with SysAdmin

ARTICLE: Flying Into Headwinds, By CHRISTOPHER DREW, New York Times, October 8, 2009

No surprise for those of us who have long argued that long/small wars are not particularly good for the old-school industrial complex.

Thus my preaching, for several years now, of the need to get into the "second half" peace/postwar/economic development.

The good news? Globalization's continued explosive growth (not our version, but that now propelled by New Core pillars like Brazil, India and China) creates all manner of business opportunities for those who can manage huge projects and build big nets and do lotsa systems integration--all things most big defense contractors are very good at doing.

The Iraq withdrawal will take some time

ARTICLE: Leaving Iraq Is a Feat That Requires an Army, By MARC SANTORA, New York Times, October 8, 2009

This is why all the talk--way back when--about a quick withdrawal out of Iraq was a complete myth.

Some sense of perspective:

The scale of the withdrawal is staggering. Consider a comparison with the Persian Gulf war in 1991: it lasted 1,012 hours, or about six weeks, and when it was over, Lt. Gen. William G. Pagonis, in charge of the Army's logistical operations at the time, wrote a book, "Moving Mountains" (Harvard Business Press Books, 1992), about the challenges of moving soldiers and equipment in and out of the theater.

He called the undertaking the equivalent of moving all the people of Alaska, along with their belongings, to the other side of the world "in short order."

When China has the logistical and political muscle to engage in interventions on this scale, then it'll be a true superpower. Until then, we'll celebrate its ethics-free "soft power."

Save the sea-level dwellings?

ARTICLE: Maldives: Bring the Waterproof Pens, ASSOCIATED PRESS, October 7, 2009

Fabulous logic implied here: the world should kneecap industrialization and economic development in a host of rising countries whose development has and will continue lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty so as to make sure that people living in the lowest levels above sea level should have their existences preserved.

Or maybe we just accept the fact that sea levels will rise and adapt ourselves.

The difference between the Netherlands and the Maldives? One has the money for dikes and all manner of sea-retaining technology, and the other does not. So what's the solution? Beggar the Netherlands or develop the Maldives? And if there's no compelling economic logic for the latter, just how far do we go to slow down globalization for these slices of humanity that will no longer be able to live in environmentally unsustainable landscapes? Do we really want to define our global future on the basis of what works to keep Bangladesh Bangladesh-like going forward?

What's it take to get some regionalization?

ARTICLE: Clinton Arrival in Pakistan Met by Fatal Attacks, By MARK LANDLER and ISMAIL KHAN, New York Times, October 28, 2009

With the Obama team continuing Bush-Cheney's lack of strategic imagination in regionalizing the solution set on Afghanistan (no worries, as the Chinese solution plugs along--investment by investment--in both sides of the Af-Pak divide), there is plenty of logic behind backing the horse most willing right now to take the fight directly to the enemy.

The Biden redirect in action, with the Pakistani desire for no American "face" being most welcome--casualty wise.

The best route forward on Iran (and nukes)

OP-ED: Bunkers or Breakthrough?, By ROGER COHEN, New York Times, November 5, 2009

Honestly, I see Cohen's angst here as completely misplaced. Normalization with Iran is not contingent on precluding Iran's nuclear achievement. Hell, NorKo made it happen and THEN we offered them a peace treaty!

The best route forward, as I have long argued, is simply to de-prioritize the nuke question. If the Iranian protesters want Obama's embrace, then I say, give it to them. If it pisses off Tehran WRT to the nuclear talks, then--quite frankly--nothing is lost.

As for getting jacked about ElBaradei leaving his post, I am completely unsympathetic. Guy never accomplished anything anyway, as he admits. Get somebody else from central casting.

China's using North Korea

ARTICLE: In North Korea, the military now issues economic orders, By Blaine Harden, Washington Post, November 3, 2009

Important story on NorKo: if it does indeed contain almost $6T in mineral wealth, then I guess I would expect China to allow Kim's kleptocracy to continue concentrating itself on that flow, meaning no hope that China will do much about the regime until the place is bled dry of resources.

The only good news here is the death of party identification, the exact opposite of press reports on Wen's recent visit there, when party symbols were everywhere.

"The army is the people, the state and the party," the government has declared. All references to the word "communism" were removed this year from the North Korean constitution. They were replaced with the word "songun," which means "military first."

Defectors and outside experts agree that "military first" is a literal description of how the economy works, how citizens are forced to organize their lives and how Kim remains powerful -- and wealthy.

To me, this is one mafia bleeding another dry before being willing to toss them on the ash heap of history.

Start the clock on the $6T.

Worthwhile delay

ARTICLE: Obama seeks study on local leaders for troop decision, By Scott Wilson and Greg Jaffe, Washington Post, October 29, 2009

Would have thought McChrystal's review would have included such an a province-by-province analysis, but since it didn't, this call makes sense to me--as in, worth the "dithering" time.

Hello, John

ARTICLE: Adios, Juan and Juanita: Latin Names Trend Down, By Jeffrey Kluger, Time, Oct. 06, 2009

Bunch of stats that drive home an old observation of mine: Latinos are no slouches when it comes to assimilation.

(Thanks: JRiley)

HRC puts Pakistanis on notice

ARTICLE: Clinton Challenges Pakistanis on Al Qaeda, By MARK LANDLER, New York Times, October 29, 2009

Clinton's none-too-subtle subtext? We will hold you responsible for the next 9/11.

There is a new sort of deterrence to be found in such declarations: Don't make me go all Bush Doctrine on your ass!

How far will Saudis go in Yemen?

ARTICLE: Saudis Strike Yemeni Rebels Along Border, By ROBERT F. WORTH, New York Times, November 5, 2009

It'll be interesting to see how far the Saudis are willing to go in any such intervention in Yemen, because, frankly, I don't see any external takers for that dubious prize.

Magazine mortality

ARTICLE: Condé Nast Closes Gourmet and 3 Other Magazines, By STEPHANIE CLIFFORD, New York Times, October 5, 2009

The magazine die-off that I spoke about months ago is happening with some speed now.

Be careful what yuan wish for

ARTICLE: China`s Revaluation Pressures, Rate Hikes & V-Shaped Recovery, How the Asian Century Begins (subscription required), By Vlad Signorelli, Bretton Woods Research, Oct 9 2009

What I find interesting here: this is an informal ganging-up, a sort of slow-mo Plaza Accord demanding a major currency (yuan) get into reasonable territory. And it's China creating the international back-pressure for its own revaluation.

Point: it works both ways when China really joins the global economy, and the days of hiding behind the dollar have to end.

Experts love to tout this as the "end of the dollar." China should be careful what it wishes for. The "beginning of the yuan" will prove to be a far more demanding era.