Policing is not security

ARTICLE: U.S. Kills Top Qaeda Militant in Southern Somalia, By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN and ERIC SCHMITT, New York Times, September 14, 2009

Second crank on this one: note how all we need to police Africa in a "global war" sense is a few special ops guys, not a ton of bodies. But remember this as well, it's the effort of places like Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa (small piece, big puzzle) that build the security. Killing bad guys is always nice, but it ain't security.

So your answer is a bit o' Leviathan and a larger SysAdmin effort, understanding--as I have long argued--that the SysAdmin is ultimately more civilian than uniform, more USG than DoD (U.S. gov than Dept. of Def), more world (esp. China in Africa) than U.S., and more FDI than ODA (foreign direct investment than official developmental aid).

So this--again--isn't about a lot of military presence and spending.

(Via WPR Media Roundup)

Does a world power fear its citizens?

ARTICLE: China makes gains in its bid to be top dog, By Gideon Rachman, Financial Times, September 14 2009

A good argument on the fragility of rising China. Note, as it's becoming frequently argued, that China seems to be ruling in fear of citizens.

That dynamic does not a world power make.

(Via WPR Media Roundup)

Balance of power in the Persian Gulf

ARTICLE: Changing Conventional Military Balance in the Gulf, By Michael Knights, PolicyWatch #1577, September 14, 2009

Some counterbalance to the notion that rising Iran owns the Gulf militarily.

(Via WPR Media Roundup)

Where America has gone and stayed, peace has come

POST: Conservatism And Afghanistan, By Andrew Sullivan, The Daily Dish, 08 Sep 2009

Disagree with Sullivan here: where America has gone and stayed, peace has come, not just to the country but to the region.

Now we're lured/forced by events to make similar efforts in parts of the world heretofore largely ignored or only temporarily/cynically addressed in the past.

Order will be applied to the region because the neighbors and the world have little choice but to address its shortcomings. That will take decades, but making it an American affair is foolish. We will simply have to accept the kindness of "strangers" more, especially those for whom this is the "front yard." The outcomes we will settle for will be sub-par by our standards, but the connectivity--also largely created and maintained by others--will come, and with the connectivity will follow the desired social change and associated political change.

But nothing can be imposed from the outside when the culture/economic/political gap is this large. We can't short-circuit history here, only speed it up. And we have to realize that while we may play bodyguard early on, globalization's advance will come through others and ultimately be defended by the same.

Again, if you can only stand for an American-style outcome, we never should have come. Both Left and Right tend to be childish in this regard--in the sense of Lenin's critique of those who wish for magical change. We have no need to match bin Laden's infantile thinking in this regard.

There are more than enough incentives to subdue this place, making it safe for women to act more like we believe they should be free to act and making it very dangerous--even deadly--for men who would have it otherwise. But we are being totally unrealistic on the incentives here--as well as the people most likely to respond to them in a manner we could eventually come to recognize as practical success.

The problem with Americans is that they hate to admit they can't do everything by themselves. And so we continue with this useless all-or-nothing debate.

We're not leaving. But we're also not going to be in charge of outcomes.

Remember those two realities and this will all go down a lot easier.

Good for the Swiss

ARTICLE: Swiss topple U.S. as most competitive economy: WEF, By Sven Egenter, Reuters, September 8, 2009

Inevitable, given the crash, and a good prod to boot.

Switzerland needs a vote of confidence right now anyway, given that it's going to stop taking tainted money--a move I cheer.

(Thanks: Vonne Meussling Barnett)

The Guard shows its teeth more and more in Iran

MIDDLE EAST AND AFRICA: "Iran's Revolutionary Guards: Showing who's boss; Iran's hard men purge opponents and line their pockets," The Economist, 29 August 2009.

The nastiness only grows: the Guard faction is taking over more and more of the government in the post-election fracas. The mullahs are being marginalized, a goal of Ahmadinejad's all along, I would argue.

Some see only the banishment of opposition parties, but the real putsch here is that the Guards are achieving a hegemony that will make them independently powerful. They simply won't need the illusion of mullah rule.

And please, spare me descriptions of how "nutty" and irrational these guys are. This is a mafia-as-ruling-party and little else--not a new beast and certainly not unfathomable.

Israel plays its role and Iran plays us

ARTICLE: Clinton Lays Out Iran Requirements, By MARK LANDLER, New York Times, September 15, 2009

I think the show-of-force requirement on our side here will be overwhelming, allowing the Iranians to act suitably enraged. That's why I think Medvedev did his recent hint on Moscow's openness on sanctions: Moscow has little sense these talks will go anywhere, so why not float it?

To me, this is a lot of time-buying, but little else. I don't think our hearts are in it and for good reasons: Israel plays its role to perfection, allowing Tehran to play us for time.

I see nothing here that tells me we're still not inevitably heading to Iran having nukes.

(Via WPR Media Roundup)

Nice progress in Iran

ARTICLE: Despite Warning, Thousands Rally in Iran, By ROBERT F. WORTH, New York Times, September 18, 2009

Very nice showing two months after the election, proving to the ruling leadership that the opposition has both legs and a capacity to disrupt events normally highly advantageous to the government.

Very impressive, indeed:

Coming a day after President Obama announced a revised missile defense system that aims to check Iran's military ambitions, the rallies underscored the continuing vitality of the domestic opposition movement, which has rejected the election as fraudulent and fiercely criticized the violence that followed it.

In a striking contrast with earlier rallies, the police often stood on the sidelines as protesters faced off against huge crowds of government supporters -- many of them bused in from outside the cities -- and chain-wielding Basij militia members. There were reports of arrests in Tehran and the southern city of Shiraz, but no shootings or deaths, with the police apparently showing greater restraint than during earlier protests.

Yet another good reason to keep our missile defense responses as temporary and flexible as possible.

Especially sweet:

The protesters, ignoring stern official warnings not to use the annual pro-Palestinian rally as a pretext for demonstrations, showed up in large numbers wearing the trademark bright green color of the opposition.

When government men shouted "Death to Israel" through loudspeakers, protesters derisively chanted "Death to Russia" in response. Many opposition supporters are angry about Russia's quick acceptance of Mr. Ahmadinejad's electoral victory.

Most important, the students seem highly energized and not intimidated:

In the capital, the police and huge crowds of government supporters blocked most protesters from approaching Mr. Ahmadinejad as he arrived in a bulletproof car at Tehran University to deliver a speech before the formal Friday Prayer sermon. But as he began his remarks, chants of "Resign! Resign!" could be heard, according to witnesses cited on opposition Web sites.

All in all, this is progressing nicely.

How to help Yemen?

ARTICLE: Yemen: The world's next failed state?, The Economist, Sep 10th 2009

The driver for me mentioning Yemen in the recent Esquire column on dealing with rogue regimes. Inside the national security community, this scenario has been discussed for a while, although no one seems to have any clear ideas about how we could help.

(Via WPR Media Roundup)

Money can't buy me love

OP-ED: A 'weapons system' based on wishful thinking, By Andrew Wilder, Boston Globe, September 16, 2009

Good reminder that money alone ain't the answer, if it's perceived as being exploited by the local corrupt elite.

(Via WPR Media Roundup)

And we don't want that, do we?

ARTICLE: Russia's Reaction on Missile Plan Leaves Iran Issue Hanging, By CLIFFORD J. LEVY and PETER BAKER, New York Times, September 18, 2009

Key quote here comes from Mark Medish, with whom I attended the Russian Research Center's masters program at Harvard in the 1980s:

Much as in the Soviet days, Moscow's praise can be seen as a political kiss of death for Western counterparts. But the criticism misses the point that Mr. Obama has made a hardheaded calculation based on U.S. national security interests and strategic priorities.

Medish is a very smart guy who's worked Russian issues for a long time, serving high up in the Clinton administration.

We can't conduct relations with other great powers on the basis of caving in to our defense contractors' desires to sell, sell, sell. That would be the tail wagging the dog.

Children and their dreams

ARTICLE: Six-Year-Old Chinese Girl Dreams of Being a Corrupt Official, By Luo Ya, Epoch Times, Sep 7, 2009

Ms. Boss Tweed-in-the-making.

(Thanks: Jim)

The shoot hogs, don't they?

MARKETPLACE: "Harley to Ride Indian Growth," by Eric Bellman, Wall Street Journal, 28 August 2009.

For now the big bikes remain a luxury item. But we're talking about 500m unbranded Indian teenagers heading toward middle-class lifestyles.

So how to resist the opportunity when your buying base back in the States is aging out (notice the trikes)?

UAW, meet FAW--your replacement

CORPORATE NEWS: "GM Launches Truck Venture in China: Agreement with FAW Is Part of Auto Maker's New Focus on a Growing Market," by Norihiko Shirouzu and Patricia Jiayi Ho, Wall Street Journal, 31 August 2009.

Very ouch! We're talking 100k vehicles assembled per year by next year. The total joint venture now approaches 200k vehicles per year.

But no choice: light trucks in China represent half the global market.

And guess who the main foreign investor will be?

WORLD NEWS: "Iron Mine Is Key for Gabon's Next Leader: Candidates in Sunday's Presidential Vote Promise to Develop Nation's Rich Resources After 41 Years of Bongo Ondimba's Rule," by David Gauthier-Villars," Wall Street Journal, 28 August 2009.

The Chinese, of course.

Think China won't be in the business of nation-building on the continent? Dream on.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying China wants to do this. I'm saying China will be forced into it.

That's why the biggest missing discussion right now in the system is the lack of dialogue between China and the U.S. on Africa.

Where Africa differs on demographics

BRIEFING: "Africa's population: The baby bonanza; Is Africa an exception to the rule that countries reap a 'demographic dividend' as they grow richer?" The Economist< 29 August 2009.

The familiar Africa: high birth rates and high death rates and a hugely young population that never seems to morph into that fat middle of laborers with few to support above (elderly) or below (kids). So Africa remains pre-1800, Malthusian, yes?

Yet there is another Africa, an Africa whose people are charting a course more similar to that of the rest of the world: one where they are living longer, having fewer children, and in which more of their children are surviving infancy. Cities are restraining population growth, just as they have in Asia and Latin America. Addis Ababa, Accra, Luanda, may be fetid in parts--shockingly so for those coming from richer countries--but they have low fertility. An emerging African middle class is taking out mortgages and moving into newly built flats--and two children is what they want.

Africa is experiencing huge change. Only about 100m in 1850, Africa is now 1B and will reach 2B by 2050 (or two Africans for every European). And yet the demographic reductions are real too: in 1990 the total fertility rate is over six. By 2030 it should be three. By 2050, when humanity tops off as a species, it'll be 2.5.

So Africa is not all that different when growth really comes.

But the key is to take advantage of that demographic divided (big middle, relatively small cohorts of kids and elderly) when it comes, because it does not last long. Indeed, China's will disappear more quickly than it arrived.

Why Malthus can still be right in Africa: birth rates are still too high (so more contraception please); agriculture vastly underperforms (all those small plots); and then there's climate change a' coming.

The second big problem is the lack of adults relative to kids. Estimates are that there are 50m orphans in Africa, and that the number will rise to 100m over time. Africa has the highest rate of child disablement in the world--up to 20%. This is why China will fade as the source of transnational adoptions and why the next wave will be all about Africa. Some day soon enough our family will join the burgeoning numbers of American families that include children from both China and Africa.

The third big problem is the continuing burden of disease (Sachs' focus).

Then there's the lack of government institutions, which just tells me that we--and China--will be in the nation-building business in Africa for decades.

So what makes Malthus finally wrong in Africa like he's been proven wrong everywhere else by now?

Globalization comes to town.

Innovative Entrepreneurs Warm to Global Warming

As somebody who spends his workdays evaluating investment opportunities in emerging/frontier economies, I receive a lot of business pitches involving new technologies. The time I spend listening to these accounts of how things can ultimately work out for the better balances my work in the national security realm contemplating how everything must "inevitably" collapse into conflict. I find the perspective it offers invaluable, because it reveals how often what we call "realism" tends to be hopelessly trapped in centuries past.

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

The role of special forces around Afghanistan

ARTICLE: CENTRAL ASIA: PENTAGON PLANS FOR DEPLOYMENT OF SPECIAL FORCES TO STATES OUTSIDE AFGHANISTAN, Deirdre Tynan, EurasiaNet, 9/17/09

No surprise, but hardly, in my mind, representative of a "worst-case scenario," as opined in the piece.

This kind of ground work with local militaries takes time to improve their capabilities, so tying the move to perceived progress or lack thereof in Afghanistan is simplistic.

(Via WPR Media Roundup)

Missile defense realism

ARTICLE: The New Defense Realism, BY JOSEPH CIRINCIONE, Foreign Policy, SEPTEMBER 17, 2009

Cirincione on the missile "shield" decision. As always, very sensible stuff.

We are now right-sizing according to the threat, and moving faster instead of slower with proven technology instead of hoped-for.

(Thanks: jjennings)

Que est√∫pido!

OP-ED: How the US deepened the crisis in Honduras, By Eric Farnsworth, Christian Science Monitor, September 17, 2009

Couldn't agree more. This is a dumb, self-limiting move on the part of the Obama Administration. I expected smarter from Clinton.

Discrediting a free election beforehand serves no purpose whatsoever, and it closes the best escape hatch from the crisis.

(Via WPR Media Roundup)