The Selling of PNM has begunófor real

Dateline: above the garage in Portsmouth RI, 24 April

Getting emails from people around the country who say theyíve bought the book in a store and have begun reading it, which is exciting. Seems Putnamís ìembargoî date of 27 April either wasnít that strict or stores just want to get it out. War College prof just back from Atlanta said he saw it all over the airport down there.

Feeling pretty good: generated all the material I wanted to generate about the book for the site (directorís commentary by chapter, bibliographies by chapter and total one for book in alphabetical listing, 27 deleted scenes with commentary, reviews with commentary, glossary, errata page, etc.). Add it all up and itís tens of thousands of words that either bring delight or pain to the interested reader.

Feel like Iíve gotten the blogging concept down reasonably well. Got my new suits. Got my haircut on Friday. Got my plane/train tickets and hotels set up by Putnam for the 10-day tour.

And then the media tour agenda arrived from Putnam yesterday, and I must admit it is a bit intimidating.

Today started easy: Got up, coached son Kevin in YMCA baseball game (we rocked) along the shore of Narragansett Bay (awesome view), then painted faces at kidsí Catholic grade school annual spring fund raiser for 6 hours, breaking (in full face paint as ìred salamanderî) for 30 minutes to do on-phone live radio interview with NJ station with big Indian following both in US and in India (via web simulcast) in principalís office. Decent interview. I love talking about Indiaís growing importance in the world, and frankly, most Indians love hearing it.

So Day 1 not exactly a killer scheduleóexcept for painting about 25 kids faces in full animal masks (I mean goodólike at Disney World ìgoodî).

Sunday I rest up, clean the house, teach youngest son a thing or two about riding on training wheels, and then the fun really beginsÖ



Here are some of the possible highlights (all subject to change with almost no notice to me):

Monday, 26 April: Hannity & Colmes show on Fox at 9pm. (Cancelled)

Tuesday, 27 April: Fox News Live (10am hour), Laura Ingraham (11am hour), Paula Zahn on CNN (8pm hour), Headline News CNN (9pm hour), and Dennis Miller CNBC (late night).

Wednesday, 28 April: Diane Rehm on NPR at 11am hour, and Jim Bohannon on Westwood One Radio at 10pm live.

Friday, 30 April will be national radio satellite tour, when I ìvisitî Atlanta, Dallas, Philly, Grand Rapids, Hartford, California, Washington DC and St. Louis in an early morning span of about 4 hours. I will be bending the space-time continuum to accomplish this, so expect waves.

Saturday, 1 May, itís Tony Snow on Fox at 12 noon.

Monday, 3 May, itís the David Brudnoy Show on WBZ-AM in Boston at 9pm.

Tuesday, 4 May I do an evening at CUNY at 7pm in Manhattan (interview on stage, Q&A from audience, and sign books). People will actually pay for this.

Those are the main upcoming highlightsóall subject to cancellation at a momentís notice. I expert more than a few things will be added on the fly.

I am excited but a bit scared by all this engineered tumult. I know I set it all in motion but . . .

I can tell I will need a good stiff drink before falling asleep tonight. The train has definitely left the station and life is about to become very interesting. I hope I donít screw anything up. Will just have to trust my instincts and go with the flow.

The Pentagon's New Map: Errata

Typos found in the first edition

Here's my list to date:

1) p. 418, second line from top of page: "Arab Human Developmen\t Report" should read "Arab Human Development Report"

2) p. 422, under Chapter 7 heading, The Myth of Global Chaos, 5th line down: "Peace and Conflicts 2003" should read "Peace and Conflict 2003"

3) p. 424, second line from top of page: "found online at www.aei.org/publications.." should read "www.aei.org/publications."

If you find any not listed here, please enter them as comments to this page.

Corrections will be reflected at The Pentagon's New Map Errata

Honored by Japanese request

Taking PNM overseas! Banzai!

Dateline: over the garage, Portsmouth RI, 23 April

Agent calls today and says we have a nice offer from a Japanese publishing house for rights there, so we're taking the deal.

I am thrilled with the interest level in Japan. Few things would make me happier than to have some genuine impact on the public debate there about Japan's role in the world. I so admire Japanese society and culture that I want to see Tokyo play a far larger role in global affairs.

Plus, once the book is translated and published, I can give a copy to my brother Jerome who works for a big Japanese trading house as its general counsel. Imagine how cool that will be!

The let-them-eat-cake Saudis

Is jihad the best Saudis have to offer their youth?

Dateline: over the garage, Portsmouth RI, 23 April

Reference: "Saudis Support A Jihad in Iraq, Not Back Home: Riyadh Bombing Stirs Widespread Outrage," by Neil MacFarquhar, New York Times, 23 April, p. A1.

The brilliant juxtaposition in the first paragraph: widespread outrage in Saudi Arabia over a suicide bomber demolishing a police station on same day a Saudi family is receiving congratulations from the neighborhood on the news that their son just died waging jihad against the Americans in Iraq. People are stunned! Is there a connection?

I guess I would call this waging jihad strictly within the context of jihad, instead of understanding jihad within the context of everything else.

So the Saudis want to have their cake (jihad against Americans) and eat it too (remain totally isolated from the consequences)óbig deal!

Saudi officials, the article says, are trying to relieve the building pressure among their radicalized youth by letting them vent angrily against America in mosques across the country. They hope this will stop Saudis from rushing into jihad in Iraq.

Meanwhile, the parents of the Saudi man who gave it his all in Iraq are accepting compliments from all sides. "People are calling all the time to congratulate usócrying from happiness and envy."

Tell me this is a sustainable relationship and I will tell you America needs to pursue the Big Bang in the Middle East for all it's worth.

America: Losing the connectivity of tourism?

Malaysia: The Goldilocks vacation spot for Muslims

Dateline: over the garage, Portsmouth RI, 23 April

Reference: "Malaysia Draws New Tourists: Middle Easterners Wary of the U.S. Find Appealing Alternative," by John Krich, Wall Street Journal, 23 April, p. A13.

Malaysia is just right for Muslims from the Middle East who just want to relax overseas, away from the hustle and bustle of everyday life. It is the Goldilocks middle-ground "between the too-open freedom of the West and the too-closed conservatism of the Middle East," according to an Iraqi immigrant living there since 1975.

Good for Malaysia's tourism industry, but reflective of the firewalls we've put up between America and the outside world since 9/11. In the three years since, tourism from the Middle East to America has dropped by more than one-third.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's great that Malaysia is playing this role for the Middle East. It's doing Allah's work on this one, and anything that increases connectivity of the human sort is good for globalization as a whole. But it's sad to think America has become such a scary place for Muslims from the Middle East. I saw a woman walking on the base here in Newport yesterday as I drove homeóshe was head to toe in a black chador, probably on her way to the PX. Imagine the opposite scene in the Middle East, and your storyline could easily end in a riot. But here, in this strangely egalitarian society called the U.S. military, there is not a second glance from anyone.

We lose something important if we lose the connectivity of tourism. Visiting America is like visiting the future for the rest of the world. It saysófor good or illóthis is the direction you go when you globalize. There is an old Russian saying about seeing something once with your own eyes being worth more than hearing about it from others a hundred times. Malaysia, as good as it gets, is but a way-station to the future. I hate to see this candleóthis global future worth creatingóbe hidden under a basket.

Iraq: Democracy is the end, not the means

Parsing words on Iraqóthe "realpolitik" of Kerry

Datelineóabove the garage, Portsmouth RI, 22 April

Reference: "Kerry's Iraq 'Stability,'" by an otherwise intelligent Wall Street Journal editorial board, 22 April, p. A18.

This makes it 0-for-2 for the Journal today ó my favorite paper.

No, I don't expect them to favor Kerry over Bush, but this analysis of Kerry's supposed backtracking from democracy as a goal in Iraq to mere "stability" is just silly.

Yes, I'm on board with the WSJ's thoughts regarding the Middle East in general: the "stability" of the past three decades has sucked big-time, generating 9/11 and the GWOT. If that's "stability," I too will vote for transformation, and have in print myself. But when Kerry now stresses stability over democracy as a goal for the Iraq occupation, he's being realistic in the best sense of the word. Again, democracy is the end, not the means.

I myself have very little expectation of democracy in Iraq any time soon, and support the idea of American troops staying there for the long haul, because I honestly believe fewer American lives will be lost this way ó as opposed to cutting and running and watching terror take hold in that country and spread elsewhere. Frankly, if the choice is fighting terrorists in Baghdad versus Boston, using professional soldiers versus unaware citizens, I will chose Baghdad every single time. And I don't know of any soldiers, sailors, airmen or Marines who think differently. All of them take real pride in being on the front lines, and keeping those front lines over there.

But we're kidding ourselves when we argue that democracy is the answer for Iraq. Connectivity is the answer, because connectivity will get us stability in ways that democracy rarely does absent a host of wonderfully interrelated and mutually-supporting outcomes. Democracy doesn't mean squat when 70% are unemployed in Iraq, but connectivity can because it creates options, seams, opportunities, schemes, etc. Little stuff that ordinary people can act on and exploit. Democracy will be an empty exercise absent the economic opportunity that comes with broadband connectivity with the outside world that taps into the ambitions and desires of average citizens.

Pushing for that sort of "stability" doesn't make you a hard-headed realpolitik thinker, it makes you a realist pure and simple.

So please, WSJ, skip the word parsing. Skip the "remarkable reversal" talk about Democrats. Hell, skip the argument about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin while you're at it.

No one has to sign up to "democracy" in the Middle East to support our troops and what they're doing there right now. We need to stay focused on the tasks at hand, and they are: 1) stability; 2) connectivity; 3) economic growth and then ó and only then ó way down the road . . . 4) democracy.

We all need to get "real" on Iraq.

You mean you want us to plan for wars in advance?

Datelineóabove the garage, Portsmouth RI, 22 April

Reference: "Pentagon Funded Mideast Plans In Secret Prior to Iraq-War Vote," by David Rogers, Wall Street Journal, 22 April, p. A4.

I must be too cynical for my own good, or too much of a military insider to find anything surprising in Bob Woodward's book, "Plan of Attack." Everyone I know or interacted with in this business following 9/11 knew that Saddam was in the crosshairs as far as this administration was concerned. The White House said it was in a war and was determined to lay a shock on the Middle East just like bin Laden had on the U.S. Scores were going to be settled. Saddam would be given time and chances galore to avoid his fate, but the endgame was to be set in motion ó if he did not step aside or give up everything asked for, he would be forcibly removed. Again, none of this was a secret to anyone I know or interact with in the defense community. Nor were any of these efforts to put in place the equipment, infrastructure, personnel, understandings with allied militaries, etc. needed to make the threat of war not only credible but on target and on schedule should Saddam pass up his final chances.

How did the Pentagon pay for this? Same way it always does, stealing from Peter to pay Paul within its budget. Did any of this spending constitute an act of war? Hardly. All of it could be rationalized within the existing efforts to squeeze Saddam and keep his forces within the box of the northern and southern fly zones. No secret war, no secret funds ó unless you somehow expected the Pentagon to pull a war plan out of its ass the day after our final offer to Saddam expired.

I must confess, I find nothing in Woodward's book compelling or new or enlightening. I find it one big spin-athon by everyone in this administration looking over his or her shoulder toward their individual legacies. True to form, Colin Powell plays it both ways. That man's entire career has been one giant exercise in putting off tough decisions til the last possible moment, choosing wrongly almost every single time a gut-check decision was required, and then later lamenting that his 20/20 hindsight wasn't respected. Tell me, other than simply holding a lot of fabulous jobs, can anyone name a genuine success within his widely assumed legacy of "great leadership"? Anything at all?

And if you say the Powell Doctrine, then let's lay the blame right here and now for the mess in Iraq in his lap. The Powell Doctrine has done nothing more than pervert our military force structure over the past 15 years, generating a first-half force in a league that keeps score until the end of the game.

But I digress . . .

I know how important it is inside the Beltway to ask "what did he know and when did he know it?" That's why Woodward is such a world-class journalist. He epitomizes what Washington has become ó almost leaderless but rife with investigations.

The Pentagon is always planning for war in secret. That's what it does for a living. It would matter what Congress approved or didn't approve if we still actually lived in a world where the United States declares war, but we no longer live in that world. Woodward's book and his charges are completely irrelevant to the tasks and questions at hand. When you get the press breathlessly reporting this sort of crap (the Wall Street Journal . . . come on!), you know we're hitting rock bottom in a political season.

"Democracy emerges when..."

Handicapping the Gap (Latin America)

Datelineóabove the garage, Portsmouth RI, 22 April

Reference: "Latin America Losing Hope In Democracy, Report Says," by Warren Hoge, New York Times, 22 April, p. A3.

A stupid headline, based on weak analysis of a poorly designed poll. The UN Development Program polls 18,000 and interviews several hundred opinion leaders across Latin America. Basic upshot? Just over half the people say that economic development is more important than maintaining democracy. Can you believe it? People prefer eating over voting!

Gosh, what will the UN think of testing next? Democracy versus cancer?

Wonderfully stupid quote: "This shows that democracy is not something that has taken hold of people's minds as strongly as we had thought it would," so sayeth Mexico's UN ambassador, clearly forgetting about the people's stomachs.

Betcha he eats just fine.

Latin America underwent a wave of democratization starting in the early 1980s, but that alone isn't enough to ensure broadband economic development. Go figure! And when people in the region still suffer from abusive police, weak judicial systems, and widespread corruption in their governments, roughly half are open to having more order and less injustice. My guess is that the international financial community would welcome it as well, along with a radical revamping of existing laws regarding property ownership, which historically have been biased toward the needs of the upper elite who ó not surprisingly ó basically own all the property.



Democracy emerges when a lot of other good things are already in place and working. That sort of freedom sits fairly high on Maslow's hierarchy of needs. You've got to take care of the body itself before you can worry about the body politic. You have to provide for it (physiological), keep it secure (safety), allow for connectivity to bloom (love) and personalóusually economically expressedóambition to be reach (esteem, aka the middle class), then we're talking the self-actualization of democracy. You remove any of the pillars below that top one, and it can easily come tumbling down in terms of people's expectations, devotion, and willing to sacrifice for it.

Democracy is not a means, but an end. We cannot shrink the Gap until we start understanding the pathways realistically involved for those whom we would help. You want to help democracy in Latin America, propose a Free Trade Area of the Americas deal that Latin American states can live with! Open up America for more member states!

Show them the money and the love connection . . .

Seam(y) Expectations

Handicapping the Gap (Thailand)

Datelineóabove the garage, Portsmouth RI, 21 April

Reference: "U.S. Ally in Asia May Have Crossed Line in Terror Fight: Thailand Admits Its Police Abducted Muslim Suspects In Wake of Brutal Attacks," by Shawn W. Crispin, Wall Street Journal, 21 April, p. A1.

Such are the trade-offs of working with key seam states such as Thailand, which has become a key U.S. ally in the Global War on Terrorism since 9/11. This country hosts a joint counter-terrorism intell center with the U.S.. The Thais are credited with the capture of the Bali bombing mastermind Hambali (Riduan Isamuddin). Thailand has been declared a "non-NATO ally" of the U.S., meaning it gets access to state-of-the-art military technology restricted to others. And the markets have liked it too: last year its stock market was the world's best.

But now there's evidence emerging of more than 100 Thai Muslims disappearing in police raids, and that sort of stink, coming on the heels of the government's very bloody crackdown on drug dealers last year in which more than 2,500 lives were ended with extreme prejudice, is beginning to have an effect. The stock market, for example, is down for the year, and the Muslims are up in protest.

What have we gotten into here? Thailand has battled with drugs (Golden Triangle area it shares with Laos and Myanmar) and Muslim separatists for decades, but that violence has flown under our normative radar the vast majority of the time. It's only when we really need Thailand's help in security, like during the Vietnam War or now in the GWOT, that we tend to notice. So the State Department issues a human rights report in February and notes the "worsening" situation there, and the local PM responds by calling the U.S. a "useless friend."

Hypocrite would be a better term.

America needs to be realistic about what it can expect from allies whose geography places them between the Core and Gap. If we want them to tighten their security rule sets enough to make sure bad things don't come out of that Gap and into the Core, we cannot simultaneously hold them to the standards of human rights security that we may enjoy deep inside the Core (and yeah, America is basically a long ways away from the serious trouble spots of the world, Colombia being about the closest).

On the other hand, we don't turn a blind eye either, because too much stickóespecially if it gets clearly out of hand or is wielded corruptlyóends up making the situation inside the country or region even worse. For example, there are signs that Muslims in Thailand are more restive as a result of these crackdowns, but then again, who wouldn't beóMuslim or not?

My larger point is this: the security rule sets we enjoy inside the Core simply do not penetrate much of the Gap, and along the Seam things can get very cloudy. We need to keep these distinctions in mind as we deal with friends and foes alike.

Russia: Give pace a chance

Democracy as a controllable condition (Russia)

Datelineóabove the garage, Portsmouth RI, 21 April

Reference: "Give Me Liberty, but Not Too Much: This Is Russia," by Seth Mydans, New York Times, 21 April, p. A4.

Ah the perplexing mystery that is Russia Ö

It has opened its borders like never before in history. It has embraced markets like never before in its history. It currently poses less of a military threat to the West than ever before in its history (except when we were beating on it in this or that European war).

And yet we are somehow disappointed, yes? Not enough democracy. Russia has become almost boring in its political functioning, and now we have a new name for this odd conditionócontrollable democracy.

Former Soviet experts who adeptly adjusted their career paths to become Russian experts tend to be a fairly sullen lot. Almost none ever have anything good to say about RussiaóMarshall Goldman being the prime example. Russia, in their view, is always going to hell in a handbasketóexcept it isn't. It's situation is . . . kak skazat pa-Amerikansky? Kontrollable.

Da, all is in order. So I guess our main disappointment is that Russia is taking its own sweet time in replicating American-style democracy. It's going slowly along that pathway, much like dawdling China. And judging by the lack of raging protest in each, and the rising incidents of class-action lawsuits and people trying toóget this!óactually sue the government for wrong-doing in certain limited instances, I guess we can say that the masses in both countries are reasonably satisfied by the pace of political change and their outlets for making their dissatisfaction known.

Might it always be faster? Sure. But going slow has its virtues, like staying out of the front pages and avoiding any slippage in the direction of the Gap.

I say, give the pace a chance.

GWOT: war against individuals, selectively so

De-accessing partners = de-accessing outcomes

Datelineóabove the garage, Portsmouth RI, 21 April

Reference: "2 U.S. Generals Criticize a Ban of Ex-Iraq Elite," by Eric Schmitt, New York Times, 21 April, p. A1.

America hasn't declared a war against another nation-state since 1943.

A free cookie to anyone who can name that state.

Drum roll please . . . ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. Romania.

World War II was the last "total war" we waged, and in total war you not only defeat your enemy's army, you dismantle his political system and remake it in your own image. That is how we got modern-day Germany and Japan.

We no longer fight such wars, and thus no longer engage in such total makeovers.

We went into Panama looking for one guy. We went into Somalia and decided it was just one warlord and his cronies. We defeated Serbia by taking down the Milosevic clan. We went into Iraq looking for a deck of cards.

We no longer fight nations, states, governments or even militaries. We wage war against individuals only.

So it's important to be clear about who exactly are the bad guys and who exactly are the good guys. Saddam and the deck of cards? Very bad. Everybody who ever belonged to the Baathist Party in Iraq? Whoa doggy! Let's be a bit more discerning than that, okay?

Why? We deny ourselves access to a whole generation of leadership in the government and military that could and should be exerting local governmental control across Iraq todayónot just some rag-tag collection of exiles whose main virtue is lack of recent time in country. Hell, we've got lotsa that sort of credentials ourselves!

In this GWOT, we wage war against individualsónot against a region, not against a religion, and hopefully not against everyone forced into service in some now-dead regime. When we de-access partners we otherwise could use through such poor decisions and through such imprecise language, we de-access outcomesópure and simple.

Rehabbing Iraq is like rehabbing the Gap in general: like the song says, "open the door and let 'em in."

Iraq: Give Pax a chance

Give them connectivity and let them blog

Datelineóabove the garage, Portsmouth RI, 21 April

Reference: "Iraqis enjoy new freedom of expression on Web journals," by Cesar G. Soriano, USA Today, 21 April

The real story of postwar Iraq is not found in the violence, but in the growing connectivity with the outside world. This is the most important measure of effectiveness regarding our interventionóIraq today is far more connected than it was a year ago.

A year ago access to the Internet was only a dream to the vast majority of Iraqis. "Now, Internet cafes seemingly dot every block in Baghdad, and new ones open often."

Quelle surprise! Iraqi bloggers have arisen in numbers, and one is already an international celebrity for his online journal. Like so many before, it began as a series of email exchanges during the war (exactly the same way I sent dispatches around the world from the family war that was my firstborn's battle with cancer back in '95). Now the poor guy, who writes as Salam Pax, has both a book and a much-visited website. So busy he doesn't return calls from USA Today.

Seems like everyone wants to give Pax a chance nowadays!

One blogger says of his new-found liberation on the Internet: "I was afraid all my life. I will not go back to living in fear"óor, I might add, disconnectedness.

The Last Starfighter

Dateline: above the garage, Portsmouth RI, 20 April

About 25 years ago on a family vacation in Canada, I got the privilege of meeting a living legend on my mother's side of the family: one of Canada biggest flying aces of World War II (my mom's cousin). I was very psyched to meet the guy, but came away from the interaction somewhat disappointed. He was shorter than me (I was only 16 at the time), friendly as a puppy dog, and all in all, he just did not fit my image of what a flying ace would act like. Despite looking like he couldn't scare a mouse, he was -- apparently in his age -- a veritable killing machine in a plane.

Until last Friday, my Mom's cousin was the most celebrated wartime pilot I had ever met in person. Unbeknownst to me, last Friday, as I was giving my brief at the Joint Staff (Strategic Plans and Policy) or J-5 off-site, I was actually in the presence of one of the most famous wartime pilots in the world today -- a one-star Air Force general by the name of General Gary North (the guy who was instrumental in getting me the invitation to speak; he had heard me before). North's claim to fame? He is the last US military pilot to actually shoot down an enemy plane in combat. When did he do this? Desert Storm--or over a dozen years ago.

It's been well over a decade since the U.S. military has faced any enemy willing to fly an aircraft in combat against our own. That's how suicidal such head-to-head competition has become, or why the only real enemies we face today will fight us exclusively in an asymmetrical fashion.

That, my friends, is what happens to the world's military Leviathan: it is forced to slowly move in the direction of System Administration as a result of no longer being able to find any enemies worth fighting in traditional combat.

If done well, this is not only a good thing, it is a great thing. Because if done well, we're talking about the end of war as this planet has known it for centuries on end.

How we prevent the next Iraq occupation from going sour

Datelineóabove the garage, Portsmouth RI, 19April

Great article in Wall Street Journal yesterday by Greg Jaffe and others entitled "Winning the Peace: Early U.S. Decisions on Iraq Now Haunt American Efforts," 19 April, p. A1.

The subtitle says it all: "officials let looters roam, disbanded army, allowed radicals to gain strength; failure to court an ayatollah."

We were in such a huge hurry to win the war in record time with our Leviathan force that we completely opted out of any responsibility for fielding the Sys Admin, or back-half force to win the peace. That back-half force is pure MOOTW, or military operations other than war.

But the Pentagon hates MOOTW, and bringing up the realities of that sort of necessary follow-on effort is enough to get you canned, as Army Chief of Staff General Eric Shinseki found out during the run-up to the war. His predictions about needing far more boots on the ground were obvious, but the Pentagon does not hold that two-part conversation when it plans for war. It plans for war within the context of war and hopes the everything else that follows will work itself outólike the magic cloud icon on a PowerPoint slide.

None of the mistakes cited above were inevitable and all could have been prevented with a strong Sys Admin force presence that flooded the country with boots in the immediate aftermath of the Leviathan-like U.S. military's march to, and quick conquering of Baghdadówhich was nothing less than brilliant but likewise was largely wasted by the lack of the follow-on force.

What I describe yet again is the A-to-Z military capability we need to process a politically bankrupt state like Saddam's Iraq in this Global War on Terrorism.

Here the simple rule set on success in generating that outcome:

1) the Pentagon recognizes its role as key enabler and hub for a globally-derived Sys Admin force

2) the Pentagon seeds that capability within its own forces to the point where it is conceivable that the U.S. alone could pull it off

3) when other states see the "sure thing" in this capability and the commitment of the U.S. to employ it in conjunction with other Saddam-style takedowns, and when they see our willingness to let them join either the front-half warfighting coalition or the back-half peace-making coalition with no prejudice exhibited regarding commercial access to the economy in questions (yes, the contracts), then they will seek new and expanded levels of bilateral cooperation with the U.S. in all such measures

4) when that global capability is married to the U.S. capability, we have the A-to-Z military tool kit in place

5) when that tool kit is successfully used in a situation, rule codification will result in an A-to-Z international understanding of "this is how you take down a Saddam/Mugabe/Kim successfully"

6) as that rule set gets codified, international organizations will either be designated by the relevant great powers as the locus for such future decisions, or a new one will be created (hint: it'll come from the G7/8/20, not the UN)

7) once that international organization is set up, the processing of politically-bankrupt states begins in earnest

8) once the "list" becomes known, you will see those on it alter behavior immediately in most instances, making actual military takedowns not necessary

9) as these bad actors vacate the Gap of their own free will (taking their loot with them, of course) or are pulled down violently by the Leviathan-Sys Admin combo, regional security situations inside the Gap will improve dramatically

10) as those security situations improve, just watch the international financial and business community step up to take advantage of the opportunities for new connectivity.

And yes, a future worth creating can be as simple as that.

Afghan says it wants connectivity again

Datelineóabove the garage, Portsmouth RI, 19 April

Reference: "Afghanistan Seeks Trade And Investors For Its Revival," by Carlotta Gall, New York Times, 19 April, p. A12.

Story about first international business conference in Afghanistan in over two decades. That, my friends, is serious disconnectedness, real isolation, and the essence of why all that nation can produce right now for export is heroin (roughly half its GDP).

Will the Taliban do whatever it can to kill whatever embryonic financial and business connectivity emerges from such efforts? You bet. Once that connectivity takes root, and there is an option for trade outside of poppies, what exactly does the Taliban offer the population besides a return to the past?

The White House: "Give us the Sys Admin Force!"

Datelineóabove the garage, Portsmouth RI, 19 April

Now, before you get all excited and start tracing cause-and-effect, let me assure you that the proposal known as the Global Peace Operations Initiative has been in the works inside the Office of the Secretary of Defense for several months. Again, all my material really does is provide the decoder ring for translating what seems like a mishmash of moves and initiative coming out of this administration as they struggle to adapt the national security establishment to the strategic security environment as they find it.

The plan, approved by Bush this month, calls for the U.S. to spend $660m over the next five years to help generate the capacity in Gap states to mount collective security, or peacekeeping efforts in response to failed states, civil wars, rehab efforts like Iraq, and so on. The short-term focus is Africa, because the fear is that the U.S., being so busy in the Middle East, can't manage squat in Africa in the meantime. But in reality, this proposal shows that this administration is warming up to the notion that a Sys Admin function is required to manage the Gap as a whole.

Like most things this administration tries, they want to do this on the cheap as much as possible, while retaining maximum freedom of action for the U.S. Such an approach may get the ball rolling, especially if you throw the better part of a billion at the problem (but that's really only peanuts over 5 years), but to really seed the beginnings of such a Gap-wide force, the U.S. has to not only admit its central role in enabling such a force on the ground (we are the hub, everyone else is the spokes, and when I say "hub," I mean command and control + logistics most of all), but realize that until we seed our own force in such a way as to constitute a serious Sys Admin contingent in its own right, other militaries will not be sufficiently attracted to the effort to really police the Gap in a comprehensive fashion.

Yes, a focus on African states is fine, but even getting a serious collective effort there isn't going to solve much on that continent. Getting New Core powers to pony up serious numbers, like I said in the Washington Post Outlook article of 11 April, is what will really get the ball rolling.

For now, this administration is only willing to throw some bucks at the general direction of Africa, in effect trying to outsource peacekeeping to the locals there. Not a bad start, but until DoD takes far more seriously the call of an Art Cebrowski and others that the U.S. military needs its own dedicated peacekeeping battalions, no one around the world is going to take such an initiative too seriously.

Yet, I cite this proposal (reference: "Bush Plans Aid to Build Foreign Peace Forces," by Bradley Graham, Washington Post, 19 April, p. A1) as yet further evidence that the system itself is groping in the direction of what I call the Sys Admin function in providing security across the Gap. Every step closer is one less step we need to take when the right disaster finally comes along to force the issue for good.

Talking ìeverything elseî with the Joint Staff and the Journal

Dateline: Reagan National Airport, Washington DC, 16 April

Today I spend four hours speaking to and with the Policy and Plans group within the Joint Staff, known by the code J-5. I give my full up briefing over 3 hours, with extensive Q&A. Youíd think the focus would be strictly war, but it was really on what I like to call the ìeverything else.î

By special permission, Greg Jaffe of the Wall Street Journal sits in on the proceedings.

Jaffe, a true student of how the Pentagon works, is interested in tracking how unconventional ideas move up the food chain within the building, and my brief fits his bill. Afterwards, we have dinner at Reagan National before I fly out. Talking with Greg is always a treat, because few know more about the current mood and workings of the Pentagon. All in all, a fascinating dayóworth getting up at 0430 to make happen.

One rule-set tidbit of the day: flying into Reagan means you canít get up from your seat to use the bathroom during the last 30 minutes of the flight. That is an essential rule set change that emerged from 9/11, geographically centered on one of the sites of the attacks.

As far as I am concerned, Reagan National Airportís slogan should be: Bin Laden means bladder control!.

Hereís today catch, culled by me during the flight into Reagan:

REFERENCES:

(1) ìAdministration Considers a Post for Intelligence: A Centralized Overseer,î by Douglas Jehl, New York Times, 16 April, p. A1.

(2) ìThe Iranian Hand,î by Michael Ledeen, Wall Street Journal, 16 April, p. A14.

(3) ìGreen Zone Start-Ups,î by Michael Broadhurst et. al, WSJ, 16 April, p. C4.

(4) ìTape, Probably bin Ladenís, Offers ëTruceí To Europe: Leaders Dismiss Any Negotiations,î by Richard Bernstein, NYT, 16 April, p. A3.

(5) ìEUís New Rules Will Shake Up Market for Bioengineered Foods,î by Scott Miller, WSJ, 16 April, p. A1.

(6) ìNewest Export Out of China: Inflation Fears,î by Keith Bradsher, NYT, 16 April, p. A1.

(7) ìMeeker Opines on China: Former ëQueen of the Netí Sees Much Possibility for Internet Stocks,î by Geoffrey Fowler and Suzanne Craig, WSJ, 16 April, p. C16.

Get me an intelligence czar!

REFERENCES:

(1) ìAdministration Considers a Post for Intelligence: A Centralized Overseer,î by Douglas Jehl, New York Times, 16 April, p. A1.

The completely unexpected continues to unfold: the Bush White House dusts off a year-old proposal from yet another presidential advisory panel (headed by Brent Scowcroft) that calls for a new super-DCI that would be called the DNI. There, dontcha feel safer already!

The DCI refers to the current position of the Director of Central Intelligence, the post commonly referred to as the director of the CIA. Actually, the DCI is supposed to oversee not just CIA but 15 total departments and agencies across the entire intelligence community. In reality, he oversees the CIA and little else. This unfortunate situation is described in the article as reflecting the legacy of an ìad hoc system created in haste after World War II.î

Actually, the National Security Act of 1947 (yes, two full years following the end of the war) created CIA and a host of other entities as the U.S. radically revamped its national security establishment to meet the new challenges of the new security age. Is the White House planning any radical change to this system? No, just adding another layer of centralizing bureaucracy on top, certain to sort everything out below.

I can see this poor guyís schedule already: 12-hour work days filled wall-to-wall with 15-minute office calls.

In short, I donít see much of an answer here. I have already said what I believe needs to happen to the intelligence community WRT to the emerging bifurcation of DoD into a warfighting-focused Leviathan force and a peace-waging Sys Admin force. The push to centralize the already secretive and distant-from-society (and much of reality) intelligence community strikes me as pretty mindless.

Thanks again, bin Laden!

The Middle Eastís forces of disconnectedness

REFERENCES:

(2) ìThe Iranian Hand,î by Michael Ledeen, Wall Street Journal, 16 April, p. A14.

(3) ìGreen Zone Start-Ups,î by Michael Broadhurst et. al, Wall Street Journal, 16 April, p. C4.

I say this time and time again about our attempt to reconnect Iraqi society to the larger world: this occupation pits us against all the regionís forces of disconnectedness.

The ìIranian handî in question is the strong connectivity between Moqtada al-Sadrís incipient intifada and Iranís mullahs, who are clearly hell-bent on making sure Iraq is not ìlostî to globalizationís creeping embrace. No, this is not just the paranoid ramblings of American neocons, but good intell from the Italian Intelligence Service, which has determined that what we face in southern Iraq is not just a domestic insurgency, but a systematic effort by Saddam loyalists with connectivity to Syria and Shiite radicals with connectivity to Iran.

Is this surprising? If the U.S. has been planning Saddamís downfall openly since 1991, should we be surprised that authoritarian regimes in the region likewise prepared to defeat any US-led level to remove Iraq from the ranks of the disconnected states? A free and open Iraq would put far greater pressure on both Iran and Syria to change than any UN-led sanctions, so in many ways, these regimes are fighting for their very lives when they support anti-coalition uprisings in Iraq. As I say in my upcoming (June) article for Esquire, the peace we wage today in Iraq is a battle for the entire soul of the region.

But even as all this conflict flares, on the ground we see the seeds of much connectivity sprouting. The great WSJ article on start-ups inside the Green Zone, or protected area in Baghdad, speaks to the natural desire of individual Iraqis to run their own livesófirst and foremostóeconomically. Yes, the political freedom to run their own lives is greatly desired as well, but itís the economic freedom that dominates anyoneís dayówhether they live in Baghdad or Boston.

As one returning sergeant remarks in the article: ìAll you have to do it walk through the Karadah district of Baghdad that looks like Times Square nowî to realize that ordinary Iraqis are desperately eager to set up shopówhatever the commodity. Why so? Under Saddam, the ruling Baath party basically controlled the sale of all raw goods, meaning all the economic connectivity in the country was verticalóor from the leaders to the led. Now weíre seeing the blossoming of horizontal connectivity, or what we might call peer-to-peer, and thatís where serious freedom begins.

Itís that sort of horizontal connectivity that authoritarian governments intrinsically fear, because when it becomes widespread, the ability to control the masses through the economy disappears. Thus, right now in Iraq, it is a battle of control from above (and outside) versus freedom from below. What U.S. troops in Iraq are really providing is bodyguard duties for the connectivity we hope will spread from below and render illusory Iranís and Syriaís dreams that Iraq can be kept isolated from the outside world.

Europe: Are you in or are you out?

REFERENCES:

(4) ìTape, Probably bin Ladenís, Offers ëTruceí To Europe: Leaders Dismiss Any Negotiations,î by Richard Bernstein, New York Times, 16 April, p. A3.

(5) ìEUís New Rules Will Shake Up Market for Bioengineered Foods,î by Scott Miller, Wall Street Journal, 16 April, p. A1.

The first story covers bin Ladenís remarkably frank offer to Europe of a cease fire if they agree to his demands for civilizational apartheid between Europe and the Islamic Middle East. For now, all the right responses are being heard from Europe, as this offer makes painfully clear al Qaedaís divide-and-conquer tactics that include the Madrid 3/11 bombings and likely many more to come.

Bin Ladenís offer is almost too good to be true for those who worry about the Western alliance coming undone over a host of diverging rule sets, one of the most contentious being the growing rift over genetically-modified organisms. And yet, when strong divergence exists first on technology, inevitably that divergence in rules spreads to economics, then politics, and ultimately to issues of security.

How we need to look at the world is as follows: there will always be a great number of overlapping rule set clashes operating across the system as a whole, like a security rule-set clash over how to deal with terrorism, or how to deal with technology, or how to deal with politically-bankrupt states, or how to deal with immigration flows, and so on. Nothing exists in a vacuum in globalization, and all rule-set clashes reverberate against one another.

Europeís general take on globalization right now is ìslow downîóalmost at all costs. The U.S. take is a mix of slow down (OMYGOD! Outsourcing is killing us!) and speed it up (the Bush White Houseís ìbig bangî strategy for the Middle East). People here need to understand that if there comes a time when the balance of forces in this country favors the slow-down approach, globalization may well not just slow down, but actually contract, given the inherent tendencies elsewhere to heavily favor that slow-down strategy. Weíre not just the engine of global growth, but the engine for globalizationís progressive advance around the world.