People who live in glass houses...

ARTICLE: Bloomberg Spent $102 Million to Win 3rd Term, By MICHAEL BARBARO, New York Times, November 27, 2009

You know, if we read this headline about the mayor of Moscow, there'd be all sorts of righteously indignant editorials about the corrupt wasteland that is Russian politics.

My point: we really don't have a problem about a successful person using their money for politics in this country.

Something to remember the next time you pick up that hefty stone.

Round and round the mulberry bush

ARTICLE: Russia and China Endorse Agency's Rebuke of Iran, By HELENE COOPER and WILLIAM J. BROAD, New York Times, November 27, 2009

The Russians and Chinese can always be counted upon to join in the condemning.

It's the sanctions where they cannot be located.

The Obama administration here makes the same useless claims that Bush-Cheney did.

Certainly a nice way to pass the time . . ..

Mao fought a losing battle

ARTICLE: A Tradition That Cherishes Poker, Not Pumpkin Pie, By CARA BUCKLEY, New York Times, November 26, 2009

At least this way, Chinese-Americans are putting their alleged inscrutability to good use . . . on the poker tables!

Me? I think a pair of sunglasses does the trick.

It does highlight, though, the long tradition of gambling in Chinese culture, which reminds us of how weird and out of character the tiny Maoist period of 30 years was amidst 5 millennia of history.

The Catholic Church's systemic problem

ARTICLE: Report Says Irish Bishops and Police Hid Abuse, By SARAH LYALL, New York Times, November 26, 2009

The gist:

The Roman Catholic Church and the police in Ireland systematically colluded in covering up decades of child sex abuse by priests in Dublin, according to a scathing report released Thursday.

Meaning this is a system-wide problem and not just an American one.

It also means Rome's absolute failings in this regard are consistent.

What I would give to see the International Criminal Court lay one indictment on the Vatican, because, are these not widespread crimes against humanity's weakest members?

The truth will out

OBITUARY: Ali Kordan, Iranian Official Fired Over Fake Degree, Dies at 51, By NAZILA FATHI, New York Times, November 26, 2009

I gotta say: if you're going to lie over an academic degree, then definitely lie over an honorary one, which is completely meaningless anyway.

Thinking about dem playoffs!

Saw my ENT at end of workday. Six weeks out and everything's healed up (mostly) quite nicely. No antibiotics now for 40 days.

Back home and I run two miles with Jerry just before sunset. About 18 degrees out. Little bugger beat my ass!

Then walked a mile and a half with my spouse, a nightly ritual, after dinner.

Then Legos with Mei Mei (finish a very cool movie theater in Lego Town), go over study techniques with two older kids (HS finals tomorrow) and then yoga in office while catching first half of Colts game. Manning looking superb at 12-for-12.

Put in for lottery for Pack playoff tix, but with 5th seed likely, almost no chance of anything (only if Pack and 6th seed get to finals--never happened before methinks). But with Lucas Oil only 20 mins away, that AFC championship game is looking awfully tempting for Vonne and I. We went to the one in 2006 when they came from behind and beat the Pats in that slugfest. I have the commemorative USPS stamp sheet of the game framed in our bedroom, it was that good (plus 4th row on the 35YL).

Santa came early this year, but I wouldn't buy until it was a sure thing. Hate to drop the money and then have Peyton drop the divisional!

Q&A: Nuclear attribution

Rob Quayle wrote in concerning Q&A: Why Iran's not crazy (again)

One conclusion from the material below is that nuclear attribution techniques are so sophisticated and so highly classified that they cannot be evaluated, or even acknowledged. However, the Stanford undergrad has a good point: If nuclear attribution techniques are robust, but not acknowledged, then they would seem to be less effective as deterrents than if they were acknowledged.

Care to comment?

***

Tom Barnett says in the Dec 19,2009 blog:
"Iran cannot pass a nuke to terrorists and not have it tracked back"

This source (foreignpolicy.com) seems to agree:

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3653
By Debra Decker Page 1 of 1
Posted December 2006

Using sophisticated techniques such as radiochemical analysis, scientists can determine the isotopic fingerprint of elements like uranium and plutonium, even after they have been used in a detonated bomb. Then, by isolating telltale trace contaminants and using traditional law-enforcement methods, analysts can narrow down the range of original sources, providing in the process a kind of "birth certificate" for nuclear material. They could then know whether the material used in a bomb might have come from, say, North Korean or Iranian facilities.

But this source does not:

http://cisac.stanford.edu/publications/nuclear_attribution_as_deterrence/

Nuclear Attribution as Deterrence
Journal Article
Author
Michael Miller - 2006 CISAC Honors Graduate

Published by
Nonproliferation Review, Vol. 14 no. 1
March 2007

Recently, post-explosion nuclear forensics, or nuclear attribution, has gained a new spotlight within the scientific and policymaking community working on nuclear weapons. Academics are beginning to ask whether post-explosion forensics might create a replacement for an international nonproliferation regime or at least offer a fallback option to deter states and individuals from selling nuclear materials. This paper examines current attribution technology from unclassified literature and finds the technology to be well developed but not foolproof, such that nuclear attribution currently provides little deterrent value. If current capabilities were publicized more thoroughly, and if the post-explosion process of assessing the evidence were internationalized, states and intermediate actors might be deterred more effectively. This paper also discusses the development of a nuclear fingerprint database; while useful, its impact on deterrence would be minimal.

This article is based on the author's undergraduate honors thesis, completed during 2005-2006 in CISAC's Interschool Honors Program in International Security.

Nor does wikipedia, which says:
Nuclear attribution is the process of tracing the origin of nuclear material that has been used in a nuclear explosion.[1] The problem is not necessarily a straightforward one, for it may be possible to obtain nuclear precursors through the black market, and therefore relatively anonymously.

Tom replied:

Without sounding coy, because I honestly don't know enough to play coy here (that's my defense and I'm sticking to it!), my guess is that far more can be done to ID the ultimate source than is commonly acknowledged in the unclassified world (been a while for me on this subject). I would also opine that, to people in this business, this is fairly well known, so I'm not sure the Stanford grad student's point isn't already well-taken.

In general, the powers-that-be don't care to discuss the underlying reality of deterrence, because their preferences are--go figure--that as few people as possible "get" the bomb, either for real or just in understanding. The mystery of MAD is part of its appeal--don't go there!

But again, read the first cited piece above and you get at the crux of my thinking: some nuke goes off and somebody will have to claim credit, as these things always come out in the end due to serious investigation. And when that understanding is reached (either voluntarily or by force), people with fixed assets (as in, countries) will be severely punished, and quite popularly so--if for no other reason than because it will feel great and send the right kind of signals to the system. And yeah, the system will stand by and let us do it at that point, for all the same motivations.

So, yeah, if Iran really wants to commit suicide, it can be arranged--believe me.

But no, I don't, on that basis, feel our entire national security policy and grand strategic vision should be casually held hostage to whatever that jackass in Tehran happens to say, day-in or day-out. We make it clear to him, like every other clown that's come along, that if he really wants to play with fire, we will be more than happy to immolate his entire civilization.

Why? Because we're Americans, and our entire DNA is about going all the way--when pushed.

What's so great about Putin?

OP-ED: In Search of a Russian Atatürk, By Alexei Bayer, The Moscow Times, 07 December 2009

Neat little argument. I may have reached for Peter the Great instead, but the point is well-taken: Putin has not delivered and so his return would signal further acceptance of decay.

(Via WPR's Media Roundup)

Cold confession, but good

ARTICLE: South Korea Admits Civilian Killings During War, By CHOE SANG-HUN, New York Times, November 26, 2009

This is when these things get admitted formally: when basically everyone involved is dead and/or beyond useful prosecution.

But it's a good thing to do, nonetheless.

Hong Kong: the ongoing experiment worth tracking

WORLD NEWS: "Hong Kong Takes a Step Toward Direct Elections," by Jonathan Cheng, Wall Street Journal< 19 November 2009.

The actual content of the recently proposed constitutional changes is rather meaningless: how many new seats get allocated in the parliament. The key thing is the continued sense of urgency within the HK government to move up the direct elections timetable, which Beijing wants delayed to 2017 for the president and 2020 for the legislature.

This back and forth tugging bears watching.

The conflict point in India: capitalist companies confront socialist labor laws

FRONT PAGE: "Deadly Labor Wars Hinder India's Rise," by Peter Wonacott, Wall Street Journal, 20 November 2009.

India's problem, in a nutshell:

Battle lines are being drawn in labor actions across India. Factory managers, amid the global economic downturn, want to pare labor costs and remove defiant workers. Unions are attempting to stop them, with slowdowns and strikes that have led at times to bloodshed.

The disputes are fueled by the discontent of workers, many of whom say they haven't partaken of the past decade's prosperity. Their passions are being whipped up, companies say, by labor leaders who want to add members to their unions and win votes for left-leaning political parties. Adding to the tensions are the country's decades-old labor codes, which workers and companies alike say require an overall.

"We can't be a capitalist country that has socialist labor laws," says Jayan Davar, president of the Automotive Component Manufacturers Association of India.

The unrest serves as a reminder that India has far to go before it stands alongside the world's other economic powerhouses.

But such strife should also serve to remind China how fragile it's own stability is, for all the same reasons plus the added burden of heavy corruption.

Chinese students in Taiwan

ARTICLE: Taiwan to recruit mainland students, China Daily, 11-1-2009

Interesting. Taiwan hoping, it would seem, to disintermediate U.S. colleges a bit for the large mainland students-studying-abroad market. There has to be a chunk that would find Taiwan to be a cheaper and easier and closer-in alternative.

Another nice sign of improving PRC-Taiwanese relations.

(Thanks: Jarrod Myrick)

Meaningless op-eds on sanctions and Japan

OP-ED: The Right Sanctions Can Still Stop Iran, By DANIELLE PLETKA, Wall Street Journal, DECEMBER 10, 2009

OP-ED: Does Japan still matter?, By Fred Hiatt, Washington Post, December 11, 2009

My favorite two types of meaningless op-eds:

1) How sanctions can still stop BLANK from doing BLANK

2) Why BLANK still matters.

Sanctions never stop anybody who's determined, and have a vast history of failure unless the entire world is on board (like with South Africa, where only nuclear collaborator Israel abstained).

And guess what? When you say so-and-so still matters, it's a clear sign that so-and-so doesn't matter.

(Via WPR's Media Roundup)

First VP for irregular warfare?

PRESS RELEASE: Mark W. Kenny Named Vice President of Irregular Warfare Programs for Northrop Grumman, Dec. 16, 2009

Now, that is interesting and a sign of the times.

You know, I still get these emails from people who've caught the TED talk and wonder out loud to me, "Are there any signs of the system 'getting it'--you know, your vision?" I don't take any offense, because they come from people unfamiliar with the field (and my blog), so they're not tracking all these data points as they flow by. Plus, nothing as big as this industry moves because of any one "vision" (please), but rather as a result of huge signals from the system, augmented, in bits and pieces, with concepts from a sizable universe of thinkers (like me and too many others to name). But my gut reaction is always to laugh a little bit inside (that ticklish feeling in the pit of your stomach), because, deep down, I still remain amazed at how much change has already happened or is in the works, and I'm quite happy and surprised with the speed at which it has arrived. People outside the industry have no idea how big and established and comfortable and certain of itself the military-industrial-complex was prior to 9/11 (in addition to considering me pretty much a flaky nut on the margins), so to witness this evolution in under a decade is really quite stunning. And to have participated in it, in my own small way? That's been priceless.

So good for Northrop Grumman for its continued evolution.

The guy in question has an interesting history: very sub-focused early on and then migrates toward irregular warfare across this decade.

Lost my Esquire.com weekly column

Just no budget there, so the .com side of the house dials back to just John Richardson writing a political blog. He's already on salary as a "writer at large," as opposed to my--essentially free-lance, sub-contractor--status as "contributing editor" (meaning, I cost extra whenever I get something published), so I can't beat his price.

So I close out with 34 columns in total, including the original two I did as a sub for RIchardson's column. Probably about 36-37,000 words in all.

I will admit to some relief regarding the requirement to do two columns every week, although I liked working with the editor of the site, Matt Sullivan. Still, it kept me busy during a stretch when I could not get into the print magazine (2009 was not kind to the contributing editors).

Thus, one hopes that my piece in the Feb issue augurs well for 2010. Obviously, I enjoy being associated with Esquire and wish the magazine well as it continues to adapt itself to the post-crash era (unlike so many newspapers and other mags that simply disappeared).

But, as usual, the only constant is change.

Meanwhile, I'll continue to be on the lookout for other opportunities, simply because I love to write.

The Grey Area Trio

The Grey Area Trio on MySpace

My nephew Ian Barnett's first group while he studies at the Berklee School of Music in Boston. He's the drummer. My favorite is the top one listed (Blue Maven). I would describe the music as jazz-like in the best sort of way.

Definitely worth a listen. If I could have, I would have instantly downloaded the songs to my iPod.

I expect many great things from Ian in the future.

Q&A: Why Iran's not crazy (again)

Mark wrote:

The basis of open honest negotiation is clearly the foundation to your theory, but with Iran's history of lip service and secrecy it is simply not the tonic the US will swallow.

The one difficult issue to comprehend is the religious undertone to the region. Iran have already publicly resisted Israel's very existence, and have expressed a desire to totally eradicate the state. Past peace deals have all failed and with Israel's existence at stake, there is no peaceful outcome. The US and their allies have been developing mini nukes for 10 years, and this very issue along with North Korea have been the driving force behind this new technology.

Israel will strike soon with bunker buster type mini nukes, this will totally wipe out Iran's nuclear capacity, but the radioactive fall out will cause widespread destruction albeit on a relatively low level compared to a full nuclear assault.

Sadly this option will be mathematically seen as the cleanest option, for the very destruction of vast nuclear material will have risks even if conventional weapons were used. A land offensive would be far too bloody and costly and this will be the preferred solution.

The nuclear security of the world will be the primary goal, and 50,000 lives will be weighed up against the millions should instability become the outcome. You are dealing with a new enemy that would happily destroy itself to become the martyrs of infidel destruction.

My prayers are with a peaceful solution, but I fear the New Year will bring new misery to the world.

Tom replied:

I would dial down all this.

First, Iran has never had any real interest in Israel, one way or the other. Jewish-Persian relations have been, throughout history, awfully benign. Since the 79 revolution, Iran uses Israel to cloak its push for Shia empowerment in the region, preferring that lead to triggering, as such efforts always do, a Sunni backlash. As such, what Iran says about Israel is pure propaganda, to be swallowed at risk of stupidity.

Honest negotiation never happens. The foundation to my thinking is common interests, nakedly defined. Iran doesn't give a shit about Israel, but only Saudi Arabia. Iran hates the Salafists, and fears their impact. Iran greatly fears U.S. invasion and seeks nukes to prevent it. Iran greatly benefited from ours wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and offered to help in both. We refused, and we got the current dynamic of aid to our enemies.

Iran's achievement of nukes is meaningless. States have never gotten anybody to do anything threatening nuke strikes. Israel has 200 plus warheads and a very advanced missile defense system, meaning there is no existential threat.

As for mini-nukes, that's a tactical myth in the sense that high-end conventional bombs have the very same impact, so crossing the line to nukes is worthless, given the trouble it would cause any state.

Israel may well strike Iran's sites soon. It will set them back months, not years, because Iran will redouble its efforts. It will be a meaningless event and not change the underlying reality of Iran wanting and achieving protection from U.S. invasion (already accomplished by our tie-down in Iraq and Afghanistan).

As for the martyrdom angle, it's also hyperbolic. Extrapolating national suicide from suicide bombers didn't make sense for Japan in WWII and it does not make sense here. Iran seeks regime survival above all else, and there's no such thing as an untrackable nuclear signature, meaning Iran cannot pass a nuke to terrorists and not have it tracked back, meaning retaliatory strikes would follow and deterrence still holds.

It's not particularly useful, after 64 years of learning how to live with the bomb, to go all wobbly over a Shia version. But some people love fear and bathe in it daily.

I'm not that person.

An article:

ARTICLE: Restoring Deterrence, by Elbridge Colby, Foreign Policy Research Institute, Summer 2007

Tom finds this article, especially its treatment of how to employ deterrence thinking/action to the reality of a successful "anonymous" (for a while, that is) terrorist nuke strike on America to be highly realistic.

Reminder: we're not there for the oil

ARTICLE: U.S. firms lag in bids for Iraqi oil, By Ernesto Londoño, Washington Post, December 13, 2009

The reality and idealism of the open-door policy continues.

So much for the conspiracy thinking both Left and Right, but they never learn anyway, so almost not worth pointing out.

Don't follow Palin on climate change

OP-ED: Copenhagen's political science, By Sarah Palin, Washington Post, December 9, 2009

More proof that Palin is a bit of a pinhead: Climate-gate only proves that world-class scientists are big-ego, high-maintenance types that, left to their own devices, are about as petty as a bunch of junior high school girls.

Big surprise to some, less so to others, but "proves" nothing.

And yet, this is the crux of Palin's weak argument here. She is brilliant at jumping on current events, but that ain't leadership. It means she needs to get her own Oprah-like show.

(Via WPR's Media Roundup)

How China hurts Brazil

OP-ED: Brazil's China headache, By Sebastian Mallaby, Washington Post, December 14, 2009

Mallaby's argument for Brazil to step up and confront China directly over its dollar peg. Brazil is being screwed over by Beijing's ploy much like the EU and SE Asia.

The core of the logic:

If economic logic prevailed, the real would fall against the Chinese yuan: China has a vast current account surplus, while Brazil has a deficit. But last year China re-pegged its currency to the dollar, so the yuan has followed the dollar down, hammering Brazil's ability to compete against Chinese producers. Meanwhile, the illogically weak yuan hurts producers in other countries, encouraging central banks to keep interest rates low and driving yet more capital into Brazil. This pressure from China is likely to grow along with China's economy.

What can Brazil do about its rearing currency? It could cut interest rates to deter money from coming in, but Brazil's economy is hot and lower rates would risk inflation. It could fight capital inflows with taxes -- it has already experimented with this option -- but such restrictions tend to leak like umbrellas made of icing. It could intervene in the foreign-exchange market, selling reals and buying dollars, but then scarce Brazilian savings would get tied up in the depreciating greenback. Or Brazil could protect its industry with tariffs. But protectionism could spark a cycle of retaliation.

The grim truth is that Brazil's domestic tools aren't powerful enough to stop its currency from threatening its success. So what about diplomacy? Asking the United States to raise its interest rates and take pressure off the real is a non-starter. With U.S. unemployment around 10 percent and an additional 7 percent of the U.S. workforce obliged to get by on part-time jobs, there is no way the Fed can raise interest rates to rescue Brazil from its predicament.

That leaves the option of talking to China.

It has been an interesting byproduct of this crisis--beyond the whole China-saves-capitalism headline--that China's currency peg and the damage it does to the rest of the global economy is finally being revealed. The old hushed story about the China model was that it could not be replicated because China itself blocked the path of any other nation that might seek to emulate it, and yet that reality seemed decidedly unclear to most emerging markets. Now, with China free-riding the dollar's decline in such an obvious way, Beijing's willingness to dismiss the rest of the world's concerns that it's unfairly hoarding the recovery's growth opportunities is coming under increasing fire.

Obviously, it's not an easy thing to confront the nation who's commodity purchases help drive your nation's economic growth, and yet, the longer you resist doing so, don't you simply become more and more its raw materials vassal?

As always, there is no such thing as deepening connectivity and "non-interference." All connectivity is interference.

(Via WPR's Media Roundup)