Return of the FLAS!

■"Untying U.S. Tongues: A presidential push for more study of key foreign languages," by Alex Kingsbury, U.S. News & World Report, 16 January 2006, p. 35.

I got through 10 years of undergrad and grad school with no student debt, and what resecued me regularly was my willingness to study Russian. Result? America got me, the grand strategist ... for whatever that's worth.

To shrink the Gap and deal with rising New Core pillar China, the Bush Admin does something really smart: puts $114 million against the goal of getting H.S. and college to study languages like Arabic, Chinese, Farsi. Guess that means we plan on wars with more Muslim regimes in the Middle East, the People's Republic and Iran.

Okay, maybe just spying on China, messing with Iran, and regime changing a few more in the Middle East.

Still, you can't wage the peace without such knowledge, and getting kids to study languages is always good (makes you better at English, I found, in my years of doing French, Russia, German and Romanian ... oh, and Moldavia too [chew on that one for a while ...­ Romanian in Cyrillic!]).

This new program naturally links State, Education and Defense, just like my old Foreign Language Area Scholarships did (I got them in Russian and Romanian and financed a summer of language study in Leningrad with a third one). Nothing wrong with that. Bucks there, needing bodies, so you have to expect Defense to be the main player. Plenty of the resulting talent will go national security in careers, like me, and plenty won't, but America will be smarter no matter what.

The kindler, gentler version of the Big Bang unfolding slowly under our noses?

■"Asia Attracts Middle East Cash: Malaysia, Singapore Are Among Destinations for Property Investors," by Cris Prystay, Wall Street Journal, 11 January 2006, p. A13.

■"A long walk: A survey of Saudia Arabia," Max Rodenbeck, The Economist, 7 January 2006, 12 pages.

These two stories actually make me feel better about the long-term possibility of a kinder, gentler sort of Modest Bang still working in the Middle East.

First, Asian Muslim states continue to play lead geese to the Middle East, attracting their investments and tourists and generally establishing more connectivity that I believe will lead to positive influence and examples over time for the latter.

Second, the usual great Economist survey on Saudi Arabia paints a pretty optimistic picture of a system with huge social and intellectual backwardness, but at least more and more of both the people and the elite seem aware of this and want to change things ... plus they've got plenty of money to smooth things over as they do this.

So the House of Saud, with new King Abdullah, seems committed to spreading wealth more equitably and dealing with their dysfunctional educational system, which seems good at producing only bored youth and the occasional, pissed-off terrorist.

Good first sign? World Bank recently picked Saudia Arabia as best overall business environment in region, even over usually top pick Dubai.

Still, we're talking the country founded and run by a ruling family clan that now numbers in the tens of thousands and hogs (we're guessing) at least one-fifth of all that fantastic oil wealth (making the entire clan worth hundreds of billions) while keeping women so queerly infantilized (SA ranks lowest in women's freedom in that sad, pathetic region, which is saying a lot) in a manner never suggested by any Koran I've ever heard of--save for that weird-ass version promoted by the strict Wahhabists. Clearly, some skepticism is in order.

And yet, as I noted in BFA, the youth bulge drives a lot of top-down fear in that system, and this is good. Abdullah, in the words of one Riyadh history prof, "feels betrayed by the religious establishment. He thinks they created the environment that made terrorism possible."

And he's right.

So here's hoping he feels the demographic pressure, realizes the decarbonization of global energy is a timetable he must adjust the country's economic profile to accommodate, and does what needs to be done to turn Saudi Arabia into a constitutional monarchy within a generation's time ... my prediction at the end of BFA.

The first draft back from Warren ...

DATELINE: In the Shire, Indy, 10 January 2006

... is really amazing. He cherry-picked the best stuff and strung it together like you wouldn't believe. Two key characters get excised pretty much, but the importance of their thinking remains. The three main characters shine through now, with quotes galore from my interviews (I got much better at eliciting them and using them this time). It's a killer piece that makes me very proud, and very grateful to Mark, who worked his ass off on the article despite a resurgent cold.

There is nothing quite like reading the first-edited draft the first time. I read it tonight outside a music store while Kev got a piano lesson. Cold and rainy and I'm drinking potato soup from a paper cup, but I was in heaven. You can see and feel the reporting in the piece, a statement I didn't even begin to understand as recently as a year ago--that's how far Mark has pulled me along.

Most exciting about going this late on the issue: we're only a month from having it on the stands. My fact-checking maestro, Tom Colligan, is on my case again. I expect about 25 phone calls over the next 48 hours as we put this baby to bed.

The piece will clock in at about 6k, which is ... BEEG! And yet a solid 7k sliced away.

Mark said I could post the first draft down the road if I wanted, but I'm afraid it would only make him look too good, and me too weak!

I say, pay no attention to that man behind the curtain. The great and powerful Tom . . . oh, to hell with it.

The Chinese are coming ... in cars!

■"See the U.S.A. in Your New Car From China, Starting in '07," by Jeremy W. Peters, New York Times, 10 January 2006, pulled from the web.

Detroit knew it way only a matter of time. Competitive Chinese cars at significantly lower prices (under $10k!):

"It does not matter that Geely, the Chinese carmaker, getting a lot of attention at the auto show here, has yet to sell a single car in the United States. It is the possibility it could that has Detroit talking."

GM's vice chair and product development chief:

"I think it's the beginning, the very beginning, of Chinese international participation in the U.S. A few years down the road, sure, it'd be foolish not to see it as a threat."

Geely is probably two years off, hoping to hit the U.S. in 2008. Chery Automotive (yes, the name is designed to look like Chevy), another Chinese giant, "has already announced plans to begin shipping cars to the United States in 2007."

Here's my favorite bit:

Recalling the collective shrug American automakers gave when Japanese cars entered the market, Detroit, in particular, is paying attention.

"Remember, the first Toyotas were laughable," Mr. Lutz said. "The first Hyundais that we saw were laughable."

Neither is so funny anymore, and neither will be Geely or Chery in a decade's time.

Watch the New Core learn on energy--faster than you think

■"As Brazil Bills Up on Ethanol, It Weans Off Energy Imports: After Years of State Support, Use of Cheap Fuel Made From Sugar Is Widespread; U.S. Delegations Pay a Visit," by David Luhnow and Geraldo Samor, Wall Street Journal, 9 January 2006, p. A1.

■"Cnooc Expects to Complete Nigeria Oil-Field Deal in 1st Half," by Kate Linebaugh and Shai Oster, Wall Street Journal, 10 January 2006, p. A7.

The opening sentence of the Brazil article is a grabber:

After nearly three decades of work, Brazil has succeeded where much of the industrialized world has failed: It has developed a cost-effective alternative to gasoline. Along with new offshore oil discoveries, that's a big reason Brazil expects to become energy independent this year.

Hmm. How long has America blown off the potential of ethanol and dismissed the notion of drilling off its shores (at least off the rich ones east and west; the less fussy Gulf Coast poor remain open to the notion, otherwise we'd had virtually no oil here in the States.

So Brazil somehow easily manages that which the U.S. can't.

Too simplistic you say? The truth always is.

Twenty percent of Brazil's transport fuel market (the global average is 1 percent for such alternative fuels). Think we couldn't grow that amount here? Interesting proposition a lot of farm-belt representatives and senators have long pushed, but not to much avail here. Of course, ours is made from corn, not sugar, so it costs a lot more.

And then there's all the left-coast liberals that want America to wean itself off the Middle East but demand that no oil be pumped off its coastline, lest their views suffer (ditto on the wind farms).

Guess who's been to Brazil checking this all out? Why Hillary, of course.

Yes, yes, too tough for U.S. to manage, but somehow old Brazil can get a car market running where seven out of 10 new cars are flex-fuel capable.

This catches the attention of India and China, which also sends plenty of delegations. Their car ranks are surging.

Yes, yes, there are some real idiosyncratic bits and pieces to the Brazilian puzzle that make its replication elsewhere harder. But need is the mother of invention, and the Brazilians, as in other matters of development and growth, clearly have things to teach not only fellow New Core states like India and China, but Old Core powers like the U.S.

We keep waiting on the world to change in our image, when we could be learning so much from others who are changing so much more than we are right now.

China buys 45 percent of a big offshore Nigerian oil and gas field. Yet another of its moves after Cnooc was denied its bid for Unocal.

Clearly, this must be sign of China's obsession with owning the barrel in the ground, so to speak. Clearly this is an aggressive attempt to close off West Africa to the U.S.!

Afraid not. Cnooc plans to sell the oil to Europe and the U.S. instead of China, "which can acquire energy reserves more cheaply from fields closer to home."

Again, see how quickly the new student learns how to work the global economy for safety and gain?

Makes the "masters" look a bit slow and stodgy in comparison, yes?

Connectivity threatens, despite the economic logic (4 cases)

■"Taiwan Indicts Two Ex-Officials At Big Chip Firm: Move Highlights Tensions As Many Executives Seek To Do Business in China," by Jason Dean, Wall Street Journal, 10 January 2006, p. A12.

■"The Challenge Before Us: Iraq and its allies enter a decisive phase," op-ed by Zalmay Khalilzad, Wall Street Journal, 9 January 2006, p. A12.

■"Afghan headmaster stabbed and beheaded," by Noor Khan, Indianapolis Star (Associated Press), 5 January 2006, p. A5.

■"How U.S. Immigration Evolved as the Nation Grew and Changed," by Cynthia Crossen, Wall Street Journal, 9 January 2006, p. B1.

Fascinating quartet that reminds us that rising connectivity always engenders a fear-threat reaction.

Taiwanese businessmen want to do more and more business with China. The famed chip and semiconductor and motherboard industries of Taiwan have been shipping production to China for years. And that scares a lot of politicians and nationalists on Taiwan, "who are concerned the island is becoming overly dependent on its political adversary."

So when execs of a large micro-electronic firm in Taiwan are observed trying to set up similar companies in China, they are investigated by the government. Can't have someone connecting these two economies too quickly, it would seem. The two execs are forced from the company for "breach of trust" against their shareholders, whatever the hell that means. Apparently they were trying to get too much profit for the shareholders by following economic logic and seeking out cheaper labor. Certainly, Taiwan will gain politically from this loss of connectivity by having their goods cost more.

Then again, it all depends on what you value: identity or efficiency. Guess which one drives human progress? Guess which one hinders it?

Khalilzad in the WSJ makes all these points about where Iraq must go in coming months. It all starts with security, and it all ends with growing economic connectivity with the outside world. The key is inserting private sector activity and access to foreign capital as early in the recovery process as possible, and security is the long pole in the tent to make that happen.

Sounds to me like somebody understands the military-market nexus with some wisdom.

So Iraq can progress through greater efficiency, or it can cling to old identities and fight over the olive groves, as Friedman would say.

Not an easy choice for anyone, but hardest for Gap states. Because when you don't have much, you still have your cultural identity. "I'm poor and ignorant and my kids lives will suck, but hey! That's what makes me fill-in-the-blank-tribe!"

So if you try to teach young girls in Afghanistan, if you try to connect them to something larger than their father's control, which over time ends only with their husband's tight grip, then you take your life in your own hands. You threaten identity with progress and connectivity and opportunity that does not fit with the status quo definitions of who does what. People gotta know their place--and only their place. To learn of other worlds is to demand more than is reasonable, and history shows, that unreasonable people tend to be troublemakers, and inventors, and pioneers and radicals.

Better to kill the teacher and cut off his head as a warning to others: teach my daughter anything about the larger world and suffer my wrath!

Of course, it's not easy to change all that history, and God knows we here in America have gone through our bouts of anti-immigration. First we wanted to preserve our Anglo-Saxon purity, then our Anglo-Saxon-Germanic purity, then our Anglo-Saxon-Germanic-Roman-Gaelic purity, and now our ... oh hell, it's just too long to type out.

But thank God for the purists. Thank God for the head-choppers and preservers of the one true way/faith/race/NFL franchise ...

Oops! That last one slipped in there.

I mean, you let one of them into a nice sitcom like The Simpsons, and pretty soon there's an Apu in every damn show in America! Pretty soon there's Kumar's heading to White Castle, stoned and hungry, like some blond surfer dude out west.

Surely, all this diversity must cost us something? All this connectivity can't be good? Surely, it's not why we remain such a strong and inventive country?

PNM Map available for download

Pleased to announced the digital version of the PNM map is now available for free download.

You can download the map as a PDF in high-resolution format (17.25 MB) or low-resolution format (309 KB).

You can visit the map download page at /pnm/map_index.htm.

Treo-bound until Mac laptop fixed

Dateline: In the Shire, Indy, 9 January 2006

Mac Powerbook at local shop for screen connection problems. Glad I got the Mac care now!

So while travelng about, have to employ my Freedom Keyboard on my Treo, which is a real bitch to squint at from a distance.

Then again, perhaps I've finally found a form of masturbation (mental) that truly does make you blind! (He typed, slumped over his crotch in intense concentration ... two hours later he could barely stand up, his back was so tight!)

Carpe diem meets carpal tunnel.

But seize I must. Just expect briefer posts til end of week.

Don't believe every Pentagon study you read, even when they're self-critical

■"Don't add to armor, some soldiers say: Troops complain that protective gear is heavy and restricts their movement," by Ryan Lenz (Associated Press), Indianapolis Star, 8 January 2006, p. A13.

The Pentagon study looks at 93 fatal wounds in Iraq from March 03 to July 05, and it decided that in 74 of the cases, armor with more coverage over the body would have made a difference.

Thus the logic implied is "the bigger the armor coverage, the more lives saved."

Makes sense at first blush, until you talk to soldiers who say the gear they wear is already too constricting. Of course there is the usual fatalism of soldiers talking here: as one puts it, "You can slap body armor on all you want, but it's not going to help anything. When it's your time, it's your time. Second Lt. Josh Suthoff says he'd wear less if his superiors would let them.

So it's a trade that probably doesn't make sense to people who haven't worn the gear in combat.

I've always wondered why so many NFL receivers and defensive backs go without knee pads I mean, why risk the career-ending injury? But when you ask them, they'll tell you straight up they'll take the mobility and speed edge over the safety.

This story reminds me of what Rumsfeld told me on such equipment shortages and weaknesses. He basically said, stuff doesn't win it for you, or keep you aive. Better tactics do, because as soon as you get better gear in this Global War on Terrorism, you can expect our enemies to figure new ways around them.

The key is not our stuff, or our technology, but our capacity to learn and change, PLUS all that stuff and technology.

But the latter never substitutes for the former in Fourth Generation Warfare, a point I will never argue with the 4GWers.

And that's the sort of thrust I was working on in the Esquire piece Mark and I edit this week (he turned in his edited first copy draft to the production crew today; we wil be editing various "passes" between now and Thursday late per his latest estimate).

The big picture--individual person trade-off on connectivity in China

■"Microsoft Defends Censoring a Dissident's Blog in China," by Kathy Chen and Geoffrey A. Fowler, Wall Street Journal, 6 January 2006, p. A9.

MS shuts down a Chinese blog site because of some postings there that offended Chinese authorities. The culprit was a Chinese journalist writing under a pen name.

MS not talking, but its action is not unusual for IT companies operating overseas: they follow the local content laws as a quid pro quo for establishing the connectivity in the first place.

China's internet users rose from almost nothing in 1998 to roughly 100 million by '05.

This journalist was pushing the limits in ways any democrat would approve, and when his site started drawing 15k hits a day, the authorities pushed MS to pull the plug, which they did.

But more key to me is the incredible growth of blogging in China, AND those bloggers pushing limits, AND getting in trouble AND forcing both governments and corporations to deal with that.

Sure most bloggers in China write about their personal lives rather than politics. But the key thing is 33 million Chinese bloggers and all the learned networking behavior that comes with it.

Of coure, the article quotes the always-solid Rebecca McKinnon on the subject, and she raies the right questions in a balanced way: "In the short term [acquiescing to China] gets you into a market you perhaps couldn't be in otherwise ... [but] in the long term is this good for your corporate global image in China, that you go along with censorship?"

Fair question, someday soon to be debated by ... say ... a couple of hundred million Chinese bloggers?

I say, take the connectivity in the hand over the political freedom in the bush. Eat today and live to blog again tomorrow.

Me? I'm betting on Chinese ingenuity--on both sides--to make this one helluva cat-and-mouse game that the many and the cheap will ultimately win over the far fewer and more expensive.

Scare me once, shame on you, but scare me again and again, then shame on me

■"Russian Gas Accord Doesn't Calm Europeans," by Gregory L. White and Chip Cummins, Wall Street Journal, 5 January 2006, p. A9.

■"Facing an Addiction: Western Europe Comes to Terms With Its Dependence on Russian Gas; Russia, still acting like a superpower, tried to use natural resources for political goals," New York Times, 8 January 2006, p. A10.

Russia's going to end up learning the same lesson that OPEC learned in the 1980s: you're in the driver's seat on energy only so long as you keep it reasonably priced and steady in supply. If you do that, you don't trigger political responses or movement economically toward alternatives--unless other values intervene and force that shift despite your best efforts (OPEC's fear of the shift to hydrogen--and yes, I know that every time I write that I get several scientists sending me emails that work hard to debunk what they see as the myths of moving in this direction, but I stick with those many other scientists and inventors (like Amory Lovins) whom I regularly interact with and who say it's nowhere near as hard as the pessimists make out).

Putin's bad-boy shtick on natural gas with the Ukraine won't win him any real power over Europe. He'll just push them toward hedging pathways, which they will pursue given their mix of social values, economic values and lack of any serious political-military alternatives for counter-pressure.

In the end, all Putin will end up doing, if he pursues this path, is driving the Europeans toward faster accommodation with the Arab and Islamic world (and increase their reliance on nukes AND bring them back into Africa and South America, where they'll bump into the Chinese and Indians already there!). Movement in the direction of better energy/people/money/security flows with the Middle East and North Africa really kills two birds with one stone for the Europeans, whereas suffering the Russians' BS and bluster only revives old enemy images they'd rather forget.

The "power guys" running Russia today are kidding themselves if they think this tactic will resurrect their superpower status. It'll just put them in the same sad category of the rancid authoritarian regimes of the Middle East and South America.

Rules for the SysAdmin force

■"A Man Does Not Ask a Man About His Wife," the "Word for Word" compilation of quotes, New York Times, 8 January 2006, p. WK7.

Excerpts from the cultural-sensitivity reference cards passed out in the thousands to U.S. troops in Afghanistan:

"Do not walk in front of someone at prayer."

"Do not ask a Muslim if he is a Sunni or a Shiite."

"When offered a seat of honor, decline graciously and accept only when offered again."

"Do not argue, but strive for consensus. Majority rule is not the norm for solving issues or problems."

"Do not stare at women, touch them or try to shake a woman's hand (unless she extends her hand first)."

And my favorite: "Speak about your families. Afghans like to know you have them."

Again, it's brains PLUS stuff, not just stuff that will win battles and keep our troops more safe. Can't win without local intell and you can't get local intell if you piss people off.

Which is why State does not lead ...

■"Words to Live By," by Mortimer B. Zuckerman, U.S. News & World Report, 9 January 2006, p. 60.

Great quote from Condi Rice: "Political agreements close chapters of the past. Economic agreements open chapters in the future."

Which I guess explains why Clinton's two terms seemed to be future oriented and economically successful while the Bush terms seem so ... something else.

I believe in this quote. In the 1990s while I still worked with the Center for Naval Analyses as a consultant, I ginned up a slide that said State closes doors on the past, Defense deals with the bad stuff of today (despite the constant daydreaming on future enemies), and Treasury (and US Trade Rep) work mostly the future (figuring that discount rate!).

In the past, State was more relevant because interstate wars and the threat of global war meant it needed to stay busy preventing the present from exploding. But now, we are back to settling and integrating frontier areas, where the military-market nexus is more obvious, so now it's Defense that needs to be able to segue failed states from instablity to connectivity, which in turn triggers the most important flows of trade and money, which is where you'll find the really good Treasury secretaries like Baker and Rubin doing their thing and reducing the risk of war over time (a sad comment on the Bush terms has been the serious weakness of their T secretaries).

That renewed military-market nexus is fundamentally why State secretaries have been so weak since the Wall came down. Quick! Name the last important one who made a real difference. Again, you're back to Baker.

'nough said.

The season of the "lessons learned" articles

■"How to do better: After brutal blunders in Iraq and Afghanistan, the American army has become more intelligent-and hopes to be more effective," The Economist, 17 December 2005, p. 22.

A great piece with some nice bits on Petraeus and Leavenworth (bet the journalist didn't address the entire student body with a two-hour lecture while he was there ... but I regress), sandwiched between a description of training changes at Fort Polk in Louisiana (actually, the Joint Readiness Training Center at Polk always feautured a lot of this stuff; it's really at the Army and Marines training centers where the change is far more stark).

Overall, a solid piece like King and Jaffe's in the WSJ and Julian Barnes' many pieces in USN&WR recently. If my piece coming out in about a month in Esquire didn't fly at a much higher altitude (I know no other way to operate and certaintly wouldn't try to compete with these brilliant reporters at their own game), I would be really nervous.

Instead I am greatly relieved. My reporting uncovered all the same details. I just want to tell the story on my usual grand strategic level (and yes, "major league bullshit" level to my critics--to which I reply, "your point?") in my own peculiar style, which just so happens to fit so well with Esquire.

Go with what you know (and do best), say I. Play at the level that makes most sense to you.

Which is my way of saying, I guess, that I'm really getting psyched about this piece!

Nice note from Hearst International today: they are picking up "The Chinese Are Our Friends" piece from November for the internatonal editions. Not sure which ones yet. Hoping for China and the UK, cause they pay the best!

Sorry Sam Harris, organized religion is only going to get stronger in the 21st century

■"Jesus, CEO: America's most successful churches are modelling themselves on businesses," The Economist, 24 December 2005, p. 41.

Harris' celebrated book on religion (The End of Faith) is considered this brillaint attack on the foibles and evil of modern-day organized religion (I have tried to read it but gave up because I found it too dense and gobbley-gooky; it may indeed be quite good, but like many great books, it made me too sleepy to seriously engage), and like most such comprehensie attacks on religion, the book pines for a time in which its global influence was lessened or eliminated all together.

Social scientists have predicted this for decades, only to be proven more and more wrong with each passing year--except in Old Core Europe and perhaps Japan, but I hesitate on that charge because their media content strikes me as so spiritual).

Well, this interesting article only points out how religions, faith and--in particular--churches seem bigger and more comprehensively involved in their attendants' lives than ever.

Sounds like Harris is on to something!

Why would people, even in very connected and relatively rich America still seek out such comprehensive faith communities? I guess religions, even in our super-connected states, are sort of the AOL for the soul--the great translating mechanism for preferred visions, preferred sites, preferred content.

Does this only prove yet again how disintegrating globalization is? Everyone seeking their own "channel"?

Or does it prove that individuality is alive and well, and so are self-selecting communities of practice--religious or otherwise?

The 21st century will be the most technologically-obsessed age yet experienced by man, and in a yin-yang balancing act, it will also be the most religious.

Connectivity and content controls. Like it or not, they go hand in hand.

And that's not a bad thing. In fact, it's how we keep things from coming apart.

And yes, that notion should help you understand China a bit better. The dominant faith clings on, but the new faiths--the individually driven ones--are just beginning to rear their beautiful heads. The South Koreans are coming! The South Koreans are coming!

Worth the Drive

In advance of Tom's speaking engagement to the Indiana Council on World Affairs (to be held at Butler University in Indy) the evening of Wednesday, 18 January, thought it would be good to share the note that went out from John Clark, Senior Fellow at the Sagamore Institute for Policy Research.

Perhaps the most important geo-strategic analyst in the US right now is Thomas P.M. Barnett, author of the best-selling book, The Pentagon's New Map and its recent sequel Blueprint for Action. On September 10, 2001, Barnett was an international relations professor at the Naval War College, who had been delivering a PowerPoint presentation to military audiences that argued that they were completely unprepared for the challenges they would be facing. Within months after 9/11 he had emerged as a leading defense intellectual-celebrity, even appearing on the cover of Esquire.

The Pentagon's New Map was an elaboration of this presentation, an exhilarating and aggravating book. No other book has so polarized military thinkers: war-fighters think he is crazy, civil-affairs and nation-builders think he is the greatest mind ever. Personally, I think Blueprint for Action, which focuses on the challenges that must be addressed after the heavy fighting is over, is even better than his first book, and I liked The Pentagon's New Map a lot.

This weekend I'll be posting a review of the book and a critical analysis of Barnett's other work at http://indybuzz.blogspot.com.

For a flavor of Barnett's writing, check out his website: http://thomaspmbarnett.com/. This has to be one of the most generous websites I know. For free, Barnettt provides access to just about everything he has ever said or written. We are in for a treat.

What: Barnett will speak to the Indiana Council on World Affairs

Where: Butler University, Johnson Room in Robertson Hall

When: The evening of Wednesday, January 18

Cocktail reception 5:30

Dinner 6:30

Talk at 7:15

Conclude at 8:45

Dinner for ICWA members is $22; the cost for nonmembers is $24. Depending on the space available, it may be possible to attend only the talk for $4. This is a great time to join the ICWA, and I have attached a membership form. This promises to be an exceptional evening: Barnett is an electrifying speaker who displays not a whiff of self-doubt. We will get a chance to experience what has enraptured or enraged much of the defense establishment, and I hope you can attend ...

To RSVP: Before January 13 e-mail Kishor Kulkarni at KMKulkarni@aol.com with "ICWA Dinner Reservation" as the subject; include your name, address, phone number, and the number of places you would like to reserve. Or phone your reservation to 317-566-2036.

You should RSVP to KMKulkarni@aol.com as soon as you can, attendance for this event will surely max out. Please feel free to pass this invitation along to anyone you think would be interested. I do hope you can make it. Please let me know if you have any questions. See you the 18th, John.

John Clark, Senior Fellow

Sagamore Institute for Policy Research

Indianapolis, IN

www.sipr.org

For those of you in the region who have not seen Tom speak (not on CSPAN, mind you, but LIVE), this is a great opportunity. Don't miss it!

The neverending story

Dateline: Back in the Shire, Indy, 8 January 2006

Worked the ever-expanding punch list on the Esquire piece from 0800 to 1300 on Saturday, then drove to Terre Haute with the boys for a mini-family reunion on my wife's side. Highlight: "Chronicles of Narnia." Lowlight: another crappy sleep on a mushy hotel mattress.

After a farewell lunch today, I zip back and put in another six hours of typing up bits and pieces in response to Warren's frequent emails.

This is the most wearying part in the long process of getting a piece done (the planning on this began in early November), but it's actually my favorite because of the intense collaboration with Mark. Reporting is exhausting. Writing is lonely.

But editing is fun.

Looking for PNM Aficionado/a

Got an email from a reader who lives near Charlotte, North Carolina, seeking any in his area who could join him and a group of friends as they gather to discuss PNM. If there is anyone in that part of the world who could join the group's discussion (such as a political science professor, history professor, or other individual intimately familiar with Tom’s work), please contact Richard D., MD, at radmd51@charter.net.

Sterling on China: worth reading

After hearing about Sterling for so long, I can easily see the attraction. Guy writes with a clean, undeniably sensible bent on China, which is a good indicator of solid strategic thinking today (arguably, THE best indicator today).

Worth reading: http://www.well.com/conf/inkwell.vue/).

Screwed by iPods, Esquire punch list incomplete

Dateline: In the Shire, Indy, 6 January 2006

Up at 0600 this morn, working Warren punch list on Esquire article solid til 1200, then shower and race to K-garten with Jerry. Today I am volunteer parent.

Then race home for more punch list items from Mark (by "punch list," I mean bits and pieces Mark wants written to cover the tape lines and zipppers he's been forced to apply in his slim-down edit and rearrange), working straight to 1930. Then race to pick up Kev at tutor's. Then home and my Mac is already lost to daughter's iTune downloading, so it's Leinenkugel Honey Weiss and Family Guy Vol. III DVDs for me til lights out.

Never should have let wife get older kids iPods. Now we'll want to go all Mac (not bad idea). Plus, I discover I am closet Coldplay fan!

Oo! ... oooo-wooo-oooo-woooo ... aaaah!

Home ... Home ... Where I wanted to go ...

As Stewie would say: "Damn! Damn you all for thwarting my plans!"

And you can't be surprised by the FG fixation. After all, we're ex-Rhodies.

Damn! Damn them all!

I return to the punch list first thing in the morn ...