Recognizing the inevitables to approach the inconceivables

ANALYSIS: Obama Makes War Gains, By Dan Balz, Washington Post, July 22, 2008; Page A06

ARTICLE: Iraq Points to Pullout in 2010, By Sudarsan Raghavan and Dan Eggen, Washington Post, July 22, 2008; Page A01

The synchronicity here has more to do with Maliki's own conditions than with U.S. -perceived conditions. At some point, the half-life of our occupation is reached (Petraeus' theory all along), and any success from the surge simply accelerates that process.

As it happens, that dynamic is more in line with Obama's desire to redirect on Afghanistan. McCain wants his "victory," problem being, no one in Iraq (or the region) is much inclined to deliver that on terms he/America might find satisfactory (esp. vis-a-vis Iranian influence).

That's why, in my mind, making a diplomatic surge to accompany the troop surge was crucial. If the surge worked (which it did), then we time out for Iraqi domestic political reasons (happening now) and U.S. troop exhaustion reasons (plus now the lure of the redirect to Afghanistan). Both were always inevitable--meaning when, not if.

If the surge didn't work, same problems emerge but with no saved face for us (it may never be perceived as a US "win," but it's now unlikely to ever be perceived as a US "defeat" either--and that, quite frankly, is as good as it gets in this long war). Either way, we're forced to accommodate Iran in the end (something Bush is realizing finally), both on Iraq and its demand for regime security (neither pleasant, but hard to see how we get our way on either, given our strategic tie-down--again, as Bush is coming to realize).

The difference?

If we had made the diplo surge, then presumably fewer US troops needlessly killed in the meantime (Iran's obvious meddling) and we're simultaneously bringing Iran in from cold, working Israel-Palestine a bit better (hard to see it could be any worse/slower than it's been), and looking at a redirect on Afghanistan with Tehran's helpful collusion (they don't want Pashtun control/re-Talibanization either).

Eventually, all these things are going to work out in the manner I favor, the differential being our stubborness (almost non-existent with Obama, substantial with McCain). The questions have always been: 1) how much needless loss of US/NATO troops in meantime; and 2) how much Iran-Israel war risk ensues.

The question of Obama's support/lack thereof re: surge is meaningless, in my mind. We were headed to these decision points (occupation half-life in Iraq, Army-Marine institutional burn-out, accommodating rising Iran, and Afghanistan redirect) anyway, the only meaningful deltas being needless American deaths and military exhaustion (and no, civil strife in Iraq per se was never an important enough strategic measure, because it can always be resurrected at the drop of a hat--like we saw in Lebanon recently, thus U.S. military commanders always speaking of "fragile" gains).

As always, real grand strategy is getting leaders to recognize the inevitables as early as possible so as to approach the "inconceivables" with all appropriate speed.

Some numbers arising from New Core demand

COLUMN: “Let’s Shoot the Speculators!” by Robert J. Samuelson, Newsweek, 7-14 July 2008, p. 18.

Obviously, the title is sarcastic. Point of piece is rising demand from emerging markets, that drive up prices in following percentages since 2002:

+ aluminum 95%

+ copper 360%

+ corn 70%

+ gold 125% (isn’t it ALWAYS a good time to buy gold?)

+ nickel 452% (screw gold, buy nickel)

+ oil 177%

+ steel 117%

+ zinc 314%.

Demand constitutes real power in this era, not supply.

Been watching this proposed energy flow for a while

ARTICLE: India, Pak, Iran to meet in Tehran to push IPI project, Times of India, 16 Jul 2008

Some movement.

(Thanks: jarrod myrick)

Guest Post: KC-17 Many-Mission Tanker Idea

Mike Nelson writes:

As a Californian watching my state burn for the 6th year in a row I got motivated to document an idea of mine. I brought this to Tom's attention and he was kind enough to offer to post it here so that it might get some visibility among those in a position to consider and act on it.

Specifically I propose that the Air Force rework their refueling tanker contract to include the mission of Fire Tanker, and see the C-17 airframe as an ideal candidate. In addition I assert that this platform would provide better utility for our emerging SysAdmin mission requirements as well as the foundation for supporting international disaster relief. I figure if we're going to spend $35B+ on this program, why not get a platform that also meets additional important needs? The attached PDF provides a summary of this idea.

My thanks to Tom for the assist in circulating this.

Tanker Idea Summary (pdf)

Update 7/28: Mike sent in an updated pdf with an added introduction for greater clarity: Tanker Idea Summary v2 (pdf)

Gates' balancing act

ARTICLE: US defense chief cites 'militarization' of US foreign policy, AP, July 15, 2008

There is the inevitable "reset" of the military in terms of stuff that happens when much of the gear we sent to Iraq gets sent back to the U.S. for rehab (through Turkey, it would seem, to mend some fences with the economic boomlet that should accompany this flow), then there is the inevitable "reset" in terms of roles and missions. Gates is addressing the latter here, putting down a marker, as he has so many times in the recent past, for a more balanced USG approach. Because he doesn't want DoD getting stuck holding too much of the bag next time, he argues for plussing-up the capacity of other agencies in the meantime.

It's a careful balancing act: Gates doesn't want the military to slip into next-war-itis but he also doesn't want the Pentagon thinking that the interagency process will be as lopsided next time as it was this last one, so he has to argue in both directions at different times/venues/audiences.

Tricky bit, but he does it well.

(Thanks: Rory Stolzenberg)

I love this kind of evidence of change

PRESS RELEASE: Sociological analysis shows emergence of 'rights revolution' in China,

Students of our own history should find this more familiar than we typically do. Human rights always starts small and practical and then gets more ambitious.

(Thanks: Lexington Green)

Saudi change

ISLAM IN A NEW WORLD: New Saudi Arabia university will have a Western feel, By Jeffrey Fleishman, Los Angeles Times, July 13, 2008

Such is the nature of Saudi accommodation of globalization over time. For jobs to work, they must be competitive, and to be competitive, they must accept a degree of modernity (e.g., coed).

So the cost of stabilization is jobs is education is coed is change.

(Thanks: jarrod myrick)

The Leviathan is eventually forced to give it up

CORPORATE NEWS: "Fate of Lockheed's F-22 Raptor Up in Air: Pentagon, Air Force Disagree on the Need For This Type of Jet," by August Cole, Wall Street Journal, 14 July 2008, p. B3.

I am reminded of those who ridiculed my notion--long-stated--that war tends to be bad for big defense contractors because it inevitably puts their programs of record (weapons systems, platforms) at risk, money simply being needed elsewhere for operations, bodies, medical care, etc. You stock up in peace, you spend in war.

The F-22 is a poster child for this: great jet, so great we can't share it. But also so great that it's really not that appropriate for the operations we face today. So the Pentagon is set to stop buying them, which means Lockheed is set to stop building them, leaving us to work the current stock (any shot down lately?) and wait on Joint Strike Fighter, so expensive ($300B to develop and buy--today's estimate) that we're sharing production costs with everyone we can stand.

The Air Force? It holds out for China and Russia.

There she is, Miss Core-wannabe ... !

ARTICLE: Miss Universe Spotlights Thriving Vietnam, AP, July 12, 2008

Hosting these sorts of events signals the desire to belong and be seen as belonging. This one especially carries some freight: your country is safe enough for us to send our virginal young women!

Recall my Nigeria story on the same in PNM ...

Vietnam is clearly moving into the Core.

(Thanks: Doug Clark)

Chinese DiB

ARTICLE: Chinese firm to build $1 billion road in Nigeria oil hub, Reuters, Jul 13, 2008

Oil revenue for infrastructure development is a hot thing right now, so China moving intelligently in line with globalization's forces--basically their COIN sans kinetics (Galrahn's point) or I could call it a Chinese version of Development-in-a-Box‚Ñ¢.

(Thanks: Galrahn)

US, EU look south for fresh strength

ARTICLE: Med Union priorities explained, BBC, 14 July 2008

Corresponds with the current cover story of The Economist: "Club Med: Why Europe should look south."

Again, this is inevitable, much like America's own southward expansion. "Inconceivable" to many now, but getting obvious to those who think ahead.

Good signs but stay vigilant

ARTICLE: U.S. Weapons Package for Taiwan Stalls as China Tensions Ease, By Ting-I Tsai, Wall Street Journal, July 21, 2008

The trifecta on a week that's tracking nicely with my notion that the Pentagon's 3 "big war" scenarios are all going down the toilet. I opine on North Korea and Iran in next weekend's column. The Chinese one is becoming too blase to mention.

Having said that, people need to remember that each of these three scenarios have plenty of champions inside our national security establishment, all of whom will fight any perceptions of their preferred scenario's loss of credibility.

(Thanks: Pete Johnson)

Next-war crowd fights back

ARTICLE: "A battle over 'the next war': Many military officers are pushing back against Defense Secretary Gates' focus on preparing for more 'asymmetric' fighting rather than for a large, conventional conflict," by Julian E. Barnes and Peter Spiegel, Los Angeles Times, 21 July 2008.

As you would expect, Mattis has the killer quotes (from my perspective):

"I think that nation-state and conventional war is in a state of hibernation," said Marine Gen. James N. Mattis, who commanded U.S. forces in Fallouja in 2004. "I don't think it's gone away, but the most likely threats probably today are not going to be conventional or from another state."

Mattis argues that the current fight is not an interlude.

"I recognize some people want to say: 'Let's hold our breath. The irregular world will go away, then we can get back to good old soldiering again,' " he said. "Unfortunately, in war, the enemy gets a vote."

And the Army's TRADOC chimes in:

Maxie L. McFarland, the deputy chief of staff for intelligence at the Army's Training and Doctrine Command, predicts the Army will be involved in regional conflicts -- over energy resources, extremist movements or environmental changes -- in places of growing strategic importance, such as Nigeria.

Defense chief Gates wants to spend more on U.S. diplomacy
"The Army believes it has to prepare for warfare and conflict among local populations with unfamiliar cultures . . . in urban settings or harsh lawless areas," McFarland said. "We think this environment will require long-duration operations, at extended distances."

The big war comeback is classic and decidedly vague:

"If you want to avoid war, prepare for war," [Air Force Maj. Gen. (and lawyer) Charles] Dunlap said.

We live in the first truly globalized economy the world has ever known. Nothing that has come before has come anywhere near this level of connectivity and integrated production chains--nothing.

And yet we expect war to retain its pre-nuclear great-power flavor?

If you want to avoid war, work the peace.

On this point alone, it's worth Obama considering to keep Gates. I fear any Dem pick will simply give in to the Big War crowd to placate them and industry and to appear "tough" on defense.

Thanks to numerous readers for passing along.

Just plain good

ARTICLE: Slowing Economy Gives Way to Global Role Reversals, By Anthony Faiola and Jill Drew, Washington Post, July 17, 2008; Page D01

ARTICLE: Saudis Look Beyond Oil to New Economy in Desert, By Faiza Saleh Ambah, Washington Post, July 17, 2008; Page A01

None of this structural change in the global economy means it's always going to be smooth sailing or anything like that. It just means there's plenty more chance for balancing across the system at any one time, which is very good.

The best thing is that the emerging/next emerging economies realize what a chance they have right now, and that they're taking full advantage.

By keeping our international liberal trade order easy to join and hard to overthrow, we build in resilience through sheer numbers of players over time.

Good for us, good for them. Globalization is just plain good.

Good in the direction of Iran

PAPER: Iran’s Political, Demographic, and Economic Vulnerabilities (pdf), By Keith Crane, Rollie Lal, Jeffrey Martini, 2008

Good analysis worth reading. When I think of Enterra's work in Kurdish Iraq, I think we'll do more good in the direction of Iran than any sanctions. There is huge unmet demand there. Meet it and you have magnificent impact. A strong Kurdistan becomes a source of connectivity (both above and below board), plus a conduit from Turkey.

Connectivity is part of the cure

ARTICLE: "Sustaining the Medellin Miracle: Colombia Struggles to Hold On To Gains From Globalization," by Anthony Faiola, Washington Post, 11 July 2008, p. A1.

The "curative power of liberalized trade,' with the key assist being preferential access for Colombian exports to the world's largest market.

Think about that: power in this world is demand, not supply.

Kaplan at his best

ARTICLE: Will Israel Attack Iran?, By Robert D. Kaplan, The Current/Atlantic, 07.07.08

Very solid analysis of the Israeli attack scenario WRT Iranian nuclear program. Well worth the perusal.

(Thanks: Terry Collier)

Dreaming for Iran

ARTICLE: US ships cigarettes, bras, more to Iran, By SHARON THEIMER, Associated Press, Jul 8, 2008

Tells us three things: 1) anything can and is smuggled into Iran; 2) Iranians prefer American stuff (a passive protest is to be unduly attracted to stuff and sources that authorities decry); and 3) there is huge unmet middle class consumer demand in Iran.

As always, one of our dreams in rebuilding Iraq should be to increase this flow immeasurably, meaning Iraq is a key conduit for the soft kill.

(Thanks: greg)

Only bad interventions must necessarily be huge ones

PAPER: Military Interventions in Sierra Leone: Lessons From a Failed State (pdf), By Larry J. Woods and Colonel Timothy R. Reese, The Long War Series, Occasional Paper 28, Combat Studies Institute Press, US Army Combined Arms Center, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas

These studies are great (I grabbed a bunch last year in Leavenworth when I spoke at a conference). Sierra Leone shows what a modest military intervention can achieve if well-designed and well-timed. About 100 British marines accomplished a lot.

Point being: only bad interventions must necessarily be huge ones. Good ones can come in a variety of sizes and public-private mixes.

Look at Kurdish Iraq for example: few troops, heavy tilt to private sector.

This week's column

Globalizations means fewer wars, less death

Two new reports about our world reiterate the overwhelmingly positive impact of globalization upon our planet, making it more peaceful and more just.

The "Human Security Brief 2007," compiled by Canada's Simon Fraser University, details the continuing overall decline in global conflict that began with globalization's rapid expansion around the planet in recent years, to include the complete absence of classic state-on-state war since 2003.

Read on at KnoxNews.
Read on at Scripps Howard.