Nice overview of better-than-waterboarding approaches

FEATURE: "How To Make Terrorists Talk," by Bobby Ghosh, Time (still an actual news magazine with actual reporting, can you believe it?), 8 June 2009.

Just like in the real world, the soft-kill of connecting beats the hard-kill of kinetics.

Beat the shit out of somebody and you just get more resistance.

But make the target see you as human beings, and he'll start talking instead of lecturing, as one American interrogator put it.

My favorite bit: the diabetic given sugarless cookies then caves in and spills all manner of beans.

Yes, we can all adhere to the holy grail scenario of the ticking nuke in Times Square, but for the other 99.999999999999999999% of reality, we can do better.

You know how the Saudis prefer to do it? They bring in the mothers--no kinetics required.

Stavridis continues to roll

POST: NATO Nominee Calls for Expanded Goldwater-Nichols, By Michael Bruno, Ares, 6/2/2009

Stavridis already having nice impact on his way to NATO. He is is arguably the smartest active-duty admiral on the planet right now. I knew him way back when, before he became flag, and he always stood out as this brain-among-brains, which is why people--like me--who admire him a lot are so happy to see him reach such heights in his career (two combatant commands: first SOUTHCOM where he did some truly innovative, very SysAdmin stuff; and now NATO, where, quite frankly, he is a better outcome than Petraeus would have been, so it's great all around that Petraeus got pushed into CENTCOM [against his will, just a bit, by circumstances . . . in which I played a small role]).

While I am not a great fan of the Goldwater-Nichols approach, I welcome as many stirring spoons in the pot as possible.

The key bit:

A move to apply the joint-forcing concept beyond the U.S. military continues to gain incremental ground, with the next expected military leader of NATO endorsing an inter-agency reorientation among U.S. agencies.

"Today, our military functions extremely well in the joint world," U.S. Navy Adm. James Stavridis testified this morning in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee. "I believe the next step toward increasing effectiveness of our national security apparatus is to institute similar provisions that encourage an interagency approach."

(Thanks: Brad Barbaza)

The flow of money: crucial to globalization

BUSINESS DAY: "A Subcontinent Stalled: India's Economy Is Suddenly Starved For Investment," by Vikas Bajaj and Somini Sengupta, New York Times, 5 May 2009.

The key thing that drives globalization's expansion has always been money that will cross borders.

The bad news is that Western money is staying home right now, so the main players are rich Arab oil states and China, both of which are keeping up their investment flows in places like Africa despite the downturn.

India has relied heavily on foreign investment flows, much of which comes from ex-pats. In 2005 such investments amounted to 25% of the national GDP. In 2008 it was up at 39%.

Naturally, a big drop so far this year. Last year saw about $14B in FDI and this year looks to be well under $10B. So Indian companies are increasingly forced to rely on Indian banks, who are notoriously stingy.

The old bit holds: nobody develops their economy without solid access to foreign money.

The stunning amount of student deaths in the China quake

INTERNATIONAL: "China Releases Its Toll Of Students in '08 Quake: First Official Tally In Contentious Issue," by Andrew Jacobs and Edward Wong, New York Times, 8 May 2009.

NATIONAL WEEKLY EDITION: "Parents' Stifled Grief: A year after the massive earthquake, China clamps down on survivors' protests," by Jill Drew, Washington Post, 11-17 May 2009.

Old estimates said as many as 10,000 school kids died. China's government says 5k and change, with 500-plus disabled.

Still, what a stunning total. I have no idea how far back--cumulatively--you'd have to go in American earthquake history to rack up a total death count that equals what China lost last year just in students.

Meanwhile, China continues to clamp down on grieving parents who want answers.

Very bad form that only bottles up social anger instead of dissipating it.

I didn't know the man, but I borrowed his stage once at Las Vegas

OBITUARIES: "Danny Gans, Impressionist, Dies at 52," by William Grimes, New York Times, 2 May 2009.

A couple of years back I perform on Gans' Mirage stage (he was there from 2000 to earlier this year) for a heavy-duty equipment manufacturers' convention. It was weird inhabiting his environment for a few hours, because I got to see all the backstage reality of the nightly show.

Gans was huge in Vegas, and his impressionism was centered in singing more than speech. He did everybody from Sinatra to Rod Steward to Anita Baker (roughly 60 in all). Entertainer of the year in Vegas the year before I borrowed his digs for a day.

Technology finds a way round the Great Firewall of China

FRONT PAGE: "Iranians and Others Outwit Net Censors," by John A. Markoff, New York Times, 1 May 2009.

Description of the Tor Project that offers anticensorship software to those inside countries with substance firewalls (usually political subjects).

Talks about "a disparate alliance of political and religious activists, civil libertarians, Internet entrepreneurs, diplomats and even military officers and intelligence agents" that now comes together to challenge growing Internet censorship.

This arms race is just beginning.

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: How Obama's Cairo Rhetoric Could Really Unfold

Despite the president's soaring speech on partnering with the world, one foreign-policy expert sees globalization splintering the Arab Islamic world -- to the tune of an Israeli air strike, Saudi-Iranian proxy wars, more nuclear weapons, and Obama's tough re-election battle in 2012.

Click here to read Tom's Esquire.com column for today.

Chinese Navy expressing interest in emulating US Navy humanitarian missions

"WAR IS BORING" (COLUMN): "Chinese, U.S. Navies Consult on Humanitarian Mission," By David Axe, World Politics Review, 3 June 2009.

Intriguing piece by Axe, who is sort of a free-ranging Michael Yon with an "everything else"-type focus. Axe has done a number of pieces on "smart power" efforts by the US Navy.

This one interests me because of the following bit:

Perhaps most surprisingly, the Chinese navy has requested a consultation during Comfort's upcoming stay in Colombia. A Chinese team will board the 70,000-ton-displacement, converted oil tanker for 10 days of training. "They're putting together a hospital ship, and are interested in how we do our business," explained Navy Capt. James Ware, senior doctor aboard Comfort.

Beijing's interest in Comfort's humanitarian mission seems to answer some questions about the intentions underpinning the rapid growth of the Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy. In October, the PLAN accepted its first purpose-built hospital ship, the so-called "Ship 866."

The PLAN's give-and-take with us is much like the Russian Navy's in the early 1990s: they ask tons of seemingly banal, picayune questions about procedures and reveal nothing about their strategic intentions. We find this dialogue mysterious and alarming, but it really just is the other side wanting to emulate our Microsoft of a navy while avoiding conversations about their lack of operational skill relative to ours.

And no, it's not odd that, as superpower wannabes, their navies naturally gauge themselves against ours when it comes to combat potential. It's as natural as the day is long and we'd definitely do the same if the situation were reversed. It's just that we're of such a high opinion of ourselves in terms of motives that we expect to have the biggest and best gun in the world and expect no one lower on the food chain to dare to plan operations against it!

I don't say that simply as an assertion. I spent a week in Moscow in the mid 1990s talking to all manner of Russian naval officers and simply got an earful (indeed, I wrote a memo outlining how best to talk to Russian naval officers which--yes--did involve afternoon drinking, way too many cigarettes and pictures of family members).

I do see this as a hopeful sign. Rather than spend all our time trying to get the PLAN close to home to cooperate (the hardest part, because we're talking their sense of security + Taiwan), better to draw out the PLAN that has ambitions to "see the world." Whenever I talk cooperation with China's military, I talk places like Latin America, like Africa, etc--places where there is no past rivalry between us like in SE Asia.

Start small and smart, I say,

So--again--a hopeful sign.

Axe's column, by the way, is worth perusing each week on SysAdmin/DoEE-like subjects. It's just his natural beat, it seems.

What's Chinese for MOOTW?

ARTICLE: China plans for the next big disaster, By Peter J Brown, Asia Times Online, May 30, 2009

Also along the lines of China's emulation, check out this bit from an Asia Times article describing China's plans to gear up government capacity to deal with serious, system-perturbing disasters:

As part of a so-called system for Military Operations Other Than War (MOOTW), the Military Training and Arms Department of the General Staff Headquarters of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) also announced in May the formation of five specialized PLA units which will be ready to respond to floods, earthquakes, chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear incidents, transportation sector-related disasters, and, international peacekeeping and disaster relief activities.

What I like, naturally, is the copying of language on MOOTW.

That's where we were in the 1990s, so to see the PLA slip into similar ambitions is another good sign, because once they get the skills ready for at-home scenarios, then they become deployable for Gap scenarios--and therein comes the ability and desire to administer to the system.

(Thanks: William R. Cumming)

Military talks with Syria

ARTICLE: Syria to Allow Visit of U.S. Military Leaders, By Glenn Kessler, Washington Post, June 3, 2009

Nice to see the reach-out to Syria. I like rolling back Iranian influence at the margins, and Syria is ripe.

The adaptive capabilities of the Chinese Capitalist Party, as sung (lips firmly attached to ass) by Banyan, Chief Suck-Up Officer for the Economist

ASIA: "The party goes on: Who, 20 years ago, would have thought that the Communist Party could come to this?" by Banyan, The Economist, 30 May 2009.

The piece goes on a bit too much about the great resilience of the Communist Party, which has done nothing more (or less) than totally abandon its ideology and remake itself as Marx's ruling capitalist elite. True to Marx's gift for prognostication (he got all the big predictions right--if you mean completely backasswards; but I quibble over his genius), when China ditched socialism and embraced capitalism, the place got amazingly richer and the body counts decreased to a stunning degree (Mao was arguably the deadliest dictator of the 20th century).

I mean, that's resilience all right, sort of like transforming yourself from a man to a woman and then congratulating the former man on his tremendous adaptability as a male.

Then we get this stupid comment: "Some in the wishful West will see this a proto-democratisation of a Leninist state."

Hmm. How would Vlad interpret two-thirds of China's exports being controlled by foreign multinational corporations? Surely, not as any serious diminishment of the Leninist State's supreme control? I mean, Lenin was all for MNCs coming in and renting local cheap labor, right?

Well, duh! A Leninist state controlled the entire f--king economy and China's government now accounts for about 30-35%--not even as high as your average socialist northern European model. So yeah, there's been some intense democratization, Mr. Banyan, as the party and government have yielded vast swaths of power.

Or we can pretend all that change is meaningless because a single party still rules.

But as I point out all the time, single parties rule--as a rule--after most revolutions, and frankly, Deng's revolution kicks Mao's ass. But single-party rule is a temporary phenomenon in country after country (United States, Mexico, Japan, South Korea, Philippines, Indonesia--soon enough Malaysia), so placing the Chinese Capitalist Party's 30-year-run in perspective makes it anything but remarkable. Show me a China with a per capita GDP in the $7-8000 range and I'll show you multiple parties--although all are likely to be off-shoots of the current "political party in power" (how the CCP likes to refer to itself in the press).

In other words, save the bragging until 2030. China's current GDP per capita is well under $5,000, as Fareed Zakaria pointed out in his recent book, so--so far--the CCP has proven nothing about authoritarian capitalism except that single-party rule works nicely in lifting a destitute economy off the ground. BFD. That's been proven time and time again. And time and time again, when the society gets enough income, pluralism breaks out.

Next we are told that the CCP has put the entire netizen population in a "virtual mind prison," so all hope of connectivity fostering individual freedom there is a complete chimera. Banyan declares the CCP to be the master of all things Internet in China.

The middle class in China, we are told, live in silent fear of the unwashed masses, and thus prefer the CCP's tight rule. This, of course, will not change over time.

Ah, but at the end, Banyan allows for leadership splits threatening party unity.

With this column, Banyan disappoints. Shilling this hard for the Party in the Economist? For shame!

I expected more than such ass-kissing and mindless regurgitating.

Back of the line, Banyan. Oh, but here's your First Annual Jackie Chan Award For Political Commentary On Chinese Society's Inherent Need For Subjugation.

Of course, your next piece could praise the resilience of the Kim clan in North Korea. That would be an even more impressive feat.

The smart money inside China realizes that the economic performance rationale will end with the 4th generation of party leadership, so pay attention to what happens after 2012, because a lot of this BS conventional wisdom is going to be progressively dissolved. The performance argument works until you've arrived, then people expect more from a self-declared global power.

Blurred vision map

Christopher Thompson sends in this map of global alcohol consumption. Looks like Core and Gap.

(source)

Cry of the heart for DoEE

POST: Lessons Not Learned, By Steve the Planner, Small Wars Council

Summary of USIP conference: The U.S. Occupation of Iraq: What Lessons Should be Learned?

Lexington Green sends the link and says:

It is a cri de coeur for the DOEE / SysAdmin. It is almost channelling TPMB.

Belle of the Brazilian ball

ARTICLE: China overtakes the US as Brazil's largest trading partner, By Malcolm Moore, (London) Telegraph, 09 May 2009

That is really something, given that regionalization of trade typically still trumps globalized trade patterns

(Thanks: Michael Smith)

Imagine

ARTICLE: "Bridge over Troubled Water? Envisioning a China-Taiwan Peace Agreement", By Phillip C. Saunders and Scott L. Kastner, International Security, Spring 2009

A thoughtful exploration of a China-Taiwan settlement.

(Thanks: William R. Cumming)

Kim's youngest son = heir

ARTICLE: North Korea's Kim Jong Il Chooses Youngest Son as Heir, By Blaine Harden, Washington Post, June 3, 2009

Proof finally of what had been rumored for about five months now: Idiot Son #3 is it.

D'oh! Another clue as to why Iran counts!

INTERNATIONAL: "Iran Hosts Regional Summit Meeting: Sign of Clout as President Meets With Afghan and Pakistani Leaders," by Michael Slackman, New York Times, 25 May 2009.

I know, I know, the only thing that matters is Tehran getting the bomb so it can hand it immediately to Hamas so it can attack Israel and Israel can launch a massive retaliation against Iranian cities.

Sometimes, though, the bigger picture intrudes.

Good prez campaign photo-op too.

Another glimpse of the basic dynamic in the Iranian election

INTERNATIONAL: "Big Crowd for Moderate Reflects Serious Challenge to Iran's Leader," by Nazila Fathi, New York Times, 26 May 2009.

Another piece to puzzle I have described before: urbanites + students + minorities = Ahmadinejad loss, or rural poor prove enough (again) against split opposition to keep Ahmadinejad in office.

The good news: you must win a clear majority, otherwise a run-off. There is where my optimism (not great, but there) resides.

Short term depressing, but long term positive in Iran

ARTICLE: Facebook block ahead of Iran vote hampers youth
, By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, AP, May 24, 2009

Fascinating story.

Uplifting because of the promise revealed, but depressing in the sense that the government--and especially Ahmadinejad--realizes how vulnerable they are, and so they act pre-emptively.

Still, old story holds: authoritarians can win only by disconnecting and isolating; and revolutions are screwed once they lose the young.

The cyberwar punchline finally delivered by USG

FRONT PAGE: "Pentagon Plans New Arm To Wage Computer Wars: How-To For Cyberspace; White House Is Also Readying a Plan for Civilian Networks," by David E. Sanger and Thom Shanker, New York Times, 29 May 2009.

You recall the timed leaks and stories and reports that seemed to come out every weekend so that a Monday front-page story could be had?

We finally got the punchline: America will develop an entire arm of its military to focus on cyberwarfare.

Why the build-up?

First we need to demonize potential enemies and build up popular fears of vulnerability and risk. Then we announce something that would otherwise make us seem very aggressive, except now it's offered totally as a defensive measure that will include--it is quietly noted--all sorts of offensive capacities.

We are doing this, of course, because we have no choice.

It's how democracies justify such things, especially when you're talking the democracy with the world's largest gun already in hand.

Our side will be extremely reticent to describe any of these pursued capabilities. When we do that, we're being prudent. When potential opponents or competitors do that, they're being un-transparent and thus inherently suspicious.

But again, we're doing this only in response to the nefarious actions of others . . ..