Wednesday, October 7, 2009 at 12:04AM ARTICLE: Nations Remain Divided on Global Warming Policy, U.S. Negotiator Says, By JOHN M. BRODER, New York Times, September 10, 2009
Nice summary of the state of the world's negotiations on controlling CO2 emissions from our chief negotiator.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009 at 12:02AM Tom will be speaking at the James L. Allen Center, Kellogg School of Management under the auspices of the Kellogg Innovation Network. The session topic is Managing Through Uncertainty. Mastering New Realities. November 9-10, 2009
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 at 5:46PM I think my oldest daughter has had it too, as she's already in the post-phase where you breathe out deeply and you hear the slight residual lung rattle, which the three of us previously ID'd victims all still exhibit (along with the productive cough I keep hearing on airplanes; I flew back from DC today). My daughter was complaining about not singing well in choir and so I listened to her deep breath and realized her recent complaints of feeling bad were more than a sinus infection she was moving past.
The danger for all of us is--of course--not respecting the flu's shadow and accidentally triggering pneumonia, which my eldest daughter, with slight asthma, has done in the past. Thus the need to rest as much as possible, despite any return to school.
On this basis, I'm pre-emptively ending my younger son's cross-country season. He was out all last week with the flu and missed the second-to-last meet last weekend. He practiced Monday and didn't sound good, I was told (I was in DC), so I think we'll pull him from the end-of-the-year-meet (he already met all my goals for his first season) and keep him quiet until the rattle-with-productive-cough goes away for good.
Because that's how I got double-pneumonia as a child (right at his age, actually) and ended up two weeks in the hospital (1971 MLB playoffs, as I remember): I had a virus, got some fluid in my lungs, ignored it and ran around playing outside every night in the chilly fall evening air (I do remember it vividly!) and the cough kept getting worse, and then I was walloped with a 105 temperature.
Good news for my older daughter: her voice will return in time for the concert weekend after next.
Hmmm. Not a bad flu, but a bit of a legacy.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 at 2:18AM ARTICLE: Barack Obama furious at General Stanley McChrystal speech on Afghanistan, By Alex Spillius, London Telegraph, 05 Oct 2009
Reminds me of Fallon-v-Bush on Iran.
Not a bad thing for generals to press case, especially when political instinct is to preserve self over nation. Bush-Cheney did that plenty (admitting problems in Iraq only AFTER 04 and 06 elections) and now we see it from Obama (we have a bigger and more important agenda and our political survival matters most--that and old Vietnam guilt), but this is no way to unwind Afghanistan (the Biden plan). Irony? Another "wise" Veep steering an inexperienced Prez wrong.
Here we begin to locate timidity as Obama's great failure as a leader (comes with the "fox" territory sometimes, but not as a rule): he promises grand recalibration of relations with rising great powers and Af-Pak certainly provides big opportunity, and yet where are the actions beyond words? This whole debate stuck in "US, US, US" mode.
Real tragedy: Boomer guilt on Vietnam overwhelming a post-Boomer president.
That and usual tragedy of one party running both Hill and White House.
The division of labor that's logical here: the generals focus on the conflict, but the political leadership focuses on enlarging the theater (i.e., allies). Instead we get politicians--again--interfering in the conflict while not improving the larger strategic environment.
Bush-Cheney finally relented on tactics. Now we need Obama-Biden to finally relent on allies and realistic wins.
Defining our way out of Dodge is a dodge.
(Thanks: Michael S. Smith II)
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 at 2:03AM ARTICLE: McChrystal Faulted On Troop Statements, By Scott Wilson, Washington Post, October 5, 2009
ARTICLE: Deadly Attack By Taliban Tests New Strategy, By Joshua Partlow and Greg Jaffe, Washington Post, October 5, 2009
ARTICLE: Voice of Bush's Favored General Is Now Harder to Hear, By ELISABETH BUMILLER, New York Times, October 4, 2009
What McChrystal's campaign tells me is that the military (to include boss Petraeus) expect a no from the White House--hence the broader effort.
Check out the additional firefight story: there is real frustration and a sense of urgency here.
Obama's people should be focused on the allies issue (regionalizing the solution set downstream), not fighting the generals.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 at 1:43AM OP-ED: For Iran's Spies, A Putsch, By David Ignatius, Washington Post, September 10, 2009
For now, Ignatius says Khamenei is still on top, but he describes him as "riding the tiger" that is Ahmadinejad.
The descriptions of dynamics here are appropriately Stalinist. Ahmadinejad is going for broke, not for some religious goal but for a highly secular one: the Guard replaces the mullahs as the enduring and uncontested power in Tehran.
You might find this frightening, but frankly, as a political scientist, I welcome it. It remains the most plausible, next-best iteration.
Yes, Ahmadinejad will continue to yank our chains with statements that "prove" his religious bent, but we're being snowed. This has nothing to do with religion--just the opposite.
And yes, ultimately, this regime will be easier to deal with, because it'll be more transparent in its goals and thus more predictable.
The revolution has been a joke--and a sad one at that--inside Iran for years now. Ahmadinejad presents himself as savior but he's actually its undertaker.
(Via WPR Media Roundup)
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 at 1:37AM OP-ED: Iran's New Nuclear Diplomacy, By Kaveh Afrasiabi, World Politics Review, 09 Sep 2009
Good example of rational analysis on Iran, from an Iranian.
The key gist:
Taken as a whole, Iran's new nuclear diplomacy is geared toward sustaining Iran's peaceful nuclear program, giving the country only a latent proliferation capability. The approach enhances Iran's national security interests, while throwing roadblocks on the path of sanctions, whether new or old.
In any event, Iran's rapid progress in nuclear technology has already rendered sanctions problematic and the West's effort to dispossess Iran of its much-cherished nuclear advancement moot. Indeed, the large degree of consensus across the political spectrum in Iran regarding its right to master the nuclear fuel cycle free from foreign pressures gives President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's a strong domestic mandate to continue along the nuclear path, regardless of any political challenges he faces as a result of the disputed Iranian presidential election.
With the "zero centrifuges" no longer a viable option, and that of "limited centrifuges" also a longshot due to Iran's aversion to foreign dependency on nuclear fuel, the U.S. and its allies would do well to formulate a viable negotiation demand -- not least because the enthusiasm for sanctions has faded. By foregoing sanctions moving forward, the West would also ensure that the genie of Iranian nuclear proliferation remains perpetually latent, particularly if this approach is coupled with a smart Western diplomacy that addresses Iran's welter of national security concerns.
Fortunately, the Iranian approach actually invites direct negotiation instead of shunning it, which means that the time for a normal treatment of Iran's nuclear file could be close at hand. Though this might seem like an overly optimistic interpretation, there are too many unwanted perils -- for both regional and world peace -- to let the pessimists steer this crisis toward the other fork in this critical diplomatic road.
In short, Iran would be satisfied with a Japan-like outcome (latent proliferation capability) but nothing less.
Read the whole piece, because this guy's delineation of Tehran's strategy here is most illuminating:
The components of this strategy are:
- Increasing transparency .... [Tom: cynical but clever]
- Floating a new negotiating "package"... [ditto]
- Casting doubt on Western evidence of illicit "weaponization studies" [sense a pattern?]
- Emphasizing the resolution of six "outstanding issues" in Iran's favor ...
- Seeking new legal barriers against a military strike .... [bingo!]
- Framing the nuclear dispute in the context of Iran's NPT rights [also smart]
- Linking nuclear diplomacy to broader engagement: Another key element of Iran's new nuclear diplomacy is a linkage approach that connects the nuclear issue with a host of other security and regional issues, such as instability in neighboring Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Linkage functions both positively, by identifying instances of "shared or common interests," and negatively, by emphasizing how these areas could substantially deteriorate -- creating problems for the U.S. in particular -- in the event of a showdown with Iran over the nuclear issue. This approach echoes the West's last incentive package, which repeatedly made the connection between the nuclear issue and regional security issues, and even called for Iran's participation in a regional security conference. [now we get to the serious possibilities ...]
- Pushing the idea of a Middle East nuclear weapons-free zone: Finally, this aspect of Iran's nuclear diplomacy in turn raises the issue of Israel's clandestine proliferation, the West's inaction and double standard regarding it, and the relationship between nonproliferation and disarmament. [a win-win for Iran no matter how it goes down]
These guys are not stupid and they're not out-of-control ideologues. We hurt ourselves when we stick to such stereotypes.
Or just keep telling yourself they're all nuts and we need to bomb, if that makes you feel smarter.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 at 1:35AM ARTICLE: Thinking About Afghanistan, by Steve Coll, New Yorker, September 23, 2009
Nice piece. Good history with connectivity/globalization that jibes very well with Great Powers and my arguments re: the thrust of American grand strategy since WWII.
The post also tracks my argument that, when it comes to that region, making India happy with the integration outcome is crucial, because it's the pillar that determines East Asia's fate.
(Thanks: Jeffrey Itell )
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 at 1:32AM OP-ED: The Afghan Imperative, By DAVID BROOKS, New York Times, September 24, 2009
Very nice and sensible analysis.
Key bit:
These are the realistic choices for America's Afghanistan policy -- all out or all in, surrender the place to the Taliban or do armed nation-building. And we might as well acknowledge that it's not an easy call. The costs and rewards are tightly balanced. But in the end, President Obama was right: "You don't muddle through the central front on terror. ... You don't muddle through stamping out the Taliban."
Since 1979, we have been involved in a long, complex conflict against Islamic extremism. We've fought this ideology in many ways in many places, and we shouldn't pretend we understand how this conflict will evolve. But we should understand that the conflict is unavoidable and that when extremism pushes, it's in our long-term interests to push back -- and that eventually, if we do so, extremism will wither.
Afghanistan is central to this effort partly because it could again become a safe haven to terrorists, but mostly because of its effects on the stability of Pakistan. As Stephen Biddle noted in a recent essay in The American Interest, the Taliban is a transnational Pashtun movement active in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. It is part of a complex insurgency trying to topple the Pakistani regime.
Pakistan has a fragile government with an estimated 50 or more nuclear weapons. A Taliban conquest in Afghanistan would endanger the Pakistani regime at best, create a regional crisis for certain and lead to a nuclear-armed Al Qaeda at worst.
A Taliban reconquest would also, it should be said, be a moral atrocity from which American self-respect would not soon recover.
Proponents of withdrawal often acknowledge the costs of defeat but argue that the cause is hopeless anyway. On this, let me note a certain pattern. When you interview people who know little about Afghanistan, they describe an anarchic place that is the graveyard of empires. When you interview people who live there or are experts, they think those stereotypes are rubbish.
Where I differ: when Brooks gets to talking about Pakistan, I switch to Coll's analysis that says we stay on India's behalf more than Pakistan's. India is the great connector for South Asia.
Extending the argument so is harder, I realize.
But if you want easy, don't play Leviathan.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 at 1:30AM OP-ED: China's challenge moves India to expect the worst, By HARSH V. PANT, The Japan Times, Sept. 28, 2009
You want a good capture of two adolescent great powers pondering a nose-resecting operation to spite their respective faces? This is it.
But go back to your rising U.S. history in the later years of the 19th century: we loved getting all jacked and bent out of shape on small stuff too. It's like watching young males standing on street corners, constantly erupting into stupid-ass, "you talking to me?" dynamics.
Yes, we will see plenty of this in years ahead. It's natural, it's annoying, and it's definitely to be managed.
(Via WPR Media Roundup)
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 at 1:28AM ARTICLE: A Nuclear Debate: Is Iran Designing Warheads?, By WILLIAM J. BROAD, MARK MAZZETTI and DAVID E. SANGER, New York Times, September 28, 2009
I find the essential question irrelevant: Iran wants us to know it can--at relatively short notice--field nuke weapons. Once it's achieved that threshold, it basically doesn't matter whether or not it goes all the way--secretly--in the meantime.
Iran has achieved its asymmetrical deterrence.
(Via WPR Media Roundup)
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 at 12:52AM CURRENTS: "Renewable Energy, Meet the New Nimbys: Solar and Wind-Power Proposals Draw Opposition From Residents Fearing Visual Blight; a Dilemma for Some Environmentalists," by Jeffrey Ball, Wall Street Journal, 4 September 2009.
Almost everything, whether wind or solar-mirror projects, draw protests from locals who fear a permanently scarred landscape.
Me? I think the windmills are quite beautiful, almost as pretty as putting those CFL in antique chandeliers in my house--they feel very Kubrick/2001.
One possible answer is geo-thermal (not the kind that pushes water): very low footprint above ground and secondary uses of all sorts are permitted.
The more I investigate, the more I am certain this is the way to go, along with small wind turbines on individual buildings for self-powering. The smart grid requires local distributed production.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 at 12:50AM WORLD NEWS: "Beijing Says New Measures Needed to Fight Lead Poisoning," by Sky Canaves, Wall Street Journal, 4 September 2009.
Recent spate of incidents in China where kids found to have lead poisoning thanks to nearby industrial development. Weak enforcement mechanisms within the government blamed. Progress made in recent years, but the enviro minister says conditions remain severe.
The driver? Protests by villagers.
In Yunan, 50-60% of kids in mining regions are said to suffer lead poisoning.
How far back in American history must we travel to find similar conditions?
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 at 12:48AM FRONT PAGE: "How Team of Geeks Cracked Spy Trade," by Siobhan Gorman, Wall Street Journal, 4 September 2009.
As usual, the title is a vast oversell, but clearly, some progress is being made.
Palantir Technology, a Silicon Valley firm, is described as coming up with new software that makes it far easier to plot out terrorist networks through better searching techniques:
Palantir's software has helped root out terrorist financing networks, revealed new trends in roadside bomb attacks, and uncovered details of Syrian suicide bombing networks in Iraq . . . It has also foiled a Pakistani suicide bombing plot on Western targets and discovered a spy infiltration of an allied government.
One thing I have learned from years of working with the national security establishment: we got the bucks and the brains to throw at any problem in a big way, and that matters plenty.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 at 12:47AM ARTICLE: Russian Schools to Teach 'The Gulag Archipelago', AP, September 9, 2009
Interesting and encouraging twist for Russian education.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009 at 12:45AM ARTICLE: Child Mortality Rate Declines Globally, By CELIA W. DUGGER, New York Times, September 9, 2009
Globalization saves babies--throughout the Gap!
The child mortality rate has declined by more than a quarter in the last two decades -- to 65 per 1,000 live births last year from 90 in 1990 -- in large part because of the widening distribution of relatively inexpensive technologies, like measles vaccines and anti-malaria mosquito nets.
Other simple practices have helped, public health experts say, including a rise in breast-feeding alone for the first six months of life, which protects children from diarrhea caused by dirty water.
Wealthy nations, international agencies and philanthropists like Bill and Melinda Gates have committed billions of dollars to the effort. Schoolchildren and church groups have also pitched in, paying for mosquito nets and feeding programs.
Official developmental aid, while I often knock it, is an essential transmission mechanism of globalization's benefits: it disseminates technology. But note that ODA is just a part of the picture. Big philanthropists like Gates--globalization personified--play a big role, as do religious organizations, who, historically, are the drivers of progressive phases like no other non-state actor.
Monday, October 5, 2009 at 11:55PM ARTICLE: German Geothermal Project Leads to Second Thoughts After the Earth Rumbles, By NICHOLAS KULISH and JAMES GLANZ, New York Times, September 10, 2009
This is the wrong way to do geothermal: drilling and pumping water to create artificial pockets of superheated water deep below the surface. Lots of issues.
Monday, October 5, 2009 at 4:28AM 
As someone who thinks systematically about the future for a living, I frequently read science fiction with an eye for what it reveals about how today's real fears are being projected upon tomorrow's imagined landscapes. The books behind the 1973 movie "Soylent Green" (too many people!) and the 2006 movie "Children of Men" (no more babies!) make for a good example. Compare their central premises and you've basically captured the 180-degree turn the popular imagination has experienced on population growth over my lifetime.
Monday, October 5, 2009 at 1:54AM OP-ED: The U.S.-Iranian Triangle, By ROGER COHEN, New York Times, September 27, 2009
Cohen continues to be sensibly brilliant, if I can use such a phrase, regarding Iran (and yes, I pat myself on the back by extension):
I've said this before: Sanctions won't work. Ray Takeyh, who worked on Iran with Dennis Ross at the State Department before losing his job last month and returning to the Council on Foreign Relations, told me that "sanctions are the feel-good option."
Yes, it feels good to do something, but it doesn't necessarily help. In this case, sanctions won't for four reasons.
One: Iran is inured to sanctions after years of living with them and has in Dubai a sure-fire conduit for goods at a manageable surtax. Two: Russia and China will never pay more than lip-service to sanctions. Three: You don't bring down a quasi-holy symbol -- nuclear power -- by cutting off gasoline sales. Four: sanctions feed the persecution complex on which the Iranian regime thrives.
I continue to guide my thinking by Takeyh and Nasr, so the citation appeals to me.
But Cohen gets more interesting (and even more in line with my stuff) when he writes:
Isolated, nuclear negotiations will fail. Integrated, they may not. Iran's sense of humiliation is rooted in its America complex; its nuclear program is above all about the restoration of pride. Settle the complex to contain the program. Triangulate. Think broad. Think E.U., not Versailles.
Good, but not far enough. You get the EU once NATO is set. NATO was not really set until SALT. Be realistic about the path we're on here. There are no assurances that will satisfy Iran in its reach for the bomb.
Monday, October 5, 2009 at 1:47AM ARTICLE: US orchestrates Pakistan-India talks, By Syed Saleem Shahzad, Asia Times Online, Sep 30, 2009
The key bit:
NEW YORK - The foreign ministers of Pakistan and India, meeting on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly meeting in New York at the weekend, did not agree on the resumption of formal talks between the countries.
However, their meeting - the first high-level contact between the countries since July - sets the stage for Washington-mediated backchannel talks for which Pakistan has already appointed a senior envoy, Riaz Mohammad Khan.
The central issues in this dialogue will be the regional "war on terror" and the establishment of a "fair bargain" between India and Pakistan over their respective interests in Afghanistan.
This, I like to see.
(Via WPR Media Roundup)
