What? No resource wars?

PAPER: Africa’s growing strategic relevanvance (pdf), By Jennifer Giroux, Center for Security Studies, July 2008

A rare-enough blast of common sense analysis.

(Thanks: Wdimitroff)

The only season that matters

I hate the summer here in Indy. I loved it in Rhode Island because of the boogie boarding, but not many waves to catch here.

Naturally, I live for the fall because of my Packers, and thus I’m happiest when the season rolls around.

Sad to see Favre in another uni (it feels like watching your ex-wife out on a date), but I’m happy to see him do well in his first game (and the Jets are favored by 3—CANUBELIEVEIT!—for next week’s home game against the Brady-less Pats. I guess I got my dose of Schadenfreude with Brady’s injury (I really expected that given his complete down-time in the preseason, because that’s when the injury bug catches you in the first game), but frankly, his injury along with Manning’s weak perf makes you appreciate Favre’s amazing ability to keep playing (knock on wood for Rodgers!).

I am very nervous going into tonight’s MNF with the Vikes, who are always neck and neck with us (our historic duel is like 45-45-4), especially since they plussed-up nicely during the off-season. I really wish we were looking at an easier start. Overall, we have a nasty sked, based on last season. But as the Not For Long constantly proves, past performance is no guarantee of future success.

Still, just so nice to have football back, even with my Brew Crew looking at its first MLB playoffs in … like … forever.

Yes, Stewart's great, but...

ARTICLE: Is Jon Stewart the Most Trusted Man in America?, New York Times, By MICHIKO KAKUTANI, August 15, 2008

While I agree with the article's laudatory tone, meaning I see the void in our national discussion caused by venal politics and a sensationally stupid mainstream media and I appreciate how the "Daily Show" fills that void (Colbert is even sharper, but requires more internal filters to catch all the comedic angles), it still saddens me greatly that this is the best solution out there right now.

I'm the last guy to argue against funny. It's my essential lubricant. But this is a sign of a disaffected public, and I find that very worrisome in this day and age. Too much is at stake globally right now for such a crisis in leadership to exist.

Jon Stewart should be trusted to be who he is, but as I've often heard him comment, he really shouldn't be elevated beyond the satire in our national dialogue. We simply should be doing better to inform, leaving the entertainers to entertain.

I'd admit it in a heartbeat: Stewart would probably do a better job hosting a presidential debate than anybody else out there. But wouldn't it be nice to laugh without cringing?

In the end, I blame the Boomers. They recreated the national acrimony of Nixon's era, which is what they grew up with so they're like a dog going back to its vomit. That's why Stewart and Colbert rule, just like the political comics of that era did.

Civilian Expeditionary Force/SysAdmin

POST: A Civilian Expeditionary Force: Are We Already There?, Blackfive, August 15, 2008

Interesting blog post by Grim on how far the national security community as a whole has already evolved toward filling in the SysAdmin function, pointing out the civilian side is more evolved than we realize.

(Thanks: Robert Johnson)

Is Israel China's gateway into Middle Eastern involvement?

ARTICLE: 'Israeli Miracle' is developing strong ties with Communist China, By Adi Schwartz, Haaretz, August 09, 2008

It will be interesting to see how this influences Beijing's take on Israel-v-Palestine, a subject where China's voice is largely missing.

I don't necessarily see a big strategic thought process on the part of Beijing here, but more just the okay for Chinese businesses to go after a good market. The question will be accretive: over time, how does this connectivity involve China more in the Middle East peace process?

(Thanks: Kenneth Nalaboff)

Comment upgrade: Party and access

Cory Markson commented:

As a military officer who read the original PNM esquire article and has always found you to be logical and well-reasoned, and who has recommended your articles/books to countess other officers and gov't personnel, I cannot understand how illogical and unreasoned your posts on this election have been. It's been a bit disappointing, as you don't see a partisan bias in your books, but now I've begun to reassess the logic in the books due to what I see as flawed logic here. I have no issue with being pro-Obama, it's just that the logic behind the support by you has been flimsy at best.

Tom replied:

Cory,

Clearly you do have a problem with my support for Obama, and that's fine. If the only way my strategic logic holds up for you is if I'm a Republican at heart, then I never really connected with you in the first place.

And that's also okay.

Frankly, I've never found my being a Democrat has cost me any access or acceptance by Republicans in the Bush administration. Despite all the stories of their hyper-partisanship, I have personally never been subjected to any. In fact, I find that everyone I've ever worked with in the administration knows I'm a Democrat and couldn't care less regarding the validity of my ideas.

Then again, during the Clinton years, I never found that being a Democrat ever got me any more acceptance than not being one.
In general, I find that it's easier to be an outsider pushing this stuff with the GOP than a perceived "part of the team" trying the same with the Dems, meaning I'd expect to have less influence in an Obama administration.

I still, however, believe he'll be more conservative in his foreign policy and that America needs that now. I also believe America is desperate to move beyond the Boomers' politics, and that Obama does that better.

Comment upgrade: Campaign optimism

JFRiley commented:

Tom,

certainly a little more pessimistic and depressing than we're used to. Hopefully a greenbay win Sunday will lift your spirits :)

This issue is the central one for me in this election: who has the better chance to continue globalizations trends? I asked this before but i'll repost. It seems that both candidtaes have traits that could help or hurt globlization.

McCain may try to bring us back to a cold war mentality, but he seems to also be about keeping the free trade going that is so critical to globalization.

Obama, if his primary speaches are to be believed, wants to help the american worker and stop jobs fron going overseas. I see trade barriers there. That could hurt. But its almost cetrtian he'll reach out and strengthen our alliances which are equally important.

Could you give us your take on where you think the candidates stand on those conflicting viewpoints?

Tom replied:

Essentially agree, and in general, I'm an optimistic guy no matter who wins the White House, because I'm more impressed with the macro-trends (economic) of globalization than I am with any native American tendency toward protectionism. In short, I trust American business, more than the government, to keep globalization on track.

Column 118

Here's to a globalization-centric grand strategy for America

Americans suspect grand motives behind foreign policy. We sense our innate exceptionalism as the world's oldest and most successful multinational economic and political union, but we're reluctant about spreading that example, believing it smacks of imperialism.

As a result, most of America's strategic choices are driven by the decisions of others. Our preference for reaction over initiative now blinds us to the enormous strategic opportunity staring us in the face -- namely, the consolidation of globalization's rapid advance in the form of a radically expanded world middle class.

Read on at KnoxNews.
Read on at Scripps Howard.

An essential problem, given the tasks that lie ahead

I see essentially four million-man armies out there: U.S., Russia, India, China. A fifth wheel would be NATO (with the body core really being Turkey).

You put those resources in rough combination (frenemies competing and collaborating economically and security-wise) and there's no question that there's enough Core-wide resources to pool against the tasks of shrinking the Gap. You put them largely at odds with each other, then the hedging requirements will gobble up most of the important budget, and in the U.S. that means a Leviathan that continues to grab the lion's share of acquisition, keeping emerging SysAdmin capabilities as strict lesser-includeds.

So here's my problem: China buys for Taiwan, India buys for Pakistan (and vice versa), and Russia optimizes to intimidate its near-abroad but may soon--if we play this wrong--redirect for the West. The U.S. already still spends way too much hedging on the past, and with a "league of democracies" mindset, will likely hold onto that strong bias, meaning we inevitably sub-optimize and sub-perform on any SysAdmin jobs in the Gap, thus encouraging more competition (Why trust the U.S. to get it right on stuff you find vital? and/or Why not challenge or compete directly with a tied-down/perceived-as-incompetent U.S. in these venues?). The more that proxy war/quasi-imperialistic competition kicks in, the heightened mistrust makes for even more intra-Core hedging (and spending) by all involved.

From history's perspective, it can't get much dumber than this: our globalization sweeping the planet in the form of an international liberal trade order, but right at its apogee, the four million-man army nations find a way to turn on each other more than the collective problems and opportunities staring them in the face.

From an international businessman's perspective, this is potential tragedy in the making. From a grand strategic perspective, this is an unthinking America playing down to the lower-order dynamics generated by less-mature great powers.

In short, we should know better and act better and avoid this pathway.

But Americans are, by their nature, strategically short-sighted. We respond emotionally to events--this week's column (above).

A nice rendition of why it's okay to be gloomy right now on globalization

OP-ED: The Great Illusion, By PAUL KRUGMAN, New York Times, August 14, 2008

We modeled the behavior, and now it's being imitated. We'll over-react and then it's off to the races. I used to believe the damage of the first Bush administration could be "reset" by the better behavior of the second Bush administration, meaning we'd reset the clock back to roughly 9/11 geopolitically. But the damage now seems worse than that. We're reverting all the way back to the late 1980s.

And if you want to scenario-ize globalization's destruction, this is a realistic pathway.

The only way it really goes downhill is if America is suckered by circumstances into believing it must basically take on the entire world. This is Bin Laden's supreme dream, affording him more strategic wiggle room than he ever dared to hope would be his.

(Thanks: motoole)

Cell phone diplomacy

ARTICLE: Babble Rouser, By Bernard Condon, Forbes, August 11, 2008

Guerilla connectivity from someone who's clearly got his own foreign policy.

(Thanks: Jack Ryan (really! ;-))

A clarification on my posts about Palin

I do think she was a bold, politically-astute choice, meaning I think she can help John McCain win the presidency.

I do not see how she can be justified as the best the GOP could come up with--not by any partisan stretch of the imagination.

My point: McCain says he's different and will put country ahead of himself and his political goals. I think his choice of Palin, the most important and revealing choice any candidate for president makes, says otherwise. Choosing her says he wants to win the election more than do what's right by the office, and that diminishes a powerful aspect of his appeal, in my mind.

As for Obama's experience: in our political system, if you can pull off what he's pulled off over the past year and a half in building and leading a political machine, that's all the qualification you need to be president. That is a huge CEO/leadership operation and that's just how our system was built to operate.

Respecting Ramadan

In Dubai now on business and bumping into all sorts of signs as to how businesses accommodate/respect the requirements of Ramadan, which always surprises me by arriving earlier each year (nature of the difference in calendars). Good example (quoting the letter from my hotel in my room) is "restaurants within the hotel will have separate sections or closed curtains as a sign of respect to our Muslim guest and no alcohol will be served during fasting hours."

As an American Catholic, about the only thing you can compare it to in length and observation is Lent, which, when I was growing up, was quite different from the rest of the year but whose differences are now more muted. One hears the same from Muslims about Ramadan in general around the world, but clearly that varies by place and UAE is pretty close to ground central on the subject--certainly in geographic terms.

I feel like I've passed through the Middle East/PG before during Ramadan, but since I'm usually moving so fast, I tend not to notice as much. This trip doesn't feature the constant blur-shifting I am usually subjected to, so I'm allowed more observation--so to speak

Connectivity enhanced--the old-school way

ARTICLE: "Not all bad news: Newspapers are thriving in many developing countries," The Economist, 26 July 2008, p. 80.

Emerging markets (basically all New Core and Seam States) see newspaper circulation rise as they emerge economically.

The logic?

The demand for news tends to go up as people enter the workforce, earn more money, invest it and so begin to feel that they have more of a stake in their society. Literacy rates also rise in tandem with wealth. For the newly literate, flipping through a newspaper in public is a potent and satisfying symbol of achievement.

As almost always, The Economist puts it best.

Digital cash in Iraq

PRESS RELEASE: Net 1 Announces Official Launch of UEPS Technology in Iraq, August 4, 2008

Simple stuff to us, but a great sign of growing connectivity inside Iraq. It doesn't take a lot of security to make this possible--just enough.

(Thanks: Gunnar Peterson)

More on the comment policy

No one likes good comments more than me. But we need to rein things in a little bit again.

For your reference: The Comment Policy

I'm really not going to publish long comments. Tom has said no longer than the post itself, so let that be your guide.

You don't get to be snarky. Tom does. It's his weblog. Tom gets to be emotional and go off half-cocked if he wants. You don't.

Stuff that Tom would call stupid, relative to his own thinking, does not get published. E.g.,

Hopefully the Obama hordes from Mordor can be held off until 2010 and reinforcements can arrive in time to save the country.

This on a thread two posts after Tom said he doesn't go in for political hysterics.

No 'blogging in the comments' (Tom's term): There are lots of great weblogging services. Go use 'em. Win yourself an audience. But here, comment on Tom's posts.

Capiche?

Right call on ag

ARTICLE: McCain opposes farm policies popular in Midwest, By MIKE GLOVER, AP, Aug 6, 2008

Give it to McCain on principles here.

Easy to imagine McCain as president

And it showed in his speech, which was a good one.

Palin, though, struck me as a political lightweight who delivered a trite speech whose cheesy banter seemed more appropriate for an awards ceremony. I watched her and I simply could not seriously imagine her as president. She looks simply way out of depth.

And I have a real problem with that, when you're talking a 72-year-old man with significant health issues. To me, it was simply a disrespectful choice, hard to square with putting country-before-self thinking. She simply isn't the best the GOP has when it comes to accomplished, experienced, maverick women. Snowe? No discussion. Hutchinson? No discussion. But Palin strikes me as a very partisan, non-mainstream, poorly equipped choice for the most important job in the world. McCain dies his first year in office: does Palin strike you as the best we could do as his replacement? I just can't see doing that to America.

You really want somebody who got their first passport a while ago--not last year.

A good problem to have

Neat view from atop Rosslyn office building we're considering for expanded facilities as the DiB effort continues to grow exponentially.

So many companies, so little office space.

With allies like this ...

ARTICLE: "Georgians Eager To Rebuild Army: U.S. Mindful That Aid Would Anger Russia," by C.J. Chivers and Thom Shanker, New York Times, 3 September 2008, p. A1.

Opening paras as chilling in their potential pathways:

Just weeks after Georgia's military collapsed in panic in the face of the Russian Army, its leaders hope to rebuild and train its armed forces as if another war with Russia is almost inevitable.

Georgia is already drawing up lists of opions, including restoring the military to its prewar strength or making it a much larger force with more modern equipment, like air-defense systems, modern antiarmor rockets and night-vision goggles.

State and DoD say no decisions made yet.

I am reminded of FDR's bit about your neighbor having a fire at his house and you loaning him your hose.

But what is your neighbor asks for a gun because he wants to blow some holes in that bully who's been threatening him?

Care to get that involved with a nuclear power?

Or is that the equivalent of Russian military hardware being stockpiled by Cuba?

One thing to pick a Veep on impulse. Another thing to pick up a nuclear war hair-trigger like this.

It gets better:

The information to date suggests that from the beginning of the war to its end, Georgia, which wants to join NATO, fought the war in a manner that undermined its efforts at presenting itself as a potentially serious military partner or power.

Mr. Saakashvilli and his advisers also say that even though he has no tactical military experience, he was at one time personally directing important elements of the battle--giving orders over a cellphone and deciding when to move a brigade from western to central Geogia to face advancing Russian columns.

But, by all means, give the kid a gun and signal to him that his plans for revenge are okay by you.

And then see where that promise takes you.

Georgia lost its Gaza and West Bank, and won't be getting either back any decade soon. This is Russia's border we're taking about here. Think carefully about the next steps and the "inviolable" U.S. strategic interests you're casually picking up, because those can quickly get our people dead.

And those orders shouldn't be taken over Saakashvilli's cellphone.