Tag: Climate change

Stevenson’s army, December 7

Politco warns that John Kerry’s ill-defined role as climate czar and NSC member is likely to lead to clashes over personalities and policies. That’s always the case with positions not written into law with prescribed authorities.
FP says incoming NSA Jake Sullivan was part of a study group that interviewed ordinary Americans to develop ideas for foreign policy.
 The resulting Carnegie Foundation report urges policies linking foreign policies to domestic ones.
Congress has a busy week. Past experience suggests that the “finish up and go home” spirit will lead to the necessary compromises, thought the budget may need a one-week extension of the CR.
Resign or be fired? AG Barr will leave early.

My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).

Tags : , , ,

The nightmare is over, now the hard work begins

I spent an hour this morning on Zoom with Italian colleagues at the Institute of International Affairs (IAI) talking about the American election and its consequences for foreign policy. Here are the points I prepared for them,
most of them all too obvious I’m afraid:

  1. While Biden is better informed and experienced on foreign policy than any president in decades, his most immediate priorities will be domestic: first and foremost stopping Covid-19 infections and moving as quickly as possible to revive the American economy, which is still in bad shape, and fix our social cleavages, which are severe.
  2. That said, he is putting in place a formidable foreign policy team: Tony Blinken, Jake Sullivan, Avril Haines and Linda Thomas-Greenfield are among our finest. Janet Yellen at Treasury will make an excellent counterpart on the economic side.
  3. Jake and Tony are both strongly committed to a revived domestic economy and solutions to America’s social challenges as prerequisites for a strong international role. You can expect them to be less transactional but just as aggressive as Trump on trade and investment issues, where America will need to satisfy more of the demands of its domestic producers.
  4. Missing so far from the Biden team is the Secretary of Defense. I’d still bet on Michele Fluornoy, but I admit I have little idea why she hasn’t been named yet. Defense industry ties may be the reason.
  5. Whoever gets Defense, Biden will seek to reinvigorate trans-Atlantic ties. He has a basically positive attitude towards NATO and America’s allies, whom he views as force multipliers whose basic values are aligned with ours.
  6. He is not opposed, as Trump was, to the European Union. I doubt he will prioritize a free trade agreement with the UK and might even try to revive the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with Europe, or something like it.
  7. Willingness of the US to return to the JCPOA will help his effort to renew the Alliance, but it will require reciprocal Iranian willingness to return to the status quo ante. I’m not convinced Tehran will be willing before the June presidential election, and maybe not even after.
  8. Biden will want to cooperate quickly with Europe in responding to Russia’s regional challenges in the Baltics, the Balkans, and especially Ukraine, though he will be hampered on Ukraine by the allegations against his son Hunter.
  9. The US will return, likely on Day 1, to the Paris Climate Change Agreement, which I trust will be a welcome move in Europe.
  10. The big looming problem for both the US and Europe is how to meet China’s global economic and political challenge. Biden will want to pursue both cooperation and competition with China.
  11. He is not interested in a new cold war, but he will be far more committed globally to democratic values and human rights than Trump has been. He will not be sword dancing in Riyadh, encouraging President Xi to imprison Uighurs, or staying silent about repression in Hong Kong.
  12. Renewed American support for human rights and democracy will unsettle relations not only with China but also with the Gulf, Israel, Brazil, and possibly with Hungary and Poland.
  13. Biden will not be able to restore everything to where things stood four years ago. He’ll need to prioritize.
  14. But I think all those who want to see American global leadership based on a rational assessment of both values and interests will feel a lot better about things on January 21 than they did on November 2. The nightmare is over, but the hard work is just beginning.

In addition to foreign policy, the Italians pressed me on the future of the Republican Party and reports that black men and Hispanics shifted towards Trump. I responded more or less this way:

  • The numbers are still iffy, but at least some of the shift among Hispanics was due to mostly white Venezuelans and Cubans who fled socialist countries and were frightened when Trump told them Biden was a socialist. Some Latinos in Texas appear to have shifted as well, possibly due to the employment impact of border wall construction.
  • The Republican Party now has a choice to make between continuing as a right-wing extremist and racist party or reverting to right-of-center social and economic conservatism. Trump will try to keep the party on the former track and can boast of an enormous turnout of voters, and relative victories in the House races, to help him. So far, only Senator Romney seems courageous enough to point in the direction of more conventional conservatism. We’ll have to wait and see which direction Republicans choose.

On the domestic side, I also emphasized the importance of the January 5 Senate run-off elections in Georgia, which will determine how far Biden can go on the legislative front.

Tags : , , , , , , , , ,

Peace Picks | November 16 – November 20, 2020

Notice: Due to public health concerns, upcoming events are only available via live stream.

1. Corruption in Kyrgyzstan: The Path Forward | November 16, 2020 | 9:00-10:00 AM ET | Carnegie Endowment for Peace | Register Here

It has been over a month since political upheaval in Kyrgyzstan resulted in the collapse of the government of now-former President Sooronbay Jeenbekov and the rise of Sadyr Japarov, a former convict, to the position of acting president. With new presidential elections now planned for January, the country’s political landscape is changing fast, with Japarov implausibly promising an anti-corruption campaign—a key concern of those who protested on the streets in October.  

This dramatic shift is driven by growing anger over corruption and poor governance—laid particularly bare by the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, despite the public’s demands for stronger government accountability, corrupt organized crime is still flourishing and poised to have increased influence in a plausible Japarov presidency. 

Please join us for a discussion on Kyrgyzstan’s legacies of corruption, prospects for better governance, and popular responses to the recent social and political upheaval the country has witnessed, all based on a new, groundbreaking report released by RFE/RL, Kloop, and OCCRP. 

Speakers:

Shirin Aitmatova: former member of Kyrgyz Parliament and a leader of Umut 2020 – a people’s movement that focuses on anti-corruption investigations.

Asel Doolotkeldieva: associate research fellow at the OSCE Academy in Bishkek. Her research examines social mobilization, religiosity and gender, democratization and institution-building, rent-seeking from natural resources, and migration in Kyrgyzstan. She holds a PhD from the University of Exeter.

Bruce Pannier: senior Central Asian affairs correspondent, who writes the Qishloq Ovozi blog and appears regularly on the Majlis podcast for RFE/RL.

Carl Schreck: RFE/RL’s enterprise editor. He has covered politics, crime, business, and sports in Russia and the former Soviet Union for nearly 20 years, including nearly a decade while based in Moscow.

Paul Stronski: senior fellow in Carnegie’s Russia and Eurasia Program, where his research focuses on the relationship between Russia and neighboring countries in Central Asia and the South Caucasus.

2. Trans-Atlantic Cooperation and the International Order After the US Election | November 16, 2020 | 9:45 – 11:45 AM ET | Brookings Institute | Register Here

Over the past four years, the United States has often abdicated its traditional leadership role, leaving allies across the Atlantic to fend for themselves. Now, as Americans and Europeans alike process the results of the U.S. election, significant practical and political questions about the future of the trans-Atlantic relationship and the global order abound. With Joe Biden in the White House, will European leaders be willing to once again rely on the U.S. as an ally? While a Biden administration will certainly be more friendly to trans-Atlantic relations and multilateralism, will this shift be lasting or merely a lapse amid an increasingly isolationist era of American foreign policy? With Republicans likely to retain control of the Senate, what impact would a divided government have on the new administration’s foreign policy?

On Monday, November 16, Foreign Policy at Brookings will host a conference to consider these questions and other implications of the next U.S. administration for the future of the international order and trans-Atlantic cooperation. Questions from the audience will follow the discussion.

Schedule and Speakers:

Welcoming Remarks: 9:45 AM – 10:00 AM

Suzanne Maloney: Vice President and Director – Foreign Policy

Henry Alt-Haaker: Senior Vice President, Strategic Partnerships and Robert Bosch Academy – Robert Bosch Stiftung

Panel Discussion: 10:00 AM – 11:00 AM

James Goldgeier: Robert Bosch Senior Visiting Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center on the United States and Europe

Fiona Hill: Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center on the United States and Europe

Stormy-Annika Mildner: Head of Department, External Economic Policy – Federation of German Industries

Rachel Rizzo: Director of Programs – Truman National Security Project; Adjunct Fellow, Transatlantic Program – Center for a New American Security

Marietje Schaake: International Policy Director – Cyber Policy Center at Stanford University

Constanze Stelzenmüller, moderator: Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center on the United States and Europe

Keynote: 11:00 AM – 11:45 AM

Nathalie Tocci: Director – Istituto Affari Internazionali; Honorary Professor – University of Tübingen

Thomas Wright, moderator: Director – Center on the United States and Europe; Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Project on International Order and Strategy

3. Assessing Perceptions of Affected Communities in Northern Iraq on Peace, Justice and Governance | November 16, 2020 | 11:30 AM ET | Atlantic Council | Register Here

Please join the Atlantic Council’s Iraq Initiative and the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative on Monday, November 16 from 11:30 am – 12:30 pm ET presenting a timely survey which offers a snapshot of the perceptions and attitudes in northern Iraq about peace and justice within communities affected by the conflict with the Islamic State (IS). The discussion will feature Abulrazzaq Al-Saiedi, research manager, Iraq country expert and policy advisor at the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, Abbas Kadhim, director of the Iraq Initiative at the Atlantic Council, Phuong Pham, director of evaluation and implementation science at the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, Patrick Vinck, research director at the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, and moderated by Kirsten Fontenrose, director of the Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council. 

The report (available in Arabic) by the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative’s Peace and Human Rights Data Program, details how northern Iraqi communities targeted by the Islamic State (IS) are denied justice. Based on 5,213 interviews conducted in 2019 among a representative sample of internally displaced persons in northern Iraq and residents of the city of Mosul and surrounding areas, the research documents a severe lack of trust in official institutions, particularly in the Government of Iraq itself, stemming in large part from the belief that these institutions do not act in the best interest of the population.

Speakers:

Abulrazzaq Al-Saiedi: Research Manager, Iraq Country Expert, and Policy Advisor, Harvard Humanitarian Initiative

Abbas Kadhim: Director, Iraq Initiative, Atlantic Council

Phuong Pham: Director of Evaluation and Implementation Science, Harvard Humanitarian Initiative

Patrick Vinck: Research Director, Harvard Humanitarian Initiative

Kirsten Fontenrose, moderator: Director, Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative, Atlantic Council

4. Moldova’s Presidential Elections | November 16, 2020 | 2:00 – 3:15 PM ET | Wilson Center | Register Here

On November 15, incumbent Moldovan President Igor Dodon will face pro-European opposition candidate Maia Sandu in a national run-off election. Sandu has promised to fight corruption, poverty, and reform the criminal justice system. Dodon is considered the most pro-Russian candidate, advocating to make Russian compulsory in schools and to strengthen Moldova’s strategic partnership with Russia. Amb. William Hill, former Moldovan Minister of Foreign Affairs Nicu Popescu, and DGAP Research Fellow Cristina Gherasimov will consider the results of the runoff election, its implications, and how the next president in Chisinau will manage Moldova-Russian relations.

Speakers:

William H. Hill: Global Fellow; Former Professor of National Security Strategy, National War College, Washington D.C.

Nicu Popescu: Director, Wider Europe Programme, European Council on Foreign Relations

Cristina Gherasimov: Research Fellow, Robert Bosch Center for Central and Eastern Europe, Russia, and Central Asia, DGAP

Matthew Rojansky, moderator: Director, Kennan Institute

5. US and Iranian Strategies for a Biden Administration | November 17, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM ET | Middle East Institute | Register Here

The looming arrival of the Joe Biden administration in January 2021 provides the leadership in Tehran with an opportunity to seek a qualitatively different relationship with the United States. President-elect Biden has already expressed a desire to salvage the 2015 nuclear deal, which the Trump administration abandoned in 2018. While Tehran awaits to see what, if any, conditions the Biden team has for the resumption of the diplomatic track and removal of US-led sanctions, a policy fight is already under way inside the Iranian state about the future of US-Iran relations. 

The American question in Tehran is not just a foreign policy file but ultimately linked to the question of whether the Islamic Republic opts to continue a revolutionary and militant foreign policy or settles for a path of de-escalation with Washington and other rivals. How much of this policy competition in Tehran will shape Washington’s next steps vis-à-vis Iran? 

To discuss these matters and other key challenges in the path of US-Iran relations in the coming Biden administration, we are delighted to host a panel of experts.

Speakers:

Jon Alterman: Senior vice president, Zbigniew Brzezinski chair in Global Security and Geostrategy, and director, Middle East Program, CSIS

Hannah Kaviani:Staffer, RFE/RL’s Persian language service, Radio Farda 

Behnam Ben Taleblu: Senior fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Alex Vatanka (moderator): Senior fellow and director, Iran program, MEI

6. The Future of Palestinian Politics under a Biden Administration | November 17, 2020; November 19, 2020 | 11:30 AM – 12:45 PM ET | Middle East Institute | Register Here

Former Vice President Joe Biden’s election victory over President Donald Trump is likely to produce a major reset in American-Palestinian relations as well as in Washington’s role in Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking. No U.S. president had done more to isolate Palestinians and delegitimize Palestinian national aspirations than Trump. Meanwhile, Biden has pledged to reverse the most destructive aspects of Trump’s policies and restore U.S.-Palestinian relations in the hope of salvaging what remains of a two-state solution. 

Yet even as the Palestinians breathe a collective sigh of relief at Trump’s departure, the Palestinians’ internal house remains in a state of disarray and decline. The Palestinian national movement, now at one of the lowest points in its history, continues to be racked by political division, institutional stagnation, and a lack of strategic clarity. 

To shed light on these and other issues, the Middle East Institute (MEI) invites you to join a two-part webinar series on the Future of Palestinian Politics Under a Biden Administration, moderated by MEI’s Khaled Elgindy

Speakers:

Part 1 – Reviving Palestinian Political Life

Tareq Baconi: Senior analyst, International Crisis Group

Sam Bahour: Ramallah-based business consultant

Mustafa Barghouti:General secretary, Palestinian National Initiative

Noura Erakat: Human rights attorney; assistant professor, Rutgers University

Khaled Elgindy, moderator: Senior fellow and director, Program on Palestine and Palestinian-Israeli Affairs, MEI

Part 2 – Toward a Palestinian National Strategy

Dana ElKurd: Researcher, Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies

Mariam Barghouti: Political commentator and writer

Yousef Munayyer: Non-resident fellow, MEI

Nasser AlKidwa: Former Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations and Palestinian Foreign Minister

Khaled Elgindy, moderator: Senior fellow and director, Program on Palestine and Palestinian-Israeli Affairs, MEI

7. Building a Climate Resilient and Just Future for All: Delivering Action and Ambition | November 17, 2020 | 1:00 PM ET | Atlantic Council | Register Here

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought resilience to the fore. It has laid bare the vulnerability of our societies and economies and exposed the lack of risk planning in countries. During this event, speakers will focus on the need to carry out ambitious actions on building resilience and identify what can be done to set up a decade of action.

This high level event will bring together the outcomes of the Regional Resilience Dialogues and Race to Zero resilience-focused dialogues and highlight how to advance the action of non-state actors and initiatives to deliver outcomes at COP26 and beyond. The High Level Champions, Gonzalo Muñoz and Nigel Topping, will also use this event to share their developing plans for a Race for Resilience campaign as a sister to the Race to Zero campaign to deliver a decade of action.

This dialogue will build upon previous Marrakech Partnership for Global Climate Action roundtables held at COP23, COP24 and COP25 events, the Global Commission on Adaptation, and from the UN Climate Action Summit and the Call to Action on Adaptation and Resilience.

Speakers:

Opening Remarks

Nigel Topping: High Level Climate Action Champion, UK, COP26

Gonzalo Muñoz: High Level Climate Action Champion, Chile, COP26

Panel Discussions

Panel 1: The Challenge: Why action on Resilience is a must?

Johan Rockstrom: Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and Professor in Earth System Science, University of Potsdam; Chair of the Global Resilience Partnership Advisory Council

Saleemul Huq: Director, International Centre for Climate Change & Development (ICCCAD); Chair of Resilience track for UN Food Systems Summit 2021

Emma Howard-Boyd: UK Commissioner, Global Commission on Adaptation and Chair of the Environment Agency

Wanjira Mathai, moderator: Vice President and Regional Director for Africa, World Resources Institute

Panel 2: Opportunities for Ambitious Action

Kathy Baughman McLeod: Senior Vice President and Director, Adrienne Arsht-Rockefeller Foundation Resilience Center; Atlantic Council, representing the Extreme Heat Resilience Alliance (EHRA)

Zakia Naznin: Programme Manager, Concern Worldwide, representing the Zurich Flood Resilience Alliance

Karen Sack: CEO, Ocean Unite, representing Ocean Risk and Resilience Action Alliance

Wanjira Mathai, moderator: Vice President and Regional Director for Africa, World Resources Institute

Panel 3: Delivering Ambition and a Decade of Action

Julio Cordano: Head, Department of Climate Change, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Chile and COP 25 Chilean Presidency Representative

Patrick Verkooijen: Chief Executive Officer, Global Center on Adaptation

Anne-Marie Trevelyan: UK International Champion on Adaptation and Resilience, COP26

Wanjira Mathai, moderator: Vice President and Regional Director for Africa, World Resources Institute

Closing Remarks

Nigel Topping: High Level Climate Action Champion, UK, COP26

Gonzalo Muñoz: High Level Climate Action Champion, Chile, COP26

8. Lebanon: Out with the Old, In with the What? | November 17, 2020 | 16:00 – 17:00 EET | Carnegie Endowment for Peace | Register Here

While Lebanon’s ruling elite continues to delay the formation of a new cabinet under Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri, French President Emmanuel Macron is growing impatient as he watches his initiative and timeline for reforms crumble. The Trump Administration, meanwhile, is still ramping up sanctions on Hezbollah’s allies in government. Where does the government formation stand today? What remains of the French initiative? How might U.S. foreign policy towards Lebanon shift under President-Elect Joe Biden?

Speakers:

Ishac Diwan: Chaire d’Excellence Monde Arabe at Paris Sciences et Lettres and is a professor at the École Normale Supérieure, Paris

Dorothée Schmid: senior research fellow and heads the Turkey and Middle East Program at the French Institute of International Relations.

Randa Slim: senior fellow at the Middle East Institute and a non-resident fellow at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced and International Studies (SAIS) Foreign Policy Institute.

Maha Yahya: Director of the Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center, where her research focuses on citizenship, pluralism, and social justice in the aftermath of the Arab uprisings.

9. What Does the World Expect of President-elect Joe Biden? | November 17, 2020 | 2:30 – 4:00 PM ET | Wilson Center | Register Here

The next U.S. Administration faces a complicated, volatile world. Please join Wilson Center experts on Russia, China, the Middle East, Africa, Europe, and Latin America as they interview colleagues and experts on the ground in their regions to discuss what a Biden Administration means in terms of our relationships around the globe.

Our experts will host a spirited conversation on the foreign policy expectations and challenges confronting the next President of the United States.

Speakers:

Jane Harman: Director, President, and CEO, Wilson Center

Cynthia J. Arnson: Director, Latin American Program

Robert Daly: Director, Kissinger Institute on China and the United States

Daniel S. Hamilton: Director, Global Europe Program; Austrian Marshall Plan Foundation Distinguished Fellow

Merissa Khurma: Program Manager, Middle East Program

Monde Muyangwa: Africa Program Director

Matthew Rojansky: Director, Kennan Institute

Duncan Wood: Director, Mexico Institute

John Milewski, moderator: Director of Digital Programming; Moderator, Wilson Center NOW

10. Exceptions to the Rules: Civilian Harm and Accountability in the Shadow Wars | November 19, 2020 | 9:30 – 11:00 AM ET | Stimson Center | Register Here

Nearly two decades after 9/11, the CIA and Special Operations Forces have become increasingly involved in U.S. counterterrorism operations around the world –often operating in the shadows and under a growing set of broad exceptions to the rules that govern the lawful use of lethal force, civilian harm mitigation, transparency, and accountability. Join the Stimson Center and the Center for Civilians in Conflict for a discussion of these programs and the launch of a new report examining the tradeoffs involved with normalizing these exceptions, and offering concrete recommendations for increasing public awareness and strengthening oversight and accountability.

Speakers:

Daniel Mahanty: Director, US Program, Center for Civilians in Conflict

Rita Siemion: Director, National Security Advocacy, Human Rights First

Rachel Stohl, Vice President, Stimson Center

Stephen Tankel: Associate Professor, American University; Adjunct Senior Fellow, Center for a New American Security

11. Elections in the Black Sea Region | November 19, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM ET | Middle East Institute | Register Here

Elections are taking place across the Black Sea, including in Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine. The three countries have Association Agreements with the EU and have benefitted from significant Western support over the last years. All three countries also share the problems of separatist and frozen conflicts on their territories that affect their security and stability. Elections outcomes in all three countries will have important implications for the foreign policy orientation of the countries and their role in the Black Sea region. Elections in the region coincide with the COVID-19 pandemic and an economic crisis with potentially devastating effects for the region. The Middle East Institute (MEI) Frontier Europe Initiative is pleased to host a discussion with the Ambassadors of Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine to the United States on the election process, outcomes, and implications for the Black Sea region.

How did the election process and the results fair out for Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine? What are the main challenges around the elections in the context of the pandemic and economic crisis? How will the election results impact their foreign policies in the years to come?

Speakers:

David Bakradze​: Georgian Ambassador to the United States

Eugen Caras: Moldovan Ambassador to the United States

Yelchenko Volodymyr​: Ukrainian Ambassador to the United States

Iulia Joja​, moderator: Senior Fellow, Frontier Europe Initiative

12. RESOLVE Network 2020 Global Forum: Violent Extremism in 2020 and Beyond | November 19, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:15 AM ET | USIP | Register Here

The year 2020 has ushered in rapid and significant shifts in existing threats to global security. From the COVID-19 pandemic to climate change and longstanding violent conflict, the pressures facing our current global system are increasingly complex and all-encompassing. Among these, violent extremism remains a significant challenge—shifting as actors adapt and take advantage of ongoing and emerging global shocks and sources of instability. 

How has the violent extremism landscape changed in the five years since the “fall” of ISIS? How has rising global instability, populism, and disinformation altered violent extremist operations and ideologies, and vice versa? What challenges do we face in addressing violent extremism in the new threat landscape? Can we apply any lessons from past experiences to address emerging threats and dynamics in 2020 and beyond? 

Please join the RESOLVE Network and USIP for a discussion about these challenges and more during part one of RESOLVE’s fifth annual Global Forum series. Convened virtually, the forum will bring together leading experts and researchers for thought-provoking conversations on evolving trends and dynamics in the violent extremist landscape. 

Speakers:

Dr. Alastair Reed, opening remarks: Senior Expert and Executive Director of the RESOLVE Network

Dr. Mary Beth Altier: Clinical Associate Professor, Center for Global Affairs, New York University

Dr. Amarnath Amarasingam: Assistant Professor, School of Religion, Queen’s University, member of the RESOLVE Research Advisory Council

Dr. Colin P. Clarke: Senior Research Fellow, The Soufan Center, member of the RESOLVE Research Advisory Council

Tags : , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Any functioning adult would be better

We can never know exactly what Hillary Clinton would have done had she won 3.5 years ago, but let us count the ways the United States could have been better off if just about any normal functioning adult–Republican or Democratic–had become president:

  • Well over 150,000 Americans would not have succumbed to Covid19, the epidemic would have receded faster, the economy would have reopened months faster and far safer, the US would be leading the world’s economic recovery instead of dragging it down, and the US debt would be trillions less.
  • Millions of now unemployed people would have jobs, and no one would risk losing the health insurance and coverage for preexisting conditions available under Obamacare.
  • The Paris Climate Accord would be more effective in limiting greenhouse gases that have contributed to this summer’s record number and intensity of storms in the Atlantic and the unprecedented wildfires in California, causing many billions of dollars of losses.
  • The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership might have been concluded, with real advantages for US producers rather than the marginal replacement for NAFTA and the trade war with China that has damaged US agriculture, manufacturers, and consumers.
  • Iran would still be a year from having enough fissile material to make a nuclear weapon and negotiation of the follow-on to the nuclear deal would be in progress, including on missiles and regional issues.
  • The Voting Rights Act might have been revived in response to the Black Lives Matter protests, along with legislation curbing police abuse, and there would be no discussion of imaginary anarchy in American cities or use of the military against peaceful protests.
  • The US would still have the confidence and support of its European allies and China would still be observing the agreement it reached with the Obama administration on commercial hacking.
  • Russia would be showing some respect instead of owning the President of the United States, whom it only needs to quote to make its points.
  • There would still be hope for a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine and a possibility of curbing the North Korean nuclear program, which has instead inaugurated a missile possibly capable of hitting the US with multiple nuclear warheads.

Of course lots of things would not likely be different: we might still be outside the Trans Pacific Partnership looking in, Maduro might still be president of Argentina, Syria, Yemen, and Libya would still be catastrophic, and the Saudi Crown Prince might still have ordered the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, though MbS would not have been shielded from accountability by the US President.

The United States would be in a far stronger position under any functioning adult, Democratic or Republican, than it is under the false flag of “Make America Great Again.” For anyone interested in foreign policy, that is all you really need to know while filling out your ballot at home and popping it into the mail, provided the US Postal Service doesn’t follow President Trump’s instructions to ensure it doesn’t arrive on time.

Tags : , , , , , , , , ,

Stevenson’s army, September 18

The respected annual poll by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs finds sharp partisan divisions among Americans, even though they support engagement abroad. WaPo has a good report.

For Democrats, the five leading threats to US vital interests are, in order, the coronavirus pandemic, climate change, racial inequality in the United States, foreign interference in U.S. elections and economic inequality in this country.

For Republicans, the top five threats to vital US interests are the development of China as a world power, international terrorism, large numbers of immigrants and refugees coming into the country, domestic violent extremism and Iran’s nuclear program. Here’s the survey.
NYT says China is losing friends in Europe.
Senate Democrats have a $350 billion package to counter China.
Politico says China issue won’t determine US elections. Former DHS aide to VP Pence on coronavirus quits, blasts Trump

StratCom head sees no need for nuclear test. [Note: this is an issue in net week’s exercise]
NATO report says Taliban is flush with cash.

My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).

Tags : , , , , , , , , , , ,

Biden will have his hands full

Time for a summer update on President Trump’s diplomatic initiatives, more or less in his priority order:

  1. Trade with China: importing less than half of what is called for in the “first phase” agreement.
  2. Re-initiating nuclear talks with Iran: Trump said more than a year ago he would talk with no pre-conditions. Tehran won’t, despite “maximum pressure.” Iran wants sanctions eased first.
  3. Getting rid of North Korea’s nuclear weapons: Kim Jong-un has in effect said “no.”
  4. Ending the war in Afghanistan: The withdrawal is proceeding, but progress in intra-Afghan talks is minimal.
  5. Removal of Venezuelan President Maduro: He has weathered the challenge and remains firmly in power.
  6. South China Sea: The US has rejected China’s sovereignty claim but is doing nothing about its military outposts.
  7. Helping Ukraine force the Russians out of Donbas: The Administration has provided lethal weapons to no avail.
  8. Reducing Saudi oil production to jack up world prices: Saudi production is down, but world prices are still in a trough.
  9. Initiating a democratic transition in Syria: Congress has beefed up sanctions, but Trump can’t even begin to get Assad out.
  10. “Deal of the century”: Not going anywhere but into the shredder. Even Israeli annexation of part of the West Bank is blocked.

This skips a lot. For example:

  • the President telling Chinese President Xi that it was fine to put (Muslim) Uighurs into concentration camps,
  • withdrawing from the Paris Climate accord, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and several favorable arms control agreements with Russia,
  • moving US troops out of Germany to the delight of Moscow,
  • failing to counter Russian bounties for Taliban who kill US soldiers in Afghanistan,
  • saying the right things about Hong Kong and withdrawing its trade preferences, but with not discernible impact,
  • not responding to foreign initiatives to undermine the US elections, and
  • withdrawing from the World Health Organization in the midst of a pandemic.

American foreign policy has rarely been so ineffectual, never mind whether the priorities are right. The Administration doesn’t think past its own next move. The President is incapable of it and won’t let others do it for him. He behaves as if the adversary has no options. Much of what the Administration does is for show, without considering however how most of the rest of the world sees the situation. The only customers for this foreign policy are the domestic audience of China hawks, Russia doves, oil and coal producers, and evangelical Christians, along with President Putin, Prime Minister Netanyahu and a few other would-be autocrats around the world.

Getting out of the foreign policy hole Trump has dug will be a big challenge. President Biden, if there ever is one, will have his hands full even if he pays attention only to the first three of the items above. Let’s hope he can somehow save us from the consequences of four dreadful years.

Tags : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Tweet