Tag: Israel/Palestine

OK Santa Claus, here’s what I want

I’m hoping it’s true Yemen’s President Saleh is coming to the U.S.  As that eagle-eyed young journalist Adam Serwer tweeted:  “not to prosecute him…would be, u know, awkward.”  That set me thinking about other good fortune that might come our way this Christmas eve:

1.  Syria’s president Bashar al Assad decides he really wants to practice opthamology in London.

2.  North Korea’s “supreme commander” Kim Jong Un wants to see professional American basketball so much he decides to give up the nuclear nonsense and buy an NBA team for Pyongyang instead.  Lots more prestige and very lucrative.

3.  Iran follows suit, abandoning its pan-Islamist pretensions, separating mosque and state and restoring close relations with Israel.  It also buys an NBA team for Tehran.

4.  Iraq’s Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki declares peace on earth and good will towards Sunnis and Kurds, steps down from power and invites Iraqiyya to name a replacement.

5.  The new Islamist-run governments in Tunisia, Egypt (and yes, eventually) Libya follow the Iranian example, which convinces them separation of mosque and state are the best protection for religious freedom and will encourage religious devotion, as it seems to do in the U.S.

6.  The Saudis rise to the occasion and do likewise, making the king a constitutional monarch to boot.

7.  Bahrain does the same.  Yemen gets not only a democratic government but lots of water.

8.  Without implacable enemies, Prime Minister Netanyahu reaches a quick agreement with the Palestinians, whose state is admitted to the UN with no opposition.

9.  The Taliban see that their Islamist counterparts in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya are on to a good thing and reach a power sharing agreement with the Northern Alliance, jettisoning President Karzai and precipitating an early American withdrawal.

10.  Pakistan follows up American withdrawal and the new government in Kabul by reaching a broad-ranging agreement with India, including self-determination for Kashmir.

11.  Al Qaeda opens a resort on the Somali coast called “The Caliphate.”

12.  I retire to observe the peaceful competition between China and the United States, who compete in ping pong but do everything else collaboratively.

If Santa Claus really does exist, children, he’ll bring me those things for the 12 days of Christmas.  If he doesn’t, then…

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

What threatens the United States?

The Council on Foreign Relations published its Preventive Priorities Survey for 2012 last week.  What does it tell us about the threats the United States faces in this second decade of the 21st century?

Looking at the ten Tier 1 contingencies “that directly threaten the U.S. homeland, are likely to trigger U.S. military involvement because of treaty commitments, or threaten the supplies of critical U.S. strategic resources,” only three are defined as military threats:

  • a major military incident with China involving U.S. or allied forces
  • an Iranian nuclear crisis (e.g., surprise advances in nuclear weapons/delivery capability, Israeli response)
  • a U.S.-Pakistan military confrontation, triggered by a terror attack or U.S. counterterror operations

Two others might also involve a military threat, though the first is more likely from a terrorist source:

  • a mass casualty attack on the U.S. homeland or on a treaty ally
  • a severe North Korean crisis (e.g., armed provocations, internal political instability, advances in nuclear weapons/ICBM capability)

The remaining five involve mainly non-military contingencies:

  • a highly disruptive cyberattack on U.S. critical infrastructure (e.g., telecommunications, electrical power, gas and oil, water supply, banking and finance, transportation, and emergency services)
  • a significant increase in drug trafficking violence in Mexico that spills over into the United States
  • severe internal instability in Pakistan, triggered by a civil-military crisis or terror attacks
  • political instability in Saudi Arabia that endangers global oil supplies
  • intensification of the European sovereign debt crisis that leads to the collapse of the euro, triggering a double-dip U.S. recession and further limiting budgetary resources

Five of the Tier 2 contingencies “that affect countries of strategic importance to the United States but that do not involve a mutual-defense treaty commitment” are also at least partly military in character, though they don’t necessarily involve U.S. forces:

  • a severe Indo-Pak crisis that carries risk of military escalation, triggered by major terror attack
  • rising tension/naval incident in the eastern Mediterranean Sea between Turkey and Israel
  • a major erosion of security and governance gains in Afghanistan with intensification of insurgency or terror attacks
  • a South China Sea armed confrontation over competing territorial claims
  • a mass casualty attack on Israel

But Tier 2 also involves predominantly non-military threats to U.S. interests, albeit with potential for military consequences:

  • political instability in Egypt with wider regional implications
  • an outbreak of widespread civil violence in Syria, with potential outside intervention
  • an outbreak of widespread civil violence in Yemen
  • rising sectarian tensions and renewed violence in Iraq
  • growing instability in Bahrain that spurs further Saudi and/or Iranian military action

Likewise Tier 3 contingencies “that could have severe/widespread humanitarian consequences but in countries of limited strategic importance to the United States” include military threats to U.S. interests:

  • military conflict between Sudan and South Sudan
  • increased conflict in Somalia, with continued outside intervention
  • renewed military conflict between Russia and Georgia
  • an outbreak of military conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, possibly over Nagorno Karabakh

And some non-military threats:

  • heightened political instability and sectarian violence in Nigeria
  • political instability in Venezuela surrounding the October 2012 elections or post-Chavez succession
  • political instability in Kenya surrounding the August 2012 elections
  • an intensification of political instability and violence in Libya
  • violent election-related instability in the Democratic Republic of the Congo
  • political instability/resurgent ethnic violence in Kyrgyzstan

I don’t mean to suggest in any way that the military is irrelevant to these “non-military” threats.  But it is not the only tool needed to meet these contingencies, or even to meet the military ones.  And if you begin thinking about preventive action, which is what the CFR unit that publishes this material does, there are clearly major non-military dimensions to what is needed to meet even the threats that take primarily military form.

And for those who read this blog because it publishes sometimes on the Balkans, please note:  the region are nowhere to be seen on this list of 30 priorities for the United States.

 

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

The game is changing, but to what?

More than a little difficult to sum up today’s Middle East Institute “game changer” conference in a few words, but here’s a try:

1.  Enthusiasm for Arab spring, with lots of uncertainty about both transition and how it will come out in the end.  It is still the first five minutes.  Economic problems loom.

2.  Tunisia could be a hopeful bellwether:  good electoral process, moderate Islamist victory, clear roadmap.

3.  Libya shaky, with militias the big immediate problem but the constitutional framework provides a clear roadmap ahead, if they can stick with it.

4.  But Egypt is the big prize.  Things there are not going well: security shaky, military holding on, electoral process too complicated, liberals fragmented, Muslim Brotherhood strong, economy weak.

5.  Revolution likely to succeed sooner or later in Syria, but possible high cost (civil war) and high payoff (depriving Iran of an important ally).  Arab League moves do make a difference.

6.  Also like to succeed in Bahrain and Yemen, but cost may also be high there.

7.  Little hope to revive the Israel/Palestine peace process before the U.S. presidential elections, though Dan Kurtzer argued strongly for a bold U.S. initiative to define parameters.

8.  Iran is gaining in Iraq and Afghanistan, but losing in Syria and the Arab world generally, as Turkey and smaller Arab monarchies gain but Saudis do not. 

9.  Israel, facing many uncertainties, hopes for preservation of the status quo but navigates when need be.

10. Lots of change, but overall outcome not yet clear.

These are obviously only my impressionistic highlights.  I’ll be glad if others chime in.

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

Waffling, weak-kneed, paltry stuff

Carl Bildt, Sweden’s able foreign minister, today tweeted this “good conclusion” from the Euroepean Union meeting today:

In the light of the new IAEA report, which is to be considered by the IAEA Board of Governors, the Council expresses its increasing concerns over the Iranian nuclear programme and the lack of progress in diplomatic efforts. It condemns the continuous expansion of Iran’s,enrichment programme, and expresses particular concerns over the findings of the IAEA Director General report on Iranian activities relating to the development of military nuclear technology. Iran has been found in violation of international obligations, including six UNSC and ten IAEA Board Resolutions. We urge Iran to address the international concerns over the nature of its nuclear programme
through full cooperation with the IAEA and by demonstrating readiness to engage seriously in concrete discussions on confidence building steps, as proposed by the HR on behalf of the E3+3. The Council recalled the latest European Council conclusions inviting it to prepare new restrictive measures against Iran. The Council will continue to examine possible new and reinforced measures and revert to this issue at its next meeting, taking into account Iran’s actions.

There may of course be something lurking here that is not spelled out: we can hope that there will in fact be “new and reinforced” measures out of the next meeting.  But on the face of it, this is waffling, weak-kneed, paltry stuff from people who should know better and by now be ready to act.

Tags : , , , , ,

Best freebie next week

Game Changer: Policy and Politics  

For a New Middle East

  The Grand Hyatt Hotel 

1000 H Street NW

Washington, DC 20001

Thursday, November 17, 2011

8:45am-5:30pm     

Tickets: FREE. Register HERE.

Conference Schedule

8:45am-9:00am – Opening remarks

Ambassador (ret.) Wendy Chamberlin, Middle East Institute President

9:00am-10:30am – After the Arab Spring: Assessing US Policy in the Middle East

Steve Clemons, New America Foundation, The Atlantic

Ambassador (ret.) Daniel Kurtzer, Princeton University

Ambassador (ret.) Ron Schlicher, Former US Department of State

Tamara Cofman Wittes, Deputy Assist. Secretary of State-NEA

10:45am-12:15pm – The Road Ahead for Emerging Arab Democracies

Esraa Abdel Fattah, Egyptian Democratic Academy

Michele Dunne, Atlantic Council

Larry Diamond, Stanford University

Radwan Masmoudi, Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy

2:15pm-3:45 pm – Shifting Regional Power Dynamics in an Era of Change

Abdelkhaleq Abdalla, UAE University

Jamal Khashoggi, Al-Arab TV
Haim Malka, Center for Strategic and International Studies

Mohsen Milani, South Florida University

Paul Salem, Carnegie Middle East Center

4:00pm-5:30pm- Economic and Development Strategies for a Middle East in Transition

Adel Abdellatif, UN Development Programme

Odeh Aburdene, OAI Advisors

Iman Bibars, Ashoka/MENA

Ambassador William B. Taylor, US Department of State

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

Nuclear cabal

The big news today is Iran’s progress towards nuclear weapons.  The reports are based on information reported to have been given to the UN-affiliated International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which administers the Non-proliferation Treaty (Iran is a “state party”).

It is the people who gave the information to the IAEA who seem to have leaked the information, which includes details of Iranian efforts not only to obtain the necessary highly enriched uranium but also to learn how to detonate a nuclear weapon.  Foreign assistance from Russia, Pakistan and North Korea is alleged to be involved.

I have no reason to doubt the assertions, but no confirmation either.  The IAEA will not necessarily publish its findings later this week with all the spin that accompanies today’s revelations. It is often more cautious than the Americans like, and presumably today’s leaks are an effort to box the IAEA into taking a hard line.

For what purpose?  My best guess is that the Americans are trying to get the Security Council to go along with ratcheting up the sanctions on Tehran.  While there has been audible saber-rattling from Israel the last few days, I don’t think we can expect that to happen in the lead-up to a real attack.  Israel needs tactical surprise to pull it off.  The rumbling from Israel is also preparation for tougher sanctions, I imagine.

The most interesting aspect of the reports today is the part about foreign assistance.  Those in charge of nonproliferation policy in my past often assumed that no state with nuclear weapons would consciously help another get them.  That assumption has evaporated.  We seem to have a kind of nuclear cabal willing to do things thought anathema in the past.

 

Tags : , , ,
Tweet