Tag: Russia
Stevenson’s army, April 13
I had planned, in next week’s class on the media, to say that most US leaks on foreign policy come from 3 sources: [1] administration officials launching trial balloons; [2] losers in the interagency fights who want to rally opponents; and [3] whistleblowers who want to expose some terrible government activities. According to WaPo, however, the leaker of recent highly classified documents was a 4th type — the Showoff who wants to demonstrate his inside knowledge. WaPo has tracked down the leaker, who seems to be a youg man in his 20s, working on a military base, who is an enthusiast about guns and gaming. No other apparent agenda.
Other reports based on the leaks say: Ukraine war is headed for stalemate.
– There’s lots of infighting among Russian officials.
– Serbia denies sending arms to Ukraine.
– Politico explains why the leaks went undetected for so long.
-NYT explains why Brazil won’t help Ukraine.
SAIS prof Cancian analyzes the service wish lists.
Atlantic Council has expert report on defense innovation. Document here.
NYT notes unrestrained behavior when strong partisan control of state legislatures.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. 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).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, April 11
– Politico reports on the GOP push to attack Mexico.
– Politico profiles Elbridge Colby, the anti-neocon.
-Economist sees US-China competition in Indian Ocean
– Blowback from intell leaks: South Korea. Lots of places.
– WaPo says Egypt planned to sell arms to Russia
-Amy Zegart assesses US intelligence challenges.
Bloomberg opinion is behind a paywall, but look at these recent points.
Let Bloomberg Opinion columnist Minxin Pei — with assistance from Bloomberg’s editorial board — calibrate your concerns. The perception of China’s increasing power tends to exceed the reality of it. Here are five reasons that is true.
- China’s military strength is overhyped: “For all its talk about the decline of the West and rise of the East, China remains a significantly weaker power than the US on practically all fronts. What China sees as unfair practices — including US surveillance operations in international airspace and waters near the Chinese coast — are merely a manifestation of the exercise of US power in its rivalry with a weaker adversary.”
- On top of that, Minxin says, China talks a big game on national ambitions but can’t follow through: “In case after case, leaders in Beijing have identified top national priorities and lavished them with support. And time after time, this ‘whole-of-nation’ effort, meant to mobilize the talent and resources of a giant country, has led only to waste, graft and failure.”
- Bloomberg’s editorial board says Washington frets about China’s financial leverage over the US, but that’s also overhyped: “Less than 2% of US foreign direct investment is held in China, and US venture-capital companies have invested only about $60 billion in Chinese startups since 2010, compared with $1.3 trillion in the US.”
- The China-Russia alliance is also less than it seems, Minxin writes, adding that influence doesn’t equal leverage: “The meagerness of the economic deals signed during Xi Jingping’s visit to Moscow — which glaringly omitted the second gas pipeline from Russia to China — indicates that China is not ready to go all in, at least for now. This portends trouble” for any alliance between the two nations.
- And the Saudi deal was significant, but the US remains firmly in control: “Those lamenting America’s apparent loss of influence in the Middle East should know that this is one of the costs of focusing US attention and resources on the competition with China — and it’s one the US can afford to pay.”
Bonus China Reading:
- US Must Still Fight for Taiwan’s Hearts and Minds: Nisid Hajari
- US ‘Guardrails’ With China Are Shaky at Best: Hal Brands
- The US, UK and Australia Send China a Message: James Stavridis
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. 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).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, April 6
–Conflicts in Poland over Ukraine policies.
– Poland ready to give more MiGs.
– Putin blames Ukraine war on US.
– NYT has detailed graphics on Russian offensive.
– FP details Chinese spying.
– Vox has history of US industrial policy
– Reuters says China to inspect ships in Taiwan strait.
-Israeli concerns over Milley Iran comment.
– Semafor has report on Coast Guard’s global role.
– Freedom caucus & Progressives have some common goals.
Charlie added a Thursday bonus:
– WH has released a 12 page review of the Afghanistan withdrawal. AP summarizes.-
-FP says we need an economic war council for dealing with China.
-Lawfare praises State rules for military AI.
– FT says US opposes roadmap for Ukraine in NATO.
-Economist has fascinating story about improvements in camouflage.
– I’ve come across several Georgetown youtubes on the all-volunteer force at 50.
-Poli sci prof confirms decline in committee legislating
– Another reports benefits in grandstanding.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. 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).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, April 5
– FP warns Northern Ireland deal likely to fail.
– China’s EU ambassador explains PRC policies.
– WSJ says Russia isn’t getting aircraft spare parts.
-Defense News says China it outselling Russia in arms.
– Our brownbag guest, Mike Mazarr of Rand has a piece on the Middle Powers.
– David Ignatius says the Saudis are sending us a message.
– It’s always good to check on recent CRS products. You’ll find things like this report on International Trade and Finance.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. 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).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Nukes could make things worse
Today the journal Survival: Global Politics and Strategy published a paper on “Assessing Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East.” I prepared it with two talented MEI research assistants, Aya Khan and Zuha Noor.
I have been concerned with nuclear issues since even before my professional career. My first participation in public protests was against fallout from nuclear weapons tests in the late 1950s and early 1960s. I wrote my doctoral thesis at Princeton on the history of radiation protection. When I joined the State Department in 1977, it was as a science and technology specialist. I spent seven years abroad as a Science Attache’ and Counselor in the US embassies in Rome and Brasilia. My main concern was Italian and Brazilian transfers to Iraq, as well as the possible military goals of the Brazilian nuclear program. I’ve visited many nuclear labs, reprocessing facilities, and power plants.
Nonproliferation in the Middle East
One of the interesting questions about the Middle East is why there has been little proliferation there in recent decades, despite the presence in the region of Israel’s nuclear weapons. Part of the answer is that Israel destroyed facilities in Iraq (1981) and Syria (2007) that might have allowed those countries to develop nuclear weapons. Libya, under American pressure, abandoned its nuclear program (2003). But why haven’t the heavier weights in the region, namely Turkey and Saudi Arabia, gone the nuclear route along with Iran?
This is an especially pertinent question right now, as Tehran approaches the nuclear threshold, at which it will have enough highly enriched uranium to build one or more nuclear weapons. The answer is at least in part that until recently Turkiye and Saudi Arabia have been largely content to rely on US security guarantees. Turkiye is a NATO member and has US nuclear weapons stationed on its territory. Saudi Arabia has until recently regarded the US as a reliable security partner. Ankara and Riyadh complain loudly about Israeli nuclear weapons, but so far as we know they have not tried to reply with nuclear weapons programs of their own.
Things are changing
But the strategic environment is changing for both of those countries. Turkiye and the US are trapped in frictions over Ankara’s purchase of Russian air defenses, the American reaction to (and alleged role in) the 2016 attempted coup, and Turkiye’s hostility to the Kurds who are allied with the Americans in Syria. Saudi Arabia resents the American failure to react strongly to the 2019 Iranian attack on its oil production facilities. Nor did it like President Biden’s criticism of Saudi human rights abuses and American efforts to lower oil prices. Security guarantees that once seemed ironclad are now doubtful.
At the same time, Russia and China are making inroads in the Middle East. Moscow has collaborated with Saudi Arabia in maintaining oil prices the Americans think too high. China is importing a lot of Saudi oil and offering to build nuclear power reactors in the Kingdom. Beijing has also mediated an agreement to restore diplomatic relations between Riyadh and Tehran. Rosatom is building nuclear reactors in Turkiye. Russia and China both have good reasons to fear nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. But is not clear that they will be as exigent on that score as the Americans.
Rosatom is also building power reactors in Egypt.
Leadership matters
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and President Erdogan have both said that if Iran gets nuclear weapons their countries will follow suit. It is not clear whether deeds have followed those words. Saudi Arabia’s technological capabilities in that direction may be limited. It only recently started up its first research reactor and is thought to be seeking US nuclear power reactors, which come with strong nonproliferation constraints. But we really don’t know. The Kingdom is opaque in that direction. The Turks are likely farther advanced, as they have had research reactors for many years. But there is no public evidence of enrichment or reprocessing research in Turkiye.
Egypt’s President Sisi has said his country doesn’t need to have nuclear weapons to achieve great power status. But what will he do if Turkiye or Saudi Arabia acquire nuclear weapons? And what will his successor do in that case?
Prevention is better than cure
My colleagues and I argue in our piece that prevention is better than cure. We need to be monitoring the nuclear capabilities of possible nuclear proliferators assiduously as well as building a regional security architecture that discourages nuclear weapons. We will also need to collaborate with Europe, Russia, and China in ensuring that other Middle Eastern states don’t follow Israel and Iran down the nuclear path. The Middle East is already a mess. Nuclear weapons would make things worse.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Montenegro begins a test that won’t be easy
Last time I talked with Montenegrin President Djukanovic, maybe 7 or 8 years ago, I told him he lacked only one thing: a pro-European opposition that could alternate with his own coalition in power. Yesterday’s election will determine whether Montenegro has in the interim acquired it. A recently elected candidate for mayor of Podgorica, Jakov Milatovic, won with 60% of the vote, defeating Djukanovic after he had dominated politics in Montenegro for more than a generation.
There are serious doubts
Milatovic leads a party with the right name, “Europe Now!,” and the right professional career. He has been Economy Minister, after a stint in various private banks as well as the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. He holds an Oxford MPhil in economics and has spent time in the US and Austria as well.
But there is good reason for doubt. Milatovic’s supporters include the pro-Russian and pro-Serbian segment of Montenegrin politics. Many opposed independence and NATO membership. Some celebrated with Serbian flags, not Montenegrin ones. Those are Serb ethnic nationalists and resent Montenegro’s minorities, who have long supported Djukanovic. Even if Milatovic is seriously pro-Europe, it is not clear whether that will be the direction he can lead the country in.
Parliamentary elections are scheduled for June 11. The outcome will likely determine whether Europe Now can deliver. Dritan Abazovic, the current caretaker prime minister, is hoping to lead a centrist coalition thereafter. But Abazovic himself has been beholden to the pro-Serbian political parties in the past. He signed an agreement that privileged the Serbian Orthodox Church and has cozied up to Belgrade, while offering himself to Washington and Brussels as a sincere, Western-oriented reformist.
Keep the pressure on
Montenegro was until recently the Balkans front-runner for EU accession. Now Western pressure and incentives will be vital to ensuring a pro-European outcome. The Serb nationalist minority in Montenegrin politics is large and well-funded. The Russians will try to use it to destabilize NATO and poison the relationship with the EU. The all too necessary corruption investigations will cast doubt on many in the former governing coalition and damage its prospects.
Alternation in power is the ultimate test of any democracy. Montenegro has so far passed, ironically due to Djukanovic. He managed the transitional governments of the past two years skillfully. Now that Djukanovic will be out of the picture, Milatovic should aim to do as well, while keeping the country moving in the European direction. It won’t be easy.
RSS - Posts
