Tag: Russia
Stevenson’s army, December 24
I have an affinity for revisionist writers, those who make a convincing case for something contrary to the conventional wisdom. On this day, therefore, I want to note that I lean now to the view that Clement Moore did not write the famous Christmas Eve poem. For your consideration, here are some articles making that case. From Canada and from NYT.
In the news, maybe redistricting hasn’t been a GOP blowout. It looks like both parties have opted for incumbent protection.
WSJ says China is helping the Saudis build missiles.
NYT says US may give Ukraine real-time intelligence if Russia attacks.
NYT reports difficulties turning Uyghur forced labor ban into a bureaucratic policy.
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).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, December 22
-Why hasn’t NDAA been signed into law yet? The final copy of the bill hasn’t been sent to the WH. Why not? Because there was an error in the draft — apparently a couple zeroes were omitted from a table somewhere in the 2,120 pages. So the Senate has passed a resolution telling the enrolling clerk to make the corrections in the final version. That also has to pass the House.
– NYT says Russia has been beating the war drums to get the country ready for war.
– WSJ says Houthis have increased their attacks on Saudi Arabia.
– Politico reports on a congressman who doesn’t use Google or social media.
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).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, December 21
– Former head of the National Intelligence Council Greg Treverton warns a civil war is coming to the US.
– Manchin friend Steve Clemons explains the breakdown.
– US & UK helping Ukraine prepare for Russian cyber attack.
– NYT says drones tipped balance in Ethiopia war.
– Reuters says Chinese spies have infiltrated Taiwan military.
– Atlantic Council warns of 2022 problems.
I somehow missed this from Charlie yesterday:
– I’m surprised and puzzled by the Manchin statement on the administration’s domestic policy bill. Normally, experienced politicians keep their word. And it sure looked like Biden was treating the Senator gingerly, never pressuring him in public. But something led Manchin to break publicly — his own ambitions? something Schumer did? something Biden or his top aides have done? The WH statement is extraordinary. Nevertheless, Biden needs Manchin for other things, as do his colleagues, so I expect renewed talks after thingds cool down.
– Sen. Cruz got his vote promised and he let some nominees through. This is normal.
– FP has a story on how interns run Washington.
– NYT has a new story on how China manipulates Facebook and Twitter.
– Don’t forget to keep checking CRS for new reports. Here’s one on Use of Force in Cyberspace. And an update on State/Foreign Ops appropriations.
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).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, December 19
– The new NDAA forbids dishonorable discharges for military personnel who refuse to get vaccinations.
– 3 retired general warn of insurrection in 2024.
-Some Israeli officials doubt ability to strike Iran.
– Major NYT review of airstrike investigations finds undercounts of civilian casualties and reluctance to blame US.
– WaPo says US greatly expanded air attacks in Afghanistan in mid-2021.
From the entrepreneurial NatSecDaily:
FIRST IN NATSEC DAILY — AMERICANS WARY OF GOING TO WAR OVER UKRAINE: A new YouGov poll commissioned by the pro-restraint Charles Koch Institute found that there are more Americans skeptical of going to war with Russia than those who are gung-ho.
In response to the question “If Ukraine is invaded again by Russia, do you favor or oppose the US going to war with Russia to protect Ukraine’s territorial integrity?” 28 percent of respondents said they “strongly oppose” the idea while another 20 percent said they “somewhat oppose” it. By contrast, only 9 percent said they “strongly favor” going to war with Russia and 18 percent said they “somewhat favor” the notion. Meanwhile, 24 percent of the 1,000 internet-using Americans surveyed said they “don’t know.”
That’s not an outright repudiation of the idea of going to war to defend Ukraine from Moscow’s forces, but this one poll indicates a majority of people are at least skeptical.
Importantly, Biden to date has ruled out sending U.S. troops to Ukraine to fight the Russians, were they to invade.
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).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, December 17
– AIPAC will launch its first campaign donation arm.-
– Remember, NDAA doesn’t provide money. Appropriations needed.
-David Ignatius urges use of IAEA to pressure Iran.
– Revolutionary Guard budget to more than double.
– Russia has a negotiation package.
Good reads: Reimagining Arms Control. Prof Brands says US is preparing for wrong war with China.
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).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Blunter would be better
In a tweet this morning, I called these words about the Western Balkan non-EU members harsh but true:
…they do not fulfil the Copenhagen criteria, despite an accession process that has lasted around 20 years: They have neither stable democratic institutions nor functioning market economies….Another factor…against early accession to the EU: their unwillingness to establish good neighbourly relations…German European policy should change course here and make it clearer that these states have no place in the EU without making efforts towards peaceful coexistence.
https://www.swp-berlin.org/en/publication/german-foreign-policy-in-transition#fn-d57704e4133
Of course there are nuances. Here I’ll try to explore some of them.
None of the Balkan states, even the current EU members, has achieved a truly independent, honest, judiciary. I’m hard put to distinguish among them, as is the World Justice Project’s Rule of Law Index. But there Kosovo and North Macedonia are headed in the right direction and Serbia in the wrong direction, which jibes with my own impression. Montenegro isn’t rated, but wouldn’t depart much from the regional average. Albania is worse than that average, despite decades of reform efforts.
When it comes to freedom and democracy, I depart from Freedom House’s rating of Kosovo as less free and democratic than the other non-EU members, which are all clustered together. Kosovo has perhaps the freest press in the region, has repeatedly seen alternation in power (unfortunately viewed as instability by many outside observers), and has a relatively free economy. Corruption is a big problem (one the current government is targeting) but it is also a big problem in the other countries.
As for the other countries, Serbia lacks a free press and power is concentrated in the hands of its current president, who has drifted towards autocracy rather than democracy. The most significant institutional governance issues are in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which at Dayton was given a constitution that makes democratic governance impossible. One person one vote is inconsistent with the group rights that the warring parties insisted on at Dayton and afterwards. Montenegro and Macedonia have both struggled with alternation in power, but both have managed it, with some violence. Albania has improved its electoral performance and has a vigorous political competition between government and opposition.
As for good neighborly relations, the main issue is between Serbia and Kosovo, since the former does not recognize the latter and has even recently menaced the use of military force. Albania, North Macedonia, Montenegro, and Kosovo (the first three NATO members and the last defended by NATO-led forces) are for now getting along pretty well, partly because they are all feeling the heat from Serbia’s Russian-sponsored re-armament. Kosovo has issues also with Bosnia and Herzegovina, but those are entirely derivative of Belgrade’s non-recognition. SWP would have done better to point the finger towards culpability rather than resort to generalities.
All that said, the SWP basically has it right. The Western Balkan countries are all looking for easy ways into the EU, but even those that have adopted and implemented much of the acquis communautaire do not completely meet the Copenhagen criteria. Besides, the EU member states have gotten more particular about accession, due in part to their own domestic politics (and economics) and in part to the poor performance of some of the more recent members, especially Bulgaria and Romania. The reforms the EU wants should be the reforms aspiring members want as well. The benefits of EU membership largely precede accession for aspirants who are serious. Germany and the EU should indeed get blunter about this.
RSS - Posts
