Tag: United States
These two look happy, don’t they?
That of course is EU envoy Miroslav Lajcak on the left and Serbian President Vucic on the right. Accompanying this photo, Lajcak wrote:
Arriving in Belgrade this morning, I met with @predsednikrs @avucic. In our discussion, we focused on the strategic outlook for 2024, took stock on the state of play in the Dialogue and spoke about the next steps in the normalisation of relations with Kosovo.
Despite Lajcak’s effort to portray the meeting in neutral terms, there are good reasons for the grim looks.
The tilt is definitively eastward
Vucic is increasingly alienated from the West the Europeans want him to embrace. Just in the last few months, he has
- Sponsored a terrorist attack inside Kosovo intended to spark a response that would allow him to move his military into his neighbor’s north.
- Mobilized the Serbian army for that purpose.
- Conducted a fraudulent election in Belgrade, importing thousands of voters from Bosnia and Herzegovina.
- Aligned Serbia increasingly with the strongmen not only of Russia and China but also Azerbaijan, Belarus, and Hungary.
- Increasingly supported the secessionist ambitions of Milorad Dodik, the strongman of the Serb-majority 49% of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
So far as I am aware, the only tidbits Vucic has offered the West are acceptance of Kosovo documents and license plates in Serbia and steps towards payment by Serbs in Kosovo of their electricity bills. I doubt however many Kosovo Albanians will risking their windshields to drive into Serbia with Kosovo plates. We’ll surely need to wait a while before the bills are paid.
What Lajcak should be saying
So what should Lajcak be saying to Vucic once the cameras are out of the room? @ivanastradner gives us part of the answer with this tweet about the UK specialy envoy for the Balkans:
Special envoy to the Western Balkans sent crystal clear messages: 1. Serbia should impose sanctions on Russia. 2. Serbia should investigate elections irregularities. 3. Republika Srpska cannot be an independent state.
telegram channels are so upset…
But that would not suffice. The Ukraine-related sanctions on Russia will have little impact. I would stop asking for them. Belgrade hardly needs to investigate the election irregularities. It needs to rerun the elections. The EU needs to make it clear that Brussels will suspend accession negotiations with Belgrade in response to any future mobilization of the Serbian Army against Kosovo. Belgrade should surrender the avowed ring leader of the September 24 attack to the Kosovo authorities for trial. Brussels require that Vucic publicly renounce the Russian-sponsored, irredentist “Serbian world” program that has endangered the sovereignty and territoriality of Bosnia, Montenegro, Kosovo, and Macedonia.
https://twitter.com/ivanastradner/status/1751450967504039968/photo/1
The Americans should be chiming in
Washington is in part responsible for the appeasement the EU has undertaken in respone to Belgrade’s defection. It needs to change its tune, in public as well as in private. In addition to pushing on the points above, the US should put its money where its mouth is. There should be no more World Bank money or other multilateral financial assistance for Serbia until it accepts in both word and deed the February and March agreements that both the EU and US claim are legally binding.
The Americans should also revivify their own relations with Pristina and try to bend the EU back into a friendlier relationship with Pristina. The “consequences” Brussels levied on Kosovo last year because of lack of progress in the dialogue with Belgrade were always unjustiably one-sided. Now they look ridiculous. The police the EU wanted withdrawn from Kosovo prevented a disastrous outcome last September 24 when they responded effectively and professionally to the terrorist attack Belgrade sponsored. The non-Serb mayors elected in polls Belgrade got the Serb majorities in the four northern municipalities of Kosovo to boycott have likewise behaved professionally while awaiting a new election.
Smiles all around?
The Balkans are a minor theater of conflict in today’s world. The wars in the Ukraine and the Middle East as well as the Chinese threat against Taiwan are far more important. But even minor instability in the Balkans could greatly complicate those other issues. Irredentism is a major factor in all of them. The Balkan region has a sad history of aggravating larger issues. The US and EU should aim to end any possibility of that happening again. Then maybe Vucic and Lajcak could smile not only at each other but also at Kosovo Prime Minister Kurti.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, January 27
– WaPo says US isn’t planning Ukraine offensive
– Michael Kofman et al. have their suggestions on WOTR
– Kenya court blocks Haiti mission; Haiti suffers.
– Congress approves F16s to Turkey
– Additional countries halt aid to UNRWA
– Biden promises border crackdown if new law is passed
– WaPo says Trump plans expanded trade war with China
– Fred Kaplan revisits Ukraine nuclear decision with declassified documents
– SAIS Prof Hal Brands sees risks of global war
– NYT reviews Gaza peace efforts
—
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, September 26
– Peter Baker sees a divided America. Note this point:
In an increasingly tribal society, Americans describe their differences more personally. Since Mr. Trump’s election in 2016, according to the Pew Research Center, the share of Democrats who see Republicans as immoral has grown from 35 percent to 63 percent while 72 percent of Republicans say the same about Democrats, up from 47 percent. In 1960, about 4 percent of Americans said they would be displeased if their child married someone from the other party. By 2020, that had grown to nearly four in 10. Indeed, only about 4 percent of all marriages today are between a Republican and a Democrat.
– WSJ says US warned Iran in advance of suicide bombers.
– WSJ says US will meet with China about Red Sea– Vox sees more war going on.- Analyst says Iraq is falling apart
– FP questions Biden’s Venezuela policy
– FP reports European reactions to Trump
-WaPo says US foreign military training has inconsistencies
– Europe has different models of conscription
– Think tank reports on Chinese FDI in Latin America
– Experts see North Korea readying for military action
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:
The sun is not setting on the US
Pantelis Ionomou asked “has the sunset of the West begun?” My own answer to this question is “no.” But that requires some explication.
The problem is real
There is no doubt but that electoral autocracies are rising while liberal democracies are declining:
The question is whether this trend will continue, where, and for how long.
2024 will see an unusual number of elections, including in big countries. Two merit particular attention: the US presidential and Congressional contests and India’s parliamentary election. The Economist rates both as “flawed democracies,” though India’s is more flawed than America’s.
Prime Minister Modi is favored to win another parliamentary majority, perhaps with a reduced number of seats. The big question is whether he will use a new mandate to further restrict Indian democracy. I wouldn’t bet against that. Modi has turned many of India’s Hindus against its massive Muslim population, the largest Muslim minority in any country on earth.
The US is particularly important
In the US, polling suggests that former President Donald Trump has a good chance of returning to the White House. As in India, the odds are he would use a second term to do additional damage to American democracy. Trump has pledged to use the Justice Department against political opponents and fire large numbers of experienced and law-abiding civil servants. He has even claimed in court absolute immunity for actions taken as president, including assassination of a political opponent. He has also avowed the intention to use dictatorial powers on “day 1” to close the border and drill, presumably for oil and gas:
The question is whether Trump will win in November against Joe Biden.
It will be tight
I doubt it. He will certainly not win the popular vote, which he lost by 7 million in 2020. It is hard to imagine any New Yorker or Californian who voted for Biden last time around who will turn out to vote for Trump this time. But one of America’s democratic flaws is its presidential election procedures. Its 18th-century constitution gives the presidency to someone who wins a majority of votes in the Electoral College, regardless of the popular vote. There it is state “electors” who determine the outcome.
Each state gets a number of electors equivalent to its number of members in Congress (plus three for the District of Columbia, which is not a state). This indirect system favors smaller states since all states (but not the District) have two members of the upper house, regardless of population. It enables a candidate with strong support in less populous states to win.
Trump has that going for him. Without it, the Republicans would be permanently out of power, or forced to change their politics. They have lost the popular vote in all but one election (2004) since 1992.
The 2024 election will come down to a contest in only a handful of states. Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin are particularly competitive. Polling shows Biden trailing Trump in the first two, as well as in the Nevada, Georgia, and Arizona “battlegrounds.” If this polling pans out, Biden is toast.
But don’t count Biden out
So why do I think the US will not continue in that direction? Polling is notoriously unreliable this far out from an election. Many of the current polls are showing improbable shifts of minorities away from Biden, whose record on their issues is far better than Trump’s. They may be signaling unhappinesss with being taken for granted, but in the polling booth I don’t know many traditional Democrats who will make the mistake of voting against their own interests.
Muslim Americans are particularly important in Michigan. All the Arabs I know (none of whom are in Michigan I should note) are deeply disappointed in Biden’s unqualified support for Israel’s war on Gaza. Ditto my Bosnian Muslim friends with his policies both in Gaza and in the Balkans. But they will in November face a choice between Biden, who has at least tried to moderate Israel’s approach and steer it towards saving Palestinian lives and establishing a Palestinian state, and a profoundly Islamophobic, race-baiting Trump. Last time around, Trump completely abandoned Palestinian concerns, moved the US embassy to Jerusalem, and gave Prime Minister Netanyahu far more unqualified support than Biden has done.
The polling is also showing a surprising shift of Black voters to Trump, but women are heading in the other direction. This is despite record low unemployment among Blacks and a narrowing of the gap with whites. Biden has appointed an unusual number of Black judges and other officials, as well as an unprecedented number of women. Young people would like a younger candidate than Biden. But Trump is only a few years younger. He is also more addled than Biden:
Trump’s white supremacist and anti-abortion advocacy may not loom large today. But any decent electoral campaign on Biden’s part will remind the electorate of both.
Trump will be a crook and Biden’s economy will look good
I hardly need even mention the many criminal indictments and civil cases against Trump, some of which will result in ignominous outcomes for him before November. He will likely be a convicted felon by then. He will also have lost control of many of his businesses. That won’t deprive him of his base, which is oblivious to his wrongdoing and convinced he is being persecuted, but it will repulse some independents and encourage at least as much turnout among Democrats as among Trumpistas.
The Republicans are pursuing Biden’s son Hunter, but they haven’t really pinned anything unknown on him. Nor have they connected their allegations to the President.
The continuing strength of the American economy, which is going uncredited to Biden among much of the citizenry, has been a problem for him. It has caused high inflation, increased interest rates and home prices, and pushed up gasoline prices. But many of these important consumer issues will be in the rear-view mirror by November. Another ten months should bring inflation close to the Fed’s 2 per cent target, enabling reduction of interest rates. Gasoline prices are not likely to rise much as the economy softens a bit. US energy production is higher than ever and gasoline prices are falling. Interest rates appear to have peaked and consumer confidence last month jumped.
Bottom line
Absent any big surprises between now and November, Biden is far more likely to be gaining than losing against Trump in the key states. I can’t be sure it will suffice. But I am more hopeful than discouraged. The sun is not setting on the West, at least not in the US.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Quit and change course before you lose
A cold-eyed look at the Gaza war is overdue.
During the atrocious October 7 attack on Israel, Hamas killed as many as 1200 civilians, kidnapped over 200, raped an unknown number, and and committed crimes against humanity.
The Hamas attack did not however threaten the existence of the Israeli state, which struck back quickly. The attack was “existential” in the imagination of some Israelis as well as some Palestinians, but not in its real consequences.
The Israeli attack on Gaza has killed upwards of 23,000 Palestinians, 15,000 or so of them civilians and most presumably women and children. Israel has detained thousands and destroyed about half the built structures in Gaza. The International Criminal Court will decide whether Israeli conduct constitutes genocide.
Israel hasn’t lost, but it hasn’t reached its objectives either
The outcome thus far is obviously not to Israel’s advantage. The Israeli attack aimed to destroy Hamas, which Israel had previously helped to finance and sustain, as a military and governing entity. Israel has also aimed to free the hostages. It has so far fallen short of both goals. Hamas has gained support both in Gaza and the West Bank. Nor have the Israelis achieved their secondary objective of releasing the hostages, upwards of 140 of whom remain in captivity.
It will not be easy for Israel to change course. Prime Minister Netanyahu can remain in power only if the war continues. He is resisting international pressure, including from President Biden, to desist. The end of the war will open a political process certain to hold him responsible for the intelligence and military failures that allowed the Hamas attack to be successful.
Other options
A growing number of Israelis favors prioritizing hostage release over destroying Hamas. This could only be achieved in a negotiated exchange with Hamas (and possibly other Palestinian factions in Gaza) for Palestinians detained in Israel. There is no guarantee however that Hamas can or will deliver all the hostages. Nor do the Israelis want to release all their imprisoned Palestinians, at least some of whom are responsible for killing Israeli Jews.
There is little apparent support in Israel for the course President Biden is proposing. He wants steps towards a Palestinian state that would sweeten the deal for the Palestinian Authority. A reformed PA would take over governing Gaza. Biden believes that would incentivize the Arab Gulf monarchies to finance post-war stabilization and reconstration. It would also allow progress on normalization between Saudi Arabia and Israel. The Israelis and Arabs who would support that course are well-intentioned but relatively few.
Some Israelis want to de-populate Gaza as well as the West Bank, claiming both as Israeli territory. This course would be sure to create a permanent threat to Israeli security in Egyptian Sinai. It would also destabilize Jordan, which would have to receive many of the West Bank Palestinians. Jordan’s pro-Western monarchy is vital to Israeli security. Any alternative would likely be far more radical and supportive of the Palestinians, who already constitute more than 50% of Jordan’s population. So forced displacement would be entirely counter-productive. That however doesn’t mean the Israelis won’t try to do it. The settlers and security forces are pressuring some West Banker Palestinians to leave.
What’s most likely?
At some point, the Israelis are likely to accept a ceasefire and try to negotiate a hostage deal. Two questions arise. Will they do so before the destruction in Gaza becomes unfixable? Will Hamas release the hostages and risk Israel re-starting the war thereafter?
Leverage in a negotiation comes from having an alternative to a negotiated solution. The alternative for Israel is to pursue Hamasees it regards as responsible for October 7 by other than conventional military means. Israel could conduct a campaign of targeted air strikes and assassinations. That is not a bad alternative. Doing it soon would maximize the odds of Gulf financing for PA takeover, stabilization, and reconstruction in Gaza.
The alternative for Hamas is to fight on, risking a war of attrition that it might not be able to sustain even if it does serious damage to Israel and PA credibility. Hamas will try to retain at least the Israeli soldiers it has captured, but getting rid of the civilians would increase sustainability. Keeping pregnant women and children captive and alive is not what most fighters want to be doing.
Bottom line
Both Israel and Hamas need to think about quitting and changing course before they lose. The sooner they do it the better. I’d prefer Biden’s two-state option, but the prisoner exchange is the more likely first step. It will be a difficult negotation and likely an incomplete exchange initially. But if it comes with a ceasefire and enhanced humanitarian relief for Gaza’s civilians, it would be a good thing. Certainly better than mass displacement.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Has the sunset of the West begun?
Pantelis Ikonomou writes:
After the collapse of then existing socialism in 1991, the clash of ideologies seemed finished. Francis Fukuyama’s “The End of History” became a bestseller.
It did not take long for him to admit the error of his prophecy. At the same time, humanity was realizing that hopes for global peace were false. History continued to flow, yet more violently and at higher human costs.
The US is to blame
The undeniable protagonist of the new hot war era was the winner of the 45-year Cold War: the American-led democratic West. The Warsaw Pact dissolved, but NATO continued to exist and to progressively encircle Russia, the collapsed adversary.
The US, with or without NATO, led a series of wars that go on to this day: the Gulf War (1991), the devastating bombardments of Yugoslavia (1995 and 1999), the military interventions in Afghanistan (2001), Iraq (2003), Libya (2011), Syria (2014) and the latest, indirect but decisive US involvement in Ukraine (2022) and the slaughter in Gaza (2023).
Human values and democratic principles are not the driving force of this on-going violence. It is the superpower’s eternal greed to achieve and maintain global hegemony.
What’s next?
In periods of crises, political change is critical. Is there a basis for hope?
Although history’s next games remain unknown, we will get to know one of them relatively soon. Recent polls in the US sugest that the presidential election next November will likely get Donald Trump, or a Republican politician with similar views, back on the top of the global American superpower.
The entire world, including the European democratic West, should not forget ex-President Trump’s unorthodox, unpredictable, and thus perilous persona.
Flash back
In 2016, president-elect Trump announced his doctrine for world order: “America First”. Its main pillar was the dissolution of the EU. He strongly urged European countries to follow the example of Brexit.
The head of the Munich Security Conference, Ambassador Wolfgang Ischinger, called this “a non-military declaration of war.” The response of the then President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, was characteristic: “Europe is threatened from all sides, including the USA.” Then German Chancellor Angela Merkel wondered whether “we will be able to cooperate with the US in the future or will we retreat into parochial policies.” At the same time, she underlined the importance of international multilateral institutions, such as the EU and the UN, which Trump defiantly discredited.
Trump also encouraged US allies Japan and South Korea, and indirectly Saudi Arabia, to acquire nuclear weapons. This violated American obligations, as well as the binding commitments of the countries in question to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Trump publicly described NATO as “obsolete.” He even proposed a retreat to bilateral agreements, a proposition Russia would support.
Hence, there are well-founded doubts worldwide about the future posture of the US in defending the security, principles, and interests of the democratic West as well as abiding by historic alliances and international treaties.
Is the West at a geopolitical turning point? Has the sunset begun?
RSS - Posts
