World Politics News   Articles for World Politics Course

The United Nations has just released a rather sobering report on the state of the world’s future.  These reports are highly general and only deal with the least tractable of global pressures–demography and very basic resources.  At that level, however, constraints on economic growth are going to be very severe by the middle of the century.  The prognosis is very grim.

The German view on fiscal austerity prevailed within the EU summit today.  Only Britain and the Czech Republic voted against the fiscal treaty that would give great authority to the EU over national budget and spending policies.  Even at this stage it is hard to imagine the treaty have a significant effect–I cannot believe that the member states would subject themselves to such external authority.  But the passage of the treaty gives Angela Merkel some credibility among German voters that she is not going to continue to finance the economically weaker states without some measure of control over their spending habits.  We’ll see how much more austerity the European states can handle.

The quiz in American foreign policy on 1 February 2012 will be on the articles posted in the blog from 26-30 January.  The syllabus materials on the quiz will be:  The Melian Dialogue, The Grand Inquisitor, Jefferson’s Inaugural Address, and sections I and II of Kant’s Perpetual Peace.

Predictably, the Greeks have turned reacted negatively to the EU plan to force a budget commissioner into their democratic procedures.  The IMF and the Germans will continue to insist upon this course of action, but it is doubtful that the other members of the EU will be as forceful.  So the question now becomes whether the Greeks will leave the eurozone or whether the IMF and Germany will deny the Greeks the money necessary to pay off their debts due in March in order to force them to accept the budget commissioner.  Much hangs in the balance in this war of wills.  The EU summit tomorrow will tell us a lot about what direction the war will go.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has an inspection team in Iran.  It does not have the ability to inspect all of Iran’s facilities, but it will try to corroborate the intelligence from other states with whatever information it is able to glean from its visit.  Meanwhile, Iran has indicated that it will stop oil shipments to “some” European states in retaliation for the EU oil embargo.

The stakes are rising in the eurozone crisis.  It appears as if the EU is going to insist that Greece give up control of its national budget and allow a budget commissioner from the EU to approve spending and taxation decisions.  If the proposal passes, it will be a decisive shift away from the normal procedures of the EU and toward the powers of a centralized government.  The reaction of the British to this proposal will be important–one can easily predict what the reaction of the Greeks will be.

There’s an interesting tit-for-tat going on between the US and Iran about weapons designed to destroyed heavily fortified sites.  The Wall Street Journal reported that current US weapons (called bunker busters because they can destroy facilities up to 200 feet below ground) are not capable of destroying Iranian nuclear facilities.  In turn, the Tehran Times cites the WSJ article, but does not even mention that the facilities in question are nuclear-related.

Violence in Syria has dramatically increased recently.  The pressures on the Assad regime continue to build, the Arab League has been ineffective, and the United Nations is stymied by Russian and Chinese opposition to some form of intervention.   One of the most astute analysts of events in the Middle East is  Rami G. Khouri, who writes for the Beirut newspaper, The Daily Star.  His essay on possible endgames in Syria is both thoughtful and provocative.

A frequent topic of conversation revolves around the question of whether the United States is a nation in decline.  Realists have an interesting take on this particular question.  One of the most astute realists in the US is a Harvard Professor by the name of Stephen Walt.  He has written extensively on the question and here is one of his more recent essays.

Globalization is a very different process to analyze–there are so many moving parts to it, and broad-brush assessments of whether it is good or bad are difficult to prove.  But it is also a process that has accelerated during a period in which the efforts of citizens to voice their opinions through non-governmental channels.  Thus, we have new sources of information upon which we can make partial assessments.  Linda Gree, of the Natural Resources Defense Council, gives a good example of how these voices can implement change.

NASA has released a very dramatic (and sobering) video of temperature changes on the planet over the last century.  It’s hard to watch this video and not come to the conclusion that something is seriously amiss.

Evidence continues to mount that the pattern of global protests is linked by dissatisfaction with the process of globalization.  This countermovement against the effects of market capitalism remains unfocused and unorganized, but in many respects it suggests the same pattern of dissatisfaction that emerged in Europe right after World War I.  If a recession does occur in Europe, then the likelihood is that the protests will only intensify and deepen.  To make matters worse, the International Labor Organization has issued a very pessimistic forecast of global employment growth in the future.

The economic slowdown in the United States has had a significant effect on its military power.  Much money (well over $1 trillion) was spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and given the pressure to reduce the budget deficit in the US, President Obama has ordered significant cuts to the defense budget.  As proposed (and there is no guarantee that the Congress will go along), the cuts will primarily affect the Army and the Marines and leave the Navy and the Air Force relatively intact.  The choice is significant: it suggests that the US is not willing to fight long ground wars any more, but still wishes to retain its ability to project power abroad.  The proposal suggests a modified global role for the US.  It will still be the world’s policeman, but it wants the police back-up to come from other countries.  We’ll see if that’s possible.

A rerun of the economic crisis in 1937 appears to becoming increasingly likely.  The IMF has reduced its predictions for global economic growth, primarily because of austerity programs in Europe.  A similar policy was implemented in 1937 which had the effect of returning the world to Depression.  The chances for austerity programs also appears to be likely in the US.  Fiscal austerity in the middle of slow economic growth is not the right policy.

Ronen Bergman has published a very long article in the New York Times with the title: “Will Israel Attack Iran?”  The article has the clear ring of one that has been carefully researched and vetted by editors–in other words, it sounds very authoritative.  Whether it actually is is another matter entirely, but a matter we cannot assess.  All the facts seem to be very consistent with what we already know about Israeli previous behavior and assessments.  We actually know very little about the Obama Administration’s views on the matter (a curious reversal of the more typical situation).  Having said all this, the article is particularly chilling.  I’ll try to find some Iranian reaction to the article–if anyone has luck on that matter, please let me know.

Breaking News.  Iran is threatening to stop selling oil to Europe, preempting the EU plan to embargo Iranian oil as soon as some of its members found alternatives to Iranian oil.  The Financial Times is reporting that the Iranian plan will be decided upon on Sunday.  If the Iranians follow through on the threat, we should prepare for a very bad Monday.  A very clever gambit by the Iranians.  http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/a3c736b0-4788-11e1-b646-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1kWPXETMd

I’ve commented before on the number of protests that have occurred globally over the last year.  Each of these protests is locally based, but they are not completely independent of each other.  Increasing evidence suggests that the common thread in many of these protests is a backlash against globalization.  This possibility is consistent with much of the research done on the backlash against globalization at the beginning of the 20th century.  Concerns about income inequality and corruption seem to be the source of the backlash.  We’ll see how this unfolds.

I hope that many were able to watch the State of the Union address this evening.  It was a good example of how foreign policy is used to inspire political loyalty.  Unfortunately, foreign policy issues rarely dominate a presidential election, and this year the economy will certainly be the dominant issue in the campaign.

Political protests turn psychedelic.  This tactic would have been great in the 1960s–many more protesters would have shown up just for the show.

Anne-Marie Slaughter, of Princeton University, has an interesting essay on the possibility of the world intervening in Syria to help prevent further bloodshed.  I disagree with many of her points, but the analysis is both sober and thoughtful.  My disagreements stem largely from my fears that the intervention would stimulate wider involvement and greater bloodshed.  Her final point, however, about the expectations of the protesters in Syria and their likely sense of betrayal is an argument I find hard to dismiss.  The difficulties of humanitarian intervention are becoming more obvious in the Libyan case.

In less than a year, 16 Tibetans have self-immolated in protest over Chinese rule.  The Chinese authorities have tried hard to prevent news of these protests from reaching the outside world, and it appears as if the Chinese government has decided to take a stronger line against the protests.  The world governments have very little to say about these actions, but the increased violence is something which will not be contained much longer.   A more effective response is necessary.

Matthew Kroenig recently published an essay in Foreign Affairs arguing for a military strike against Iran.  He just published a shorter essay in the Christian Science Monitor articulating the same point of view.  I bring the article to your attention because it represents a sentiment that is getting louder in policy circles.  I do not believe that the argument is gaining more adherents, but it is getting more difficult to ignore.  One thing is clear: the rhetorical war between Iran and the West is definitely heating up.

I apologize for the hiatus in my postings–I was vacationing in an area with very limited internet access.  On the one hand, it was liberating not to think about world politics for a while.  On the other hand, I was somewhat lost, wondering what was going on in the world.  As  I have been catching up, I have been struck by some stories that don’t seem to be highly visible that I consider to be of great importance.

The first is the continuation of the tactic of self-immolation in the Arab world.  There have been many stories about the violence in Syria and the elections in Egypt.   But the continuing protests in other Arab states is receiving little attention in both the Western and Arab presses.  The Arab spring is far from over.

But the global protests against governments, of which the Arab spring is a critical part, also has surfaced in other areas of the world (Occupy Wall Street is another such movement).  Protests in Romania have been going on for about a week now, and have grown increasingly violent.

Finally, it’s the Chinese New Year!!!