In virtually every country on the planet, economic inequality is getting worse. For some, like the US, the trend has been going on since the 1980s. For others, like Brazil and China, the divergence between rich and poor is more recent, reversing difficult attempts to even out economic disparities. Walter Scheidel of Stanford University has written a book (The Great Leveler: Violence and the History of Inequality from the Stone Age to the Twenty-First Century) on the historic points where economic inequality was reversed. In an interview with the Economist, which summarizes his argument–“throughout history, economic inequality has only been rectified by one of the “Four Horsemen of Leveling”: warfare, revolution, state collapse and plague”–Scheidel expands on his evidence. The Economist quotes from the book:
“There was always one Big Reason behind every known episode of substantial leveling. There was one Big Reason why John D. Rockefeller was an entire order of magnitude richer in real terms than his richest compatriots one and two generations later, why the Britain of Downton Abbey gave way to a society known for universal free healthcare and powerful labor unions, why in industrialized nations around the globe the gap between rich and poor was so much smaller in the third quarter of the twentieth century than it had been at its beginning – and, indeed, why a hundred generations earlier ancient Spartans and Athenians had embraced ideals of equality and sought to put them into practice. There was one Big Reason why by the 1950s the Chinese village of Zhangghuangcun had come to boast a perfectly egalitarian distribution of farmland; one Big Reason why the high and mighty of Lower Egypt 3,000 years ago had to bury their dead with hand-me-downs or in shoddily manufactured coffins, why the remnants of the Roman aristocracy lined up for handouts from the pope and the successors of Maya chiefs subsisted on the same diet as hoi polloi; and one Big Reason why humble farmhands in Byzantine and early Islamic Egypt and carpenters in late medieval England and hired workers in early modern Mexico earned more and ate better than their peers before or after. These Big Reasons were not all the same, but they shared one common root: massive and violent disruptions of the established order. Across recorded history, the periodic compressions of inequality brought about by mass mobilization warfare, transformative revolution, state failure, and pandemics have invariably dwarfed any known instances of equalization by entirely peaceful means.”
The argument is huge and difficult to sustain over the time period Scheidel uses. Nonetheless, I found the book to be engaging and it carried an intuitive ring of truth. As I read it, I kept telling myself that history is not a sure guide to the future, but it certainly does make us think.
The Sweden Democrats did not do as well as many had feared in the national election. Instead of breaking the 20% barrier, the party only won 17.6%, not a huge percentage but better than the 12.9% it garnered last year. The final composition of the Swedish Government remains unclear as none of the political alliances achieved 50% of the seats. But the business of governance will be significantly more complicated because of the power of the right-wing. Moreover, the results do not really shed light on the cause of the popularity of the right wing parties which we simply label as “populist”. The popularity could be economic stagnation among certain groups or a backlash against immigration and refugees. The analysis of the Swedish election is quite intricate and complicated.
Results of the Swedish Election
National Security Advisor John Bolton gave an address to the Federalist Society in Washington, DC today (the video of the address is below). The speech was entitled “Protecting American Constitutionalism and Sovereignty from International Threats” and it was in response to a request by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to launch an investigation into “alleged war crimes committed by the US military and intelligence officials in Afghanistan, especially over the abuse of detainees.” The ICC was finally created in July 2002 but the US signed the Treaty (The Rome Statute) establishing it in 2000. The US Senate never ratified the Treaty and in July 2002 US President Bush ordered that the US revoke its signature to the Treaty, The US objections to the ICC are well-known and they center over the issue of sovereignty. The US White House issued a statement on the ICC which stated, in part:
If the ICC formally proceeds with opening an investigation, the Trump Administration will consider the following steps:
We will negotiate even more binding, bilateral agreements to prohibit nations from surrendering United States persons to the ICC.
To the extent permitted by United States law, we will ban ICC judges and prosecutors from entering the United States, sanction their funds in the United States financial system, and, prosecute them in the United States criminal system.
We will consider taking steps in the United Nations Security Council to constrain the Court’s sweeping powers, including to ensure that the ICC does not exercise jurisdiction over Americans and the nationals of our allies that have not ratified the Rome Statute.
This Administration will fight back to protect American constitutionalism, our sovereignty, and our citizens. As always, in every decision we make, we will put the interests of the American People first.
The White House position, echoed by Bolton in his speech, goes too far by raising the issue of banning judges and lawyers simply because they work with or for the ICC. Ambassador David Scheffer (retired) critiques the US position:
“John Bolton’s speech today isolates the United States from international criminal justice and severely undermines our leadership in bringing perpetrators of atrocity crimes to justice elsewhere in the world. The double standard set forth in his speech will likely play well with authoritarian regimes, which will resist accountability for atrocity crimes and ignore international efforts to advance the rule of law. This was a speech soaked in fear and Bolton sounded the message, once again, that the United States is intimidated by international law and multilateral organizations. I saw not strength but weakness conveyed today by the Trump Administration.”
The speech and the statement are just additional evidence that the US continues to move away from a rules-based international system, back into the balance of power system of the 19th century.
The New York Times reported on Saturday that US officials met with members of the Venezuelan military and the the discussion was about a possible military coup against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. According to New York Magazine:
“After overcoming skepticism that the Venezuelans were setting them up, the American officials agreed to send a diplomat to meet with the plotters several times in strict “listening mode” between fall 2017 and early 2018. But according to that official, the Venezuelans did not have a real, concrete plan to take down Maduro; instead, they mostly sought advice from the Americans on how to go about it.”
It is indeed fortunate that the US did not act upon the plan, there is probably no way any US support for a coup against Maduro could have served US interests. It is extraordinary that the Trump Administration even tolerated several meetings on such a ridiculous proposition. There is no question that Venezuela is ripe for a change of government and, unfortunately, military coups are not highly unusual in Latin America (though they have become much less frequent than in the past). But any hint of US involvement in a change of government would immediately spark anti-US sentiments.
We do not yet have election results from Sweden, but exit polls suggests that the right-wing Sweden Democrats are polling quite strongly in the national election. The polls suggest that the Sweden Democrats might receive 20 percent of the vote which would give them a very strong voice in the government. Such a result would also be higher than their counterpart in Germany, the Alternative for Germany. The right-wing, populist movements in Europe continue to gain strength. The sentiment continues to be a repudiation of the traditional parties and typical politics, more than an embrace of a right-wing ideology. The Guardian has a revealing quotation from a Swedish voter:
“‘I want to stir up the stew,’ said Fredrik Sigleifs, 23, casting his ballot for the anti-immigration Sweden Democrats in the town art gallery in Sjöbo, just over 30 miles (50km) west of the southern city of Malmö, in a constituency where the populist party won 30% of the vote in the 2014 elections. ‘It’s been the same shit now for as long as you can think.’”
It remains a question whether the left-wing can articulate a similar anti-establishment sentiment.
In a sign of the increased tension between the US and Russia in Syria, the US has conducted live-fire aerial exercises in a remote base in Syria. The US has also sent an additional 100 marines to the military base in Tanf, Syria. Tanf is an important border crossing, but is far from the expected battle in Idlib. It is hard to figure out what this posturing is all about. Russia warned the US last Thursday that it is preparing to attack in the area of Tanf. In addition, Russia has conducted large military exercises in the eastern Mediterranean. I wish I could properly interpret these moves, but it seems dangerous given the current atmosphere in Syria.
Visual Capitalist is a web site that publishes beautiful graphics to demonstrate economic facts. It has published a stunning graphic of the world’s rich (those with wealth above $50 million) which shows where the global economic elite live. The distribution of that elite is not surprising, but the rate of growth of that elite in each area reveals a great deal. Of particular interest is the fact that in two countries, Great Britain and Turkey, the number of the very rich is declining: the effects of Brexit and Erdogan are obvious. Some conclusions are important:
“North America still reigns supreme, but Asia is fast catching up and has already surpassed Europe in this measure of wealth. It’s worth noting that in the one-year span between 2016 (Q4) and 2017 (Q4), the ultra-wealthy population for Asia grew a solid 15%….
“The U.S. holds about 30% of the world’s ultra-wealthy population, while China adds up to nearly 11% when including both Mainland China and Hong Kong in the calculations.
“Switzerland (8.4 million people) punches above its weight class, hitting the #9 spot globally, while Canada takes the #5 spot despite having fewer people (36 million) than the majority of the countries on the list.”
The Trump Administration continues to cut funding for the Palestinian people. It has cut virtually all financial assistance to the Palestinians, including critical funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). This time, the US has cut $25 million earmarked for the East Jerusalem Hospital Network. According to the World Health Organization:
“The six East Jerusalem hospitals have had an historic role in the development of the Palestinian health care system and training of health professionals. They have been the main providers of tertiary referral care for Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip for health services for which the Ministry of Health is unable to provide, such as cancer care, cardiac and eye surgeries, neonatal intensive care, children’s dialysis and physical rehabilitation of children.”
The cuts are an attempt to pressure the Palestinian Authority to accept the still-unveiled peace plan being formulated by the Trump Administration. On 6 September, President Trump made this comment in response to a question from Alan Dershowitz:
“And the other thing I did, Alan, I will tell you, is I stopped massive amounts of money that we were paying to the Palestinians and the Palestinian leaders. We were — the United States was paying them tremendous amounts of money. And I’d say, you’ll get money, but we’re not paying you until we make a deal. If we don’t make a deal, we’re not paying. And that’s going to have a little impact.”
Political pressure to force a deal is entirely legitimate, but this money was the last part of the money the US has historically given to the Palestinian people. So there are two points to ponder. First, the US no longer has any financial leverage over the Palestinian Authority. When the peace deal is made public, there will no longer be any way to exert financial pressure toward its acceptance. Second, putting pressure on sick people does not put pressure on the political authorities. Indeed, the move smacks of collective punishment on the most vulnerable, and it makes the US seem completely unfeeling.
China is consolidating its control over the South China Sea. China claims the South China Sea to be part of its national territory, using what it calls the “Nine-Dash Line” to outline its sovereignty. The international law of the sea does not recognize the Chinese claims and instead uses the more traditional techniques of measuring the seas from the coastline of the states that abut the sea. The map below shows the difference in the two claims: the Chinese claim is the line in red; the international law basis for territory is outlined in blue. In order to buttress its claim, China has been building up reefs and shoals in the South China Sea and building military installations on those artificial islands (international law does not recognize artificial islands as a basis for sovereignty). Because the Chinese consider the artificial islands to be sovereign territory, it believes that it has a 12-mile buffer from international waters. The US and Great Britain have challenged that belief by sailing their naval vessels within the 12-mile limit asserting their rights to sail through international waters. At some point, push will come to shove in this diplomatic tussle.
There was a summit meeting today of representatives from Turkey, Iran, and Russia over the next steps to address the last rebel stronghold in Syria in the province of Idlib. Turkey has proposed a peace agreement, but Russia and Iran decided to support Syrian President Assad in his efforts to put down the rebellion. The decision likely means a military assault which will mean significant loss of life. An Islamic Relief worker in Idlib published an impassioned op-ed in the Guardian:
“Even as we stare death in the face, however, I fear the international community will once again fail to act and allow one of the worst humanitarian crises in living memory to go unchallenged.
“For seven years we have seen hospitals, markets, schools, mosques, people’s homes, whole cities turned to dust, and people’s bodies and minds broken beyond repair. While we bleed, world leaders respond with meek platitudes and statements of “concern”.
“Where were they when whole families suffocated to death in chemical attacks, when barrages of barrel bombs killed thousands and turned ancient cities to dust? Where are they now that one “de-escalation” zone after another is turned into a bloody battleground?
“This collective inaction and inability to bring the warring parties to the table in any kind of meaningful way will haunt the public conscience for generations to come. Despite growing efforts to sweep this tragedy under the carpet and pretend things are getting back to normal, these atrocities cannot be erased or forgotten.”
Today marked the end of the 60 day comment period for US President Trump’s decision to put tariffs on $200 billion of imports from China. We will have to see if he implements them, but he now has the authority to do so. He also threatened today to put tariffs on another $267 billion of Chinese imports. Reuters quotes Larry Kudlow, one of President Trump’s economic advisers about the purpose of the tariffs:
“Specifically, Kudlow said, the United States was seeking ‘zero tariffs, zero non-tariff barriers, zero subsidies, stop the IP theft, stop the technology transfer, allow Americans to own their own companies.’
“’Those have been our asks for many months and so far those asks have not been satisfied,’ he said. ‘However, hope springs eternal.’”
The tariff war seems to be about economics. It is not. It is primarily about technological innovation and supremacy. Kudlow’s comments clearly indicate US concern about preserving control over intellectual property and its ownership.
Sweden is holding its national elections on Sunday, and there is growing evidence that the Sweden Democrats, a right-wing party opposed to immigration, will do very well at the polls. The Sweden Democrats have strong support in the rural areas of Sweden. Sweden admitted more than 160,000 refugees seeking political asylum in 2015 and the influx of refugees has coincided with an increase in crime in the country, although there is no evidence of a connection between the two facts. The election will likely not produce a majority government, so smaller parties, including the Sweden Democrats, will have an outsized voice in the new government. The rise of the right wing is testimony to the radical changes in the ethos of the open society that has been the hallmark of Swedish society for many years.
There is an interesting proposal in the US Congress to build “concrete seawalls, earthen barriers, floating gates and steel levees on the Texas Gulf Coast.” The purpose of these projects is to build property coast from the devastating effects of storm surges and storm damage that may be getting worse because of climate change. There is little question that property damage from storms like Harvey and Sandy was extensive and that the US must take steps to minimize the damage as much as possible. But what makes the proposal so interesting and difficult to think about is that much of the property being protected are oil refineries which produce the very fuels that aggravate climate change through greenhouse gases. Do we build these structures in order to protect the oil industry? Do we build these structures to protect an energy that most Americans use on a daily basis? Or do we build these structures in order to protect ordinary property owners who have nothing to do with the oil industry? According to the AP:
“Construction in Texas could begin in several months on the three sections of storm barrier. While plans are still being finalized, some dirt levees will be raised to about 17 feet high, and 6 miles of 19-foot-tall floodwalls would be built or strengthened around Port Arthur, a Texas-Louisiana border locale of pungent chemical smells and towering knots of steel pipes.
“The town of 55,000 includes the Saudi-controlled Motiva oil refinery, the nation’s largest, as well as refineries owned by oil giants Valero Energy Corp. and Total S.A. There are also almost a dozen petrochemical facilities.”
One way to think about this plan is to pose the question of whether such structures would be built in the absence of the oil industry’s interests. If the answer to that question is no, then perhaps the oil industry should be expected to pay a larger share of the projects’ costs.
Areas of Southeast US Susceptible to Storm Surge Damage
“There is no longer a Nuclear Threat from North Korea.” (Tweet, June 13)
“And the big thing is, it will be a total denuclearization, which is already starting taking place. (Cabinet meeting, June 21)
“I have solved that problem. Now, we’re getting it memorialized and all, but that problem is largely solved, and part of the reason is we signed, number one, a very good document.” (Remarks to reporters, June 15)
Those predictions were premature. The evidence suggests that there has been little progress in the negotiations. Some analysts believe that it is the US that is dragging its feet, not North Korea. According to Global Post:
“’If you add up these confidence-building measures, North Korea has done a lot more than the US has reciprocated — and we don’t know if the US is not making good on something it said it would do,’ said Jenny Town, a research analyst at the Stimson Center and managing editor of the analysis site 38 North. ‘And none of [North Korea’s concessions] are reducing North Korea’s core nuclear capabilities, but they weren’t meant to. These are trust-building measures so that we can move forward. … I think people just have really bad, unrealistic expectations of what North Korea is supposed to be doing after the Singapore summit.’”
Global Post“Nuclear Decision Game” has a for those of you who wish to try out your decision-making abilities in a crisis.
There are reports of at least 23 fighter jet raids on the Syrian town of Idlib and observers in the area claim that the jets were both Syrian and Russian. There are fears that these airstrikes signal the beginning of the assault on the last rebel stronghold in Syria. In response, US President Trump tweeted: “President Bashar al-Assad of Syria must not recklessly attack Idlib Province. The Russians and Iranians would be making a grave humanitarian mistake to take part in this potential human tragedy. Hundreds of thousands of people could be killed. Don’t let that happen!” Idlib province is home to about 2.9 million people and it represents a significant strategic crossroad for Syrian, Turkish, Israeli, Kurdish, and Russian interests. The Russians have amassed its largest naval flotilla off the coast of Syria as a sign how important it regards the outcome of the battle for Idlib. Iran, Turkey, and Russia have scheduled a summit meeting on Syria for 8 September and the results of that meeting will determine how the battle for Idlib will unfold.
The British still have not figured out how to manage its exit (Brexit) from the European Union (EU). It is a major economy in the Union, but leaving the Union has raised a large number of issues that were not anticipated by the voters. And it now appears as if sentiment in Great Britain is changing. According to Reuters:
“Polling showed 59 percent of voters would now vote to remain in the bloc, versus 41 percent who would vote to leave. The findings were published in an academic-led report on Wednesday by research bodies NatCen and The UK in a Changing Europe.
“That is the highest recorded support for ‘remain’ in a series of five such surveys since the 2016 referendum and a large reversal of the actual 52-48 percent vote to leave.”
The Brexit controversy has split the ruling Tory government and its not clear that Prime Minister Teresa May has the ability to take the steps necessary to engineer a coherent strategy on Brexit. UBS, a major back, estimates that the British GDP is already 2% lower because of the lack of a plan.
Two journalists from Myanmar, Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo, were convicted of violating the Official Secrets Act in Myanmar for their reporting on the murder of ten Muslims by Myanmar security forces. The two were convicted despite evidence that indicated that they had been framed:
“On April 20, a prosecution witness revealed in pre-trial hearings that police planted military documents on Reuters reporters Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo in order to frame them for violating the country’s Official Secrets Act. That admission drew gasps from the courtroom.
“A police officer told the court that he burned notes he made at the time of the reporters’ arrest, but didn’t explain why. Several prosecution witnesses contradicted the police account of where the arrests took place. A police major conceded the “secret” information allegedly found on the reporters wasn’t actually a secret.
“And outside the courtroom, military officials even admitted that the killings had indeed taken place.
The two were sentenced to 7 years in prison. The court decision is incomprehensible and indicates that Myanmar is far from leaving its authoritarian past even though the military government is no longer in power. The decision also sullies the reputation of Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi who, before she became the leader of the government, was a fierce defender of human rights. The evidence of crimes against humanity being committed by Myanmar authorities against the Royingha minority in the country is extensive and the news reports were entirely consistent with that evidence.
“In her statement, Nauert said that the UNWRA’s business model and fundamental practices were ‘unsustainable.’ She added that the group has been in ‘crisis mode’ for years.
“‘The U.S. will no longer commit further funding to this irredeemably flawed operation,’ she said. ‘We are very mindful of and deeply concerned regarding the impact upon innocent Palestinians, especially school children, of the failure of UNRWA and key members of the regional and international donor community to reform and reset the UNRWA way of doing business.’
“‘These children are part of the future of the Middle East. Palestinians, wherever they live, deserve better than an endlessly crisis-driven service provision model. They deserve to be able to plan for the future.'”
It is not clear how this decision moves the region closer to peace. It will unquestionably increase the misery of many who rely upon this humanitarian assistance to survive. Whether those individuals have the ability to persuade the Palestinian authorities, whether the Palestinian Authority or Hamas, to forge a legitimate peace is highly doubtful.
The US has announced that it is going to cut off aid to Pakistan because it has not taken effective action against terrorist groups in its territory. The US threatened similar action during the Obama Administration, but the election of Imran Khan has further aggravated US-Pakistani relations. The US is concerned about support for extremists in Afghanistan as the security situation in that country continues to deteriorate. According to the BBC:
“The Haqqani network is a militant group that focuses most of its activities on neighbouring Afghanistan, which has complained for years that Pakistan allows it to operate unimpeded from its soil across the border.
“The group is linked to the Afghan Taliban – a hardline Islamist movement that poses a major threat to the Afghan government. Pakistani Taliban groups, while associated with the Afghan Taliban, focus on attacks within Pakistan.”
It is not clear what the US action is supposed to accomplish. It is doubtful that Pakistan will change its behavior in any substantial way since the domestic constraints on effective action in Pakistan are formidable. US Secretary of State Pompeo is scheduled to visit Pakistan soon, but it is likely that his welcome will be somewhat rocky.
The deadline for a NAFTA agreement with Canada and the US has passed, but the two sides have agreed to keep negotiating. US President Trump, however, has made the negotiations more difficult with what could be called a highly undiplomatic tweet: “We shouldn’t have to buy our friends with bad Trade Deals and Free Military Protection!” The tweet continues: “There is no political necessity to keep Canada in the new Nafta deal. If we don’t make a fair deal for the US after decades of abuse, Canada will be out. Congress should not interfere w/ these negotiations or I will simply terminate Nafta entirely & we will be far better off.” Fortunately, Canada will soberly assess its own national interest and willlikely not make any decisions in a fit of pique.
“The real warning of Chemnitz is how many locals joined the protest. Squeezed by low-paid work and rising rents, many are furious at how new arrivals got free apartments and generous welfare. Germany’s Geneva refugee convention obligations mean little to people with little experience of foreigners in the East German past and real, existential worries in the present.”
World Politics News 