World Politics News   Articles for World Politics Course

North Korea launched what appears to be an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM).  We will need to wait for more specific details, but initial reports suggest that it flew to a height of about 3000 miles but only about 500 miles from the launch site.  The trajectory suggests that the North Koreans were primarily interested in the re-entry process–an important detail to determine whether a warhead could survive the heat of re-entry into the atmosphere.  The trajectory also suggests that the possible range of the missile could be quite extensive, possibly even to the east coast of the United States.  The missile was also apparently launched around 3:00 am in North Korea, a timing that hints that the North Koreans are interested in launching missiles when overhead satellites might not be able to pick up images of a launch preparation.

The launch comes after two months of quiet.  North Korean testing has historically tapered off at the end of the calendar ear, but many analysts had been hoping that the period of relative quiet suggested perhaps a new North Korean attitude, perhaps because of US threats or Chinese pressure.  Those explanations may be partially true, but there is no way for us to know.  President Trump issued a very low-key response to the test, saying that the US would “handle it”.  It is difficult to interpret the statement, but the ratcheting down of rhetoric is perhaps important.  President Trump also consulted with South Korean President Moon so it seems probable that the two allies are coordinating their responses.

What is unknown is the extent to which President Trump considers such tests to be the essential “red line” in terms of a threat to the US homeland.  His previous statements indicate that he thinks that allowing the US homeland to be at risk of a North Korean nuclear attack is completely unacceptable.  This test indicates that North Korea is very close to that red line, perhaps one that will crossed definitively next year at the latest.  Thus, the question is how much lead time President Trump believes he has until he invokes a preventive strike to foreclose that option to North Korea.  If and when such a strike occurs, the US will classify the strike as “pre-emptive”.  It is important to keep in mind that a pre-emptive strike only exists in the context of an imminent attack by an enemy.  I doubt very much that North Korea has any intention of attacking the US homeland–such a attack would be an invitation to suicide.  Thus, a US strike to deny the North Koreans from developing the capability to hit the US homeland in the absence of an imminent attack must be classified as a preventive strike.  According to the Pew Research Center, Americans are split on the justification for a pre-emptive strike.  The Just War tradition does not support a preventive strike.

On this day in 1095, Pope Urban II called for a “crusade” against Muslims occupying what he considered the “holy places” of Christianity.  He ordered Christians to retake those lands because “Deus vult!” or “God wills it!”.  Christian pilgrims had been traveling to these areas since the 6th Century, but when the Seljuk Turks occupied Jerusalem in 1042 the city was closed to Christians.  When the Turks threatened the Byzantine Empire, its leader, Alexius I, appealed to the Pope for help.  At the Council of Clermont Pope Urban gave a rousing speech which was not transcribed, but in one of the five versions of the speech written down by others, he exhorted the faithful in this manner:

“All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested. O what a disgrace if such a despised and base race, which worships demons, should conquer a people which has the faith of omnipotent God and is made glorious with the name of Christ! With what reproaches will the Lord overwhelm us if you do not aid those who, with us, profess the Christian religion! Let those who have been accustomed unjustly to wage private warfare against the faithful now go against the infidels and end with victory this war which should have been begun long ago. Let those who for a long time, have been robbers, now become knights. Let those who have been fighting against their brothers and relatives now fight in a proper way against the barbarians. Let those who have been serving as mercenaries for small pay now obtain the eternal reward. Let those who have been wearing themselves out in both body and soul now work for a double honor. Behold! on this side will be the sorrowful and poor, on that, the rich; on this side, the enemies of the Lord, on that, his friends. Let those who go not put off the journey, but rent their lands and collect money for their expenses; and as soon as winter is over and spring comes, let hem eagerly set out on the way with God as their guide.”

Both the faithful and the merely opportunistic responded to the call, and the Crusades, which sealed the enmity of Christians and Muslims for centuries, began and lasted until 1291.

The Council of Clermont

One of the more interesting changes in US President Trump’s foreign policy is the shift from being very critical of China as a candidate to a more benign attitude after his meeting with Chinese President Xi in April. There really has not been any change in China’s trade policies which were Mr. Trump’s main concern as a candidate.  Moreover, there is little evidence that North Korea’s nuclear policies as a result of China’s influence with the country, although there is always the possibility that China has exerted pressure which is not easily comprehensible.  Zack Beauchamp has written an article for Vox which suggests that one possibility for the change is Mr. Trump’s admiration for strong leaders such as Russian President Putin.  President Xi certainly fits that profile but that seems to me to be a small price to pay for being able to continue trade and investment policies which can hardly be described as “free”.

Presidents Trump and Xi in April 2017

In a telephone call to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, President Trump announced that the US would no longer send arms to the Kurds in Syria and Iraq.  Despite being loyal allies in the fight against Daesh (the Islamic State) and bearing the burden of the ground war, the US has left the Kurds without a major supporter.  The decision was made without consultation with the US Defense Department or the State Department whose officials were caught unaware of the change.  Dropping a loyal ally could hardly inspire other allies, and I fight it hard to believe that Turkey or Iran will reward the US for abandoning their enemies, the Kurds.

The Nile at Night

Climate change is difficult to assess since the effects, although global, will only be experienced locally.  But researchers have come up with a way to represent visually the changes about which we should be concerned.  David Roberts assesses the attempt by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to demonstrate the risks  (“Reasons for Concern”, RFC) of climate change graphically.  Roberts explains the graph:

“The thermometer on the right shows temperatures relative to preindustrial levels; the thermometer on the left shows them relative to 1986-2005. The distance between the two blue lines is warming that occurred through 2005. (As that note on the right indicates, warming is up a bit 2003-2012.)”

“Following the IPCC, risks are divided into five buckets or RFCs:

1. Risks to unique and threatened systems. These are ecological or human systems that are geographically constrained and have a high degree of “endemism” — they are uniquely adapted to a particular geography and climate. The authors cite as examples “tropical glacier systems, coral reefs, mangrove ecosystems, biodiversity hotspots, and unique indigenous communities.”
2. Risks associated with extreme weather events. This is what it says, i.e., “risk to human health, livelihoods, assets, and ecosystems from extremes such as heat waves, heavy rain, drought and associated wildfires, and coastal flooding.”
3. Risks associated with the distribution of impacts. This reflects the fact that some groups will be hit earlier and harder than others. Distribution of impacts can be uneven with respect to “geographic location, income and wealth, gender, age, or other physical and socioeconomic characteristics.”
4. Risks associated with global aggregate impacts. This refers to “impacts to socio-ecological systems that can be aggregated globally according to a single metric such as lives affected, monetary damage, number of species at risk of extinction, or degradation and loss of a number of ecosystems at a global scale.”
5. Risks associated with large-scale singular events. These are the much-discussed “tipping points,” whereby a series of incremental changes pushes some system over a threshold, at which point it shifts into a period of rapid, discontinuous, and sometimes irreversible change. The iconic example here is “disintegration of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets leading to a large and rapid sea-level rise.”

There is too much information to grasp quickly, but the graph is worth careful study.

Pakistan has been rocked by protesters throughout the country, led primarily by a political party that believes that the government is not enforcing the anti-blasphemy laws effectively.  Specifically, the party, Tehreek-e-Labaik, took serious exception to a purported change in the oath of office elected officials are expected to take when inaugurated.  Reuters describes the dispute in this way:

“Tehreek-e-Labaik blames the law minister, Zahid Hamid, for wording in an electoral law that changed a religious oath proclaiming Mohammad the last prophet of Islam to the words “I believe”, a change the party says amounts to blasphemy.

“The government put the issue down to a clerical error and swiftly changed the language back.”

Pakistan has ordered the army to put down the protests which have occurred in a large number of cities: Karachi, Islamabad, Lahore, Gujranwala and Faisalabad.

There are reports that Bangladesh and Myanmar have reached an agreement for the Royingha refugees in Bangladesh to be repatriated back to Myanmar.  More than 620,000 Royinghas have left the Rakhine Province in Myanmar, many of them enduring unbelievable brutality in their flight.  Amnesty International’s Director for Refugee and Migrant Rights, Charmain Mohamed characterized the proposed move as unthinkable:

“There can be no safe or dignified returns of Rohingya to Myanmar while a system of apartheid remains in the country, and thousands are held there in conditions that amount to concentration camps. Returns in the current climate are simply unthinkable.

“Myanmar and Bangladesh have clear obligations under international law not to return individuals to a situation in which they are at risk of persecution or other serious human rights violations.

“The fact the United Nations and the international community have been completely sidelined from this process does not bode well for ensuring a robust voluntary repatriation agreement that meets international standards.”

The details of the proposed repatriation have not been disclosed and there is little question that Bangladesh has been heavily burden taking care of the refugees with very little help from the international community.  But how such a repatriation could be safely managed is difficult to imagine.

Refugees from the civil war in Syria and other conflict zones in the Middle East and Africa continue to enter Turkey and then try to enter the European Union (EU) through Greece.  By agreement with Turkey, the refugees are held in five Greek islands in the Aegean Sea: Samos, Lesbos, Chios, Kos or Leros.  The conditions in these refugee camps are deplorable and the processing of the refugees into other states in the EU is painfully slow.  As winter begins, the lives of these refugees will only worsen, but there is little evidence that the EU will take the actions necessary to ameliorate the circumstances.  Opposition to allowing more refugees is very strong in the eastern and central European states, and the political impasse in Germany hamstrings the most powerful government advocating better treatment of the refugees.

I highly recommend reading the book review in the London Review of Books by Steven Mithen on the new book by the Yale political theorist, James C. Scott, Against the Grain: A Deep History of the Earliest States.  Scott’s argument is highly speculative and goes against the grain of the generally accepted understanding of human evolution. He asserts that the shift from hinting and gathering to agriculture was a profoundly negative development, leading to the possibility of centralized government and all sorts of negative health and social effects.  The review is highly informed by Mithen’s own work on early human societies and his general knowledge of hunters and gatherers throughout history.  It is a detailed read but well worth the effort.

There are times when irony is especially delicious, and what better day for a word treat for an American than Thanksgiving?  US President Trump spoke to US soldiers abroad from his Florida resort, Mar-a-Lago, telling them about successes against Daesh (the Islamic State).  US News and World Reports describes the speech in these words:

Ratko Mladić, the former Serb commander known as the “butcher of Bosnia” has been convicted of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity and sentenced to life imprisonment.  The judgment was rendered by the UN tribunal set up at the Hague to adjudicate war crimes in the former Yugoslavia.  Mladić was chief of staff of the Serbian forces in Bosnia from 1992-96 during which horrific atrocities were committed against the Bosnian people in an effort to “ethnically cleanse” the region of non-Serbs.  He was arrested in 2011 and his trial took over 4 years.  He never showed any sign of remorse for the crimes for which he was responsible.

Memorial for Those Slaughtered at Srebenica

The US has finally acknowledged that the treatment of the Royingha in Myanmar constituted “ehtnic cleansing”.   The statement by US Secretary of State Tillerson was long overdue and was accompanied by a vague promise that the US “may” impose sanctions on the government of Myanmar.   The statement read, in part:

“Those responsible for these atrocities must be held accountable. The United States continues to support a credible, independent investigation to further determine all facts on the ground to aid in these processes of accountability. We have supported constructive action on the Rakhine crisis at the UN Security Council and in the UN General Assembly’s Third Committee. The United States will also pursue accountability through U.S. law, including possible targeted sanctions.”

“Ethnic cleansing” is not a recognized term in international law.  But the treatment of the Royinghya is clearly a crime against humanity.  We will have to see if the US takes any effective actions against Myanmar.

Royingha Refugees

About a dozen US State Department officials have charged Secretary of State Tillerson with violating the Federal law designed to stop foreign militaries from using Child Soldiers.  The Child Soldier Prevention Act (CSPA) was passed in 2008 and requires that countries that conscript children for the military be excluded from US military assistance.  An Action Memo for the Secretary dated 21 June 2017 identified the following countries as using children under the age of 18 in their military:  Afghanistan, Mali, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, Burma, Nigeria, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.  Secretary Tillerson decided to ignore the unanimous recommendations of his staff and excluded Iraq, Burma, and Afghanistan from the prohibited list.  The decision triggered off the use of what is known as a “dissent channel” for the State Department officials who opposed Tillerson’s decision.   The dissent channel memo can be accessed here.  The dissent memo indicates a high degree of opposition to Secretary Tillerson’s decision.

Researchers at the University at Oxford and the University of Leeds have come up with a very interesting index which purports to show rising global temperatures in real time.  The researchers spell out the assumptions of the model and what exactly they measured to come up with the index.   I lack the credentials to verify the legitimacy of the index, but the data underlying the model seem solid.  Its accuracy, however, is probably less important than its ability to remind us that climate change is real.

President Mugabe has apparently resigned, although one cannot be sure that his decision to resign is final.  Now the question is what is next for Zimbabwe?  According to the constitution, Vice-President Emmerson Mnangagwa should succeed Mugabe, but, given that Mugabe fired Mnangagwa, it is not clear if he is still the legal Vice-President.  If he does become President, it is doubtful that the economic situation in Zimbabwe will improve.  Mnangagwa is reputed to be as corrupt as Mugabe.  There are not any real good choices for the upcoming election in 2018 if those elections are actually held.

Joy in the Streets of Harare After News of Mugabe’s Resignation

After weeks of negotiations, the German parties–Christian Democrats CDU, the Bavarian Christian Social Union (CSU), the pro-business Free Democrats (FDP) and the Greens–failed to come to agreement on a coalition government led by Chancellor Angela Merkel.  It does not appear as if the Free Democrats and the Greens will change their minds and a resurrection of a coalition with the Social Democrats (SDP) seems unlikely since the previous coalition did not seem to help the SPD at all.  A minority government is a possibility with decisions made on an ad hoc basis but that solution is inherently unstable.  If no coalition is possible, then the only alternative is another election, an outcome that will rock Europe’s last predictable politics.  After Macron in France, Brexit in Great Britain, and the growing illiberal governments in Eastern Europe (Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic), politics in Europe has become highly uncertain.

The World Trade Organization is predicting slower growth in international trade in the next quarter of 2017.  For most of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st, international trade has always grown faster than global economic growth.  Trade has been the engine of economic growth in the process of globalization as productive activities have sought out the cheapest places to produce goods.  It may be the case, however, that the link between trade and economic growth is about to change.  According to Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide:

“… the volume of world merchandise trade has tended to grow between 1.5 times to twice as fast as world GDP. But since 2012, trade has only been growing at a rate equal to or below that of GDP. In 2016, 20 of the world’s largest shipping companies sold $120 billion, compared to $200 billion in 2012. The downturn of the Chinese economy and other emerging economies, as well as the contraction of investment in the US during recent years, may explain part of this deceleration – but not all of it. Other technological and political factors could indicate a long-term anti-globalization trend. This would create a world very different to the one we know.”

One of the key factors in this change is the radical transformation occurring in the manufacturing process itself as robotization changes the dynamic of labor costs.  Firms no longer have to go abroad to produce cheaply.  With automated processes, labor costs shrivel and firms can stay closer to the markets for their products.  The Financial Times has an informative article on the process which forecasts a dramatic growth in the number of industrial robots globally.

The US has announced that the Palestinian mission to the US in Washington, DC  must close because the Palestinian Authority has violated US law by bringing a case against Israel to the International Criminal Court (ICC).  A law passed by the US Congress in 2015 bans the Palestinians from bringing cases to the ICC.  There are a number of legal questions as to whether the Palestinian Authority had the right to sign the Charter of the ICC since the ICC is only open to “states”.  Since Palestine does not have a clearly recognized “territory”, its status as a state can be questioned.  But statehood is generally determined by what is known as the Montevideo Convention of 1933 which has four criteria:

1. The entity aspiring to be regarded as a state must possess a permanent population;
2. it must occupy a clearly defined territory;
3. it must operate an effective government over the extent of its territory; and
4. it must display capacity to engage in international relations-such capacity including the ability to fulfill international treaty obligations.

But the UN General Assembly also passed Resolution 67/19, “Status of Palestine in the United Nations” on 29 November 2012.  The resolution was passed with 138 votes in favor,  9 opposed, 41 abstentions, and 5 absent.  Passage of the resolution with more than a 2/3s affirmative vote is considered by some analysts–but not all–as sufficient evidence of common recognition of Palestine by the international community.

In response to the threat by the US, the Palestinian Authority has itself threatened to cut off all communications with the US.  The ICC has initiated a Preliminary Examination of the Palestinian complaint against Israel which focuses largely on crimes “in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, since June 13, 2014”.  The US move seems to be a prelude to an new round of peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority with the Saudi Arabians and the Egyptians weighing in to pressure concessions from the Palestinians.  The US considers the ICC to be an obstacle to its role as negotiator.  Ironically, both Israel and the US have yet to ratify their membership in the ICC yet wish to have pre-eminent voices in its deliberations.

As the US continues to work closely with Saudi Arabia, the humanitarian situation in Yemen has deteriorated dramatically since the Saudis imposed a blockade on the country.  The Washington Post describes the situation in dire terms:

“According to the United Nations, Yemen is in urgent need of medicines, vaccines and food. The supplies ‘are essential to staving off disease and starvation,’ the organization said. ‘Without them, untold thousands of innocent victims, among them many children, will die.’ A joint statement from the heads of the World Food Program, UNICEF and the World Health Organization called the situation in Yemen ‘the worst humanitarian crisis in the world.’

“A least 17 million other people, including 11 million children, are in desperate need of humanitarian supplies. The shortage of medicine and clean water has also led to the spread of disease. The country is now in the throes of the fastest-growing cholera epidemic ever recorded. Nearly 900,000 people have been affected, according to U.N. figures.”

And there is no end in sight to this pointless war.  The Yemeni people are pawns in the proxy war between the Saudis and the Iranians, and the US continues to support Saudi Arabia without conditions.

The situation in Zimbabwe remains muddy.  Mugabe’s party, ZANU-PF, gave the leader an ultimatum: resign or face impeachment on Monday. Most thought the situation was resolved, but Mugabe delivered a televised address to the nation in which he made no offer to resign.  He was flanked by military officers, giving the impression that he had the support of at least some parts of the military.  But it is doubtful that anyone really knows what is going on.  We will wait to see if impeachment proceedings begin tomorrow.