There are some disquieting rumors in the press about a possible deal with Turkey to get the Turks to ease up on pressure on Saudi Arabia about the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. Several media outlets are reporting that the Trump Administration is thinking about expelling Turkish cleric Fethullah Gulen who has been living in the US for many years. Turkish President Erdogan regards Gulen as the leader of a failed coup against him two years ago. NBC News makes the argument:
“The secret effort to resolve one of the leading tensions in U.S.-Turkey relations — Gulen’s residency in the U.S. — provides a window into how President Donald Trump is trying to navigate hostility between two key allies after Saudi officials murdered Khashoggi on Oct. 2 at the kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul.
“It suggests the White House could be looking for ways to contain Erdogan’s ire over the murder while preserving Trump’s close alliance with Saudi Arabia’s controversial de facto leader, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.”
Eric Levitz, writing for New York Magazine, is much less diplomatic in his understanding of the situation: “To review: In order to help an Islamist theocracy get away with executing one American immigrant, Trump is (reportedly) trying to find a legal rationale for letting another (much less totalitarian) Islamist theocracy execute a different American immigrant.” If the reports turn out to be accurate, one can safely assert that Realpolitik is alive and well at least in some areas of American foreign policy.
We are getting a better idea of how Brazil’s new President, Jair Bolsonaro, intends to rule. He has announced his selection for Foreign Minister and the choice reflects the deep-seated populism of the new government.
“Ernesto Araújo – until recently a mid-ranking official who blogs about the “criminalisation” of red meat, oil and heterosexual sex – will become the top diplomat of South America’s biggest nation, representing 200 million people and the greatest and most biodiverse forest on Earth, the Amazon.”
Since 1992, Brazil has been a true leader in the international actions to protect the global environment. Its defection from the movement will make it more difficult to take the necessary steps to avert climate change.
There is a deal of uncertainty about the British exit (Brexit) from the European Union (EU). After Prime Minister Teresa May informed her cabinet of the tentative agreement with the EU, several of her cabinet ministers–Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab, Work Pensions Secretary Esther McVey, junior Northern Ireland minister Shailesh Vara, and junior Brexit minister Suella Braverman–resigned in protest. The Brookings Institution has a nice summary of the tentative agreement:
- Separation issues, enabling a smooth winding down of current arrangements (e.g., protect existing intellectual property rights, conclude police and judicial cooperation on criminal matters, enable goods placed on the market to reach their destination)
- Financial settlement, ensuring both sides meet all financial obligations undertaken while the U.K. was an EU member
- Citizens’ rights, protecting the rights of over 3 million EU citizens in the U.K. and over 1 million U.K. nationals in EU countries
- Northern Ireland backstop, ensuring no hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland and protecting the rights enshrined in the Good Friday Agreement
- Protocols for Cyprus and Gibraltar, respectively protecting the interests of Cypriots who live and work in the Sovereign Base Areas and enabling close cooperation with Spain on the rights of citizens living in Gibraltar
It is possible that Prime Minister May may have to face a vote of no confidence. But the possible outcomes are quite complex and bewildering. The Washington Post runs through some of the possibilities.
The evidence that the US is getting ready to make an arrangement with the Taliban in Afghanistan continues to mount. What is interesting, however, is that the increasing ability of the Taliban to control areas within Afghanistan is occurring even as the US steps up its bombing. The discrepancy between military power and political power has never been more apparent, and that discrepancy should be noted by all who believe that military power can be decisive in what is essentially only a political matter.
On 31 October, I posted an article published by the Washington Post that a research paper had indicated that the world’s oceans were warming faster than climate models had assumed, raising the possibility that global warming might be more rapid than predicted. Today the Post published an article acknowledging that the research paper had made some crucial errors. The errors were raised in a blog post by an independent researcher. I am certain that the article published in Nature will undergo intense scrutiny and that amended conclusions will be published at some point in the near future.
British Prime Minister Teresa May has secured the support of her Cabinet for the Brexit agreement with the European Union. The draft runs 585 pages and it deals with a very large number of issues, the most important of which are:
- Britain’s financial settlement with the EU to meet agreed commitments.
- The post-Brexit rights of EU citizens in the UK and British citizens on the continent.
- A mechanism to prevent a hard border on the island of Ireland.
The agreement works largely because both sides have agreed that Great Britain and the EU will forge a free trade agreement after the British leave the Union. Such an agreement would allow Great Britain to not be bound by many of the regulations of the EU but would allow the passage of goods and services without any trade barriers. It is an intriguing resolution, but one which will not satisfy some members of May’s Conservative Party members. Presumably, she will be able to get the votes to pass the agreement through Parliament. The agreement has to be approved by all the other members of the Union and may be subjected to a second national referendum in Great Britain. So there is much left to be done, and it is premature to think that the crisis has passed.
The Los Angeles Times has a well-documented article on the disengagement of the Trump Administration from foreign policy. It is a disturbing article because there is increasing evidence that there will significant personnel changes in the Administration and one gets the sense that no one is minding the store at a time when the inventory of the store is changing rapidly as well. It may be the case that American commitments abroad need to be pulled back. But dropping those commitments is not the same thing as carefully ending them,
The New York Times has published a story indicating that satellite images show that North Korea is building 16 new ballistic missile testing areas even as it engages in talks on denuclearization. The evidence undermines US President Trump’s assertions that progress is being made:
“The satellite images suggest that the North has been engaged in a great deception: It has offered to dismantle a major launching site — a step it began, then halted — while continuing to make improvements at more than a dozen others that would bolster launches of conventional and nuclear warheads.
“The existence of the ballistic missile bases, which North Korea has never acknowledged, contradicts Mr. Trump’s assertion that his landmark diplomacy is leading to the elimination of a nuclear and missile program that the North had warned could devastate the United States.”
The very reputable blog, 38North argues, however, that discussions about denuclearization should be considered separately from ballistic missile development, and that the satellite images do not necessarily indicate duplicity. This difference in interpretation is not unusual in arms control discussions, but point out the difficulties in interpreting intentions from capabilities.
Israel and Hamas have escalated the exchanges of rocket and aerial bombardment. The escalation has been slowly creeping up over the last few weeks, but yesterday Hamas launched 400 rockets into southern Israel. The recent violence is the most intense since the Israeli-Hamas war in 2014 and some analysts fear that another war is in the works. The exchange of fire only deepens the misery of the Palestinians living in Gaza and is unlikely to lead to any political settlement that resolves the dispute.
The world is remembering the end of World War I, a seminal event in modern history. As always, we try to glean meaning from such remembrances, some of which make sense and others which are misleading. Katrin Bennhold has written a short essay fro The New York TImes entitled “Can Europe’s Liberal Order Survive as the Memory of War Fades?” Her observations about the similarities between 1914 and 2018 are chilling:
“Politicians are apt to use history selectively when it suits them. But the history in this case is ominous.
“Now as then, Europe’s political center is weak and the fringes are radicalizing. Nationalism, laced with ethnic hatred, has been gaining momentum. Populists sit in several European governments.”
9 November was also the 80th anniversary of Kristallnacht, a night when Nazi-inspired thugs broke the windows of Jewish stores, signalling the ultimate intent of Aryan nationalism in Europe. The world, to its everlasting shame, ignored that warning, as it seems to be ignoring the signs of anti-semitism today.
We are finally getting some more information about the US sanctions on Iran which were imposed on Monday. First, the US has apparently granted waivers to 8 countries to continue to import Iranian oil. Those countries are China, India, South Korea, Japan, Italy, Greece, Taiwan and Turkey and they collectively account for 80% of Iranian exports. The waivers are good for 180 days and can be extended. Thus, the sanctions will probably have little effect after December (imports were reduced by these countries in anticipation of the sanctions, but will go up now that the waivers have been granted). Second, there is good evidence that many countries do not intend to honor the sanctions or will seek to evade them. Third, Iranian oil tankers have turned off their maritime transponders so that they cannot be tracked. Turning off the transponders vitiates the insurance on the tankers so there are increased risks to Iran by this tactic, but it will make it more difficult for the US to identify who is buying Iranian oil.
As the economic and political situation in Venezuela continues to deteriorate, almost 3 million Venezuelans have left the country. Most of the refugees have gone to neighboring countries, putting a genuine strain on the resources available to shelter refugees properly. According to The Guardian:
“UN data in September showed 2.6 million had fled to neighbouring countries, but regional governments are struggling to cope with the humanitarian and political fallout from one of the largest mass migrations in Latin American history.
“’The main increases continue to be reported in Colombia and Peru,’ Spindler [UN high commissioner for refugees (UNHCR)] said.
“Colombia is sheltering 1 million Venezuelans. About 3,000 more arrive each day, and the Bogotá government says 4 million could be living there by 2021, costing it nearly $9bn.”
For perspective, one should compare the anxiety in the US over a group of refugees numbering around 3,000 coming through Mexico. What if there were 3,000 coming every day?
The scheduled meeting between US Secretary of State Pompeo and his North Korean counterpart has been postponed, with no explanation given for the decision. The postponement follows the North Korean declaration that it would resume nuclear testing if the US did not lift the sanctions against it. Robert Carlin, in 38North, quotes Kwon Jong Gun, director of North Korea’s Foreign Ministry’s Institute for American Studies (IFAS), to interpret the recent situation:
“In the commentary, Kwon put forth what may actually be a high-level perception in Pyongyang—that the US did not get serious about talks until the North demonstrated in 2017 that it could strike the US mainland with an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) and made clear that the DPRK nuclear threat to the US mainland was ‘only a matter of time.’ A worst-case interpretation of that position, unstated by Kwon, is that the North might at some point in the future decide the only way to get the US into productive talks would be to demonstrate even more starkly its ICBM capability.”
Clearly, the negotiations are not bringing North Korea and the US closer together. It is difficult to predict the US reaction if North Korea resumes nuclear testing.
The Saudi Arabian-led coalition has stepped up its attacks on the Yemeni port city of Hodeidah, despite US and British calls for a cease-fire. Abdel-Malik al-Houthi, the leader of the Houthi rebels, vowed that he will never surrender even though the rebels had lost ground. Al Jazeera puts the conflict in context:
“The conflict in Yemen began with the 2014 takeover of the capital, Sanaa, by the Houthis, who toppled the internationally recognised government of President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi.
“The coalition forces – which include Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates and are backed by the United States – intervened in 2015 to reinstall Hadi’s government.
Even as the conflict goes on, the humanitarian crisis in Yemen has deepened to the point where the regional director for UNICEF said that Yemen is a “living hell”. According to NBC News: “UNICEF’s operation in Yemen estimates there are 1.8 million children currently facing malnutrition, including 400,000 who are severely malnourished and at risk of death if not urgently treated. More than 8 million children are cut off from regular access to basic water, sanitation and hygiene services.”
The Pew Research Center has some interesting results from a poll it conducted in several European countries. The questions related to the degree of openness to Muslims and Jews and the extent to which citizens regarded their societies as superior to other societies. The poll found a rather sharp divide between western and eastern European societies:
“The continental divide in attitudes and values can be extreme in some cases. For example, in nearly every Central and Eastern European country polled, fewer than half of adults say they would be willing to accept Muslims into their family; in nearly every Western European country surveyed, more than half say they would accept a Muslim into their family. A similar divide emerges between Central/Eastern Europe and Western Europe with regard to accepting Jews into one’s family.”
The poll found similar splits on the issues of gay rights, abortion, and the role of religion. The study is fascinating.
French President Macron is on a tour of World War I battle sites, honoring the centenary of the Armistice agreement that ended the war. While on tour, he called for the creation of a “real European army” saying that “We have to protect ourselves with respect to China, Russia and even the United States of America.” European states have toyed with the idea of creating a unified European army for a number of years, but those plans have always floundered over the question of how to integrate such an army into the overall NATO framework. The US has usually been opposed to the force, but it is not clear how the current US Administration views the possibility. Macron no longer believes that the US is a reliable security partner: “When I see President Trump announcing that he’s quitting a major disarmament treaty which was formed after the 1980s euro-missile crisis that hit Europe, who is the main victim? Europe and its security.”
Photograph revealing the trenches from the battle of the Somme, 100 years after the battle
According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), India has 14 of the top 15 most polluted cities in the world. Fall is always bad in Indian cities: farmers burn the stubble from their fields and the Diwali festival is always accompanied by fireworks that contribute to polluted air. The pollution is a serious health hazard, but it also has serious economic consequences. According to NDTV: “By the World Bank’s calculations, health-care fees and productivity losses from pollution cost India as much as 8.5 percent of GDP. At its current size of $2.6 trillion that works out to about $221 billion every year.” India has made significant progress in developing alternative sources of energy, but its progress in that area lags far behind the efforts to curtail pollution.
The decision made by the US in 1945 to create a rules-based international order was based largely upon the assessment by US President Franklin Roosevelt that the horrors of the Interwar Period (1918-1939) came about because there were essentially no rules after the tragedy of World War I and the US decision to not support the rules-based order suggested by US President Wilson’s proposal for the League of Nations. That assessment was well articulated by the US Undersecretary of State, Sumner Welles, in a speech in 1942:
“The people of the United States were offered at the conclusion of the last war the realization of a great vision. They were offered the opportunity of sharing in the assumption of responsibility for the maintenance of peace in the world by participating in an international organization designed to prevent and to quell the outbreak of war. That opportunity they rejected. They rejected it in part because of the human tendency after a great upsurge of emotional idealism to seek the relapse into what was once termed “normalcy.” They rejected it because of partisan politics. They rejected it because of the false propaganda, widely spread, that by our participation in a world order we would incur the danger of war rather than avoid it. They rejected it because of unenlightened selfishness….
“In 1920 and in the succeeding years we as a nation not only plumbed the depths of material selfishness, but we were unbelievably blind. We were blind to what constituted our own enlightened self-interest, and we therefore refused to see that by undertaking a measure of responsibility in maintaining world order, with the immediate commitments which that might involve, we were insuring our people and our democratic ideals against the perils of an unforeseeable future, and we were safeguarding our children and our children’s children against having to incur the same sacrifices as those forced upon their fathers. Who can today compare the cost in life or treasure which we might have had to contribute toward the stabilization of a world order during its formative years after 1919, with the prospective loss in lives and the lowering of living standards which will result from the supreme struggle in which we are now engaged?”
Christine Lagarde, the Director of the International Monetary Fund, makes essentially the same point when assessing the current world situation:
“And in 1918, when leaders surveyed the corpse-laden poppy fields, they failed to draw the correct lessons. They again put short-term advantage over long-term prosperity—retreating from trade, trying to recreate the gold standard, and eschewing the mechanisms of peaceful cooperation. As John Maynard Keynes—one of the IMF’s founding fathers—wrote in response to the Versailles Treaty, the insistence on imposing financial ruin on Germany would eventually lead to disaster. He was entirely correct.
“It took the horrors of another war for world leaders to find more durable solutions to our shared problems. The United Nations, the World Bank, and of course the institution I now lead, the IMF, are a proud part of this legacy.”
Some lessons are never learned.
The Pew Research Center polled Americans on their confidence in a number of world leaders to “do the right thing” in world affairs, and the results are quite interesting. According to Pew:
“Majorities in the U.S. view French President Emmanuel Macron, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and German Chancellor Angela Merkel with confidence, while about half (48%) are confident that Trump will do the right thing internationally.
“Still, Americans are more likely than others around the world to have confidence in Trump: Across 25 other surveyed nations, a median of just 27% have confidence in the U.S. president.
The poll also tests party affiliation and confidence over the course of the term of recent Presidents within the US. A very worthwhile read.
The South China Morning Post posted an article on the confrontation between a Chinese and US warship last September. We knew that the Chinese warship Luyang came within 45 yards of the USS Decatur in the South China Sea. Transcripts of the conversations between the two vessels, however, show that each side was absolutely committed to its course of action. The SCMP quotes Bill Hayton, an associate fellow with the Asia-Pacific Programme at Chatham House in London, on the gravity of the incident: “’To my knowledge, this is the first time we’ve had a direct threat to an American warship with that kind of language,’ he said, suggesting China’s response was also intended as a message to US allies with a presence in the waters such as Britain and Australia.” Another article in the SCMP then goes on to point out how other issues, such as the status of Taiwan, are deeply aggravating the US-China relationship. War is becoming more, not less, likely.
Daniel Boffey has written a very detailed article for The Guardian which summarizes all the challenges currently facing the European Union. The list is long: Brexit and the inability of Great Britain to resolve its internal debate over its exit from the Union; the growth of illiberal regimes in Hungary and Poland and their challenges to the values ofthe Union; the confrontation with Italy over its recent populist budget and its incompatibility with Union rules; the ongoing refugee influx and the strains on the economics and politics of the Union; and the recent political weakness of perhaps the most important member of the Union, Germany, and the planned departure of Chancellor Merkel. All these problems will weigh heavily on the scheduled elections next year for the European Parliament. On top of all these issues, Europe also has to contend with US President Trump’s willingness to question traditional rules concerning trade and his antipathy toward NATO, the pre-eminent security alliance for Europe.
The political crisis in Sri Lanka continues. The “former” Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, who was fired by President Maithripala Sirisena, has refused to leave the Prime Minister’s residence, claiming that his sacking was illegal. Mr. Wickremesinghe has demanded that Parliament be reconvened to decide the matter, but that demand has been rebuffed. According to the BBC:
“But Mr Sirisena has not yet allowed this to happen – and analysts say that’s because he knows no majority yet exists that would endorse Mr Rajapaksa as PM. The Sirisena-Rajapaksa alliance is however trying to turn Wickremesinghe loyalists over to their side with ministries and other concessions. Some in the ousted PM’s party allege bribes have been offered, though MPs from Mr Rajapaksa’s party deny this.
“However the wheels of government have not stopped turning amid this crisis – Mr Rajapaksa has begun work and sworn in a cabinet. He, not Mr Wickremesinghe, is listed as prime minister on the official government website.“
Not surprisingly, the Tamil-based parties in Sri Lanka have indicated that they will oppose Mr. Rajapaksa because of his role in opposing the Tamil separatist movement in the country several years ago. Similarly, many countries oppose Rajapaksa for exactly the same reasons–the repression against the Tamils was brutal.
The Washington Post is reporting that the deployment of up to 15,000 regular troops to the US-Mexico border will cost about $200 million. One should remember that US regular military are not allowed to enforce domestic law, so the most these troops can do is to provide logistical support to the Border Patrol. US President Trump continues to call the movement of migrants through Mexico an “invasion” but the Department of Defense analysis suggests that, of the 7,200 people who started the caravan, only 20%–about 1,200–will actually make it to the border (p. 10). Moreover, President Trump seemed to authorize the use of deadly force in the case of rock-throwing by the protesters: ““we will consider that a firearm. Because there’s not much difference.” In his White House speech on the subject, the back and forth between the President was described by the New Yorker:
“’Do you envision them firing upon any of these people?’ the reporter asked.
“’I hope not,’ Trump said, in a tone that was more a warning than a reassurance. ‘It’s the military—I hope—I hope there won’t be that. But I will tell you this. Anybody throwing stones, rocks—like they did to Mexico and the Mexican military, Mexican police, where they badly hurt police and soldiers of Mexico—we will consider that a firearm.’ Later, when asked what he meant about the rocks, he added, ‘If they want to throw rocks at our military, our military fights back. We’re going to consider—and I told them, consider it a rifle.’”
The image of troops using deadly force on unarmed asylum seekers would forever damage the reputation of the US as a human rights advocate.
North Korea has threatened to restart its nuclear program unless the US drops its economic sanctions. The threat comes as US Secretary of State Pompeo is scheduled to meet with North Korean officials to continue the negotiations on the nuclear program. Satellite images show that North Korea has continued its program of uranium mining and enrichment. The threat also comes as there are a number of signs that the US is becoming increasingly uncomfortable with the growing interactions between North and South Korea, spearheaded primarily by South Korean President Moon.
World Politics News 