October 26, 2006

"Welcome to the party, pal!"

A quick cycle through the headlines of the past two days provides an update on our NATO allies:

Continue reading ""Welcome to the party, pal!""

Written by Chester at 10:47 AM | Link | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Print Article

October 3, 2006

In Which the European Defense Agency Shows It Has Learned Nothing in the Last Five Years

Political discourse about warfare is all too frequently shot through with utopian impulses. This is because warfare involves both the vision of an "end-state" that one's forces work toward, and millions of decisions at all levels that are easily second guessed as time passes.

An article in the London Telegraph reports that the new European Defense Agency has released a paper envisioning the next 20 years of conflict.

The paper, An Initial Long-Term Vision for European Defence Capability and Capacity Needs, paints a Europe in which plunging fertility rates leave the military struggling to recruit young men and women of fighting age, at a time when national budgets will be under unprecedented strain to pay for greying populations.

At the same time, increasingly cautious voters and politicians may be unwilling to contemplate casualties, or "potentially controversial interventions abroad – in particular interventions in regions from where large numbers of immigrants have come."

Voters will also be insistent on having backing from the United Nations for operations, and on crafting large coalitions of EU member states with a heavy involvement of civilian agencies, and not just fighting units, the paper states. They will also want military operations to be environmentally friendly, where possible.

It seems the study does not attempt to really envision future conflicts so much as it attempts to proscribe a series of measures that must be in place in order for the EU to engage in war. In other words, rather than focusing on enemies, it seems to focus on its own requirements. There is a term for this: self-induced friction. The EU Defense Agency is only 2 years old and already is hamstringing itself.

All of this is similar to the Powell Doctrine in the United States, another set of internally imposed rules meant to make domestic constituents happy and to limit the kinds and types of wars that will have to be fought.

A hard-thinking, proactive enemy -- and there are few other kinds -- no doubt laughs in glee at these efforts, as it merely gives him all the more opportunities to avoid battle with the West and pursue his own agenda with impunity; or, once engaged in battle, to prevail simply by using methods and techniques that the West is institutionally (and thereby mentally) unprepared to counter.

The entire report may be downloaded here.

Written by Chester at 2:33 PM | Link | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Print Article

August 31, 2006

Energy Followup Post

So there was quite a bit of great discussion in the two threads on Energy Independence in the last couple of weeks. (See here and here.) Two more thoughts. First, frequent commenter "Papa Ray" sent me this link: China nomads on energy's cutting edge, which is quite an interesting story. Frequent readers may know that I have a burning desire to go to Mongolia one day (at least I think I've mentioned that before). I've often wondered if the nomads there would do well with some sort of rugged electrical production system. Maybe something like this: SkyBuilt Power.

And also, a Loyal Reader sent this comment:

Let's get a little creative in our quest to reduce our consumption of
imported petroleum. Use tactics that cost little or nothing.

If every job that could be accomplished by telecommuting were to be
made so,
for 1-2-3-4-5-6-7 days a week, we'd reduce our consumption
dramatically,
overnight. A distributed workforce is a good thing, in wartime and
peacetime.

For those who can't telecommute, how about changing the workweek? Four
10-hour days instead of five 8-hour days would reduce consumption by up
to
15%.

Road tolls can be increased without taxing gas, increasing car-pooling.

Right turn-on-red, smart traffic signals, enforcement of pedestrian
scofflaws and a myriad other options, in combination could reduce
consumption immediately, by more than 25%, with very small impact on
the
population.

No Manhattan Project (i.e., huge waste of taxpayers' funds) necessary.
Change the rules of the game.

Any thoughts, readers?

Written by Chester at 8:26 PM | Link | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Print Article

June 30, 2006

Of Note

Some things to note for weekend thinking:

1. The Guardian reports that:

The intelligence agencies have warned ministers that Iran could launch terrorist attacks against British targets if the row over its controversial nuclear programme escalates, it was disclosed today.

The parliamentary intelligence and security committee - which oversees the work of the agencies - said the possibility of Iranian state-sponsored terrorism was now considered one of the main threats facing the UK.

"There is increasing international tension over Iran's nuclear programme and backing of groups such as Lebanese Hezbollah," the committee said in its annual report.

"There is a possibility of an increased threat to UK interests from Iranian state-sponsored terrorism should the diplomatic situation deteriorate."

That's something to keep in mind. The same article notes:
The report also revealed that MI5, the security service, was expanding so rapidly in order to meet the threat of terrorism in the UK that it had outgrown its London headquarters building.

Thames House at Westminster is expected to have exhausted its capacity by October. The committee said another building had been found to provide additional accommodation - but its identity was censored out on security grounds.

MI5 staff numbers are now expected to grow by over 50% over the next three years, with over half its resources now devoted to counter-terrorism.

Wow. That is amazing. MI-5 is the agency that will be infiltrating or surveiling any homegrown terror cells or organizations. Good to see that they are taking things seriously across the pond.

2. That article was via RegimeChangeIran, which is asking for your help. Gary Metz, aka Dr. Zin, is requesting donations for "several campaigns to take this work to the next level." Look for more info there soon. He's also asking for volunteers. Sounds like he has something up his sleeve . . . RegimeChangeIran is a great site, so consider supporting him.

3. Finally, while we're in an altruistic mood, Robert Mayer of Publiuspundit sends this:

I have decided to try the path of Michael Totten sans the Middle East. I will be writing pieces from places like Honduras (one of the darkest corners in Latin America), Catalunya (which voted for large autonomy from Spain), The Netherlands (where the government has collapsed over the Ayaan Hirsi Ali affair), Switzerland (an overlooked and extremely interesting country), and the Czech Republic (home of the original velvet revolution that people talk so much about). Most of my reporting will be from Latin America and eventually Eastern Europe, someday moving on to other regions.
His first post is here. Check it out and if you like it hit his tipjar.

Written by Chester at 11:03 PM | Link | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Print Article

October 25, 2005

"Market Autocracies"

A TCS article asks, Does Growth Lead to Liberalization? points to an article in the most recent Foreign Affairs [subscription only - or at the library like me] titled "Develoment and Democracy." Excerpt:

Threading this needle is difficult, but not, as it turns out, impossible. Gradually, through trial and error, oppressive regimes have discovered that they can suppress opposition activity without totally undermining economic growth by carefully rationing a particular subset of public goods -- goods that are critical to political coordination but less important for economic cooperation. By restricting these goods, autocrats have insulated themselves from the political liberalization that economic growth promotes.
The authors note the difference between "coordination goods" and "general public goods":
Eachof these cases has involved the restriction what might be called "coordination goods" -- that is, those public goods that critically affext the ability of th political opponents to coordinate but that have relatively little impact on eceonomic growth. Coordination goods are distinct from more general public goods -- public transportation, health care, primary education, and national defense -- which, when restricted, can have a substantial impact on both public opinion and economic growth.
The four types of coordination goods are:
1. Political rights, including free speech and the right to demonstrate peacefully.
2. General human rights, including legal protections and due process.
3. A diverse and unregulated press.
4. Broad access to higher eduction and graduate training.

The authors go on the mention several countries which have strengthened their autocratic regimes via economic growth. They even mention that in some cases, as incomces increase, political reform seems even less likely. The author of the TCS article calls them "market autocracies."

This all makes sense if one views it through the lens of how developed the economy is. Initially, the general public goods described above are absolutely essential to growth. In fact, they never cease being essential. This is true if one's economy consists of agriculture, mining, timber, all the way up through to manufacturing. But there, the importance of "coordination goods" increases dramatically if an economy is to make the leap from industrial workers to service workers.

In his 1991 book, The Work of Nations Robert Reich, in what probably landed him the job of Clinton's Secretary of Labor discusses three kinds of jobs in the American economy: Routine-production services: basically traditional industrial and factory workers, but data-processing workers too; in-person services: nurses, janitors, retail workers, the entire hospitality industry, secretaries, hairdressers, etc, and symbolic analysts: all the problem-solving, problem-identifying and strategic-brokering activities, such as scientists, doctors, financial experts, lawyers, software designers, engineers, screenwriters, etc.

I have trouble seeing a country developing its economy to the extent that it has a vast number of symbolic analysts without the "coordination goods" mentioned above. The creativity, questioning of assumptions, and robust communcation necessary to, for example, negotiate a complex transaction, write a sitcom, or design a computer game seem to go hand in hand with the kinds of coordination goods that market autocracies would restrict.

Perhaps there's just not enough data yet . . . it'll be a long, long time before China, for example, has more symbolic analysts and service workers than routine producers.

Another take would be this: American culture, shaped by its democratic political values, has resulted in a symbolic analyst culture that reflects those values and would not exist without them. But is it possible for symbolic analysts to thrive in cultures that place higher values on other merits? It is hard to imagine for us cantankerous Americans, but perhaps it is possible.

Time will tell.

Written by Chester at 12:10 AM | Link | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Print Article