Month: April 2020
Stevenson’s army, April 26
– George Will worries that courts are limiting Congress’ power of the purse. This week an appeals court hears a case, and the issue may turn on “standing” to sue.
-Ed Kilgore says there’s a constitutional way for Republicans to steal the presidential election this year.
– Are troop deployment numbers a Constitutional question?
– Lawfare history lesson: when FDR seized Montgomery Ward.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The politics of faith
Ambassador Miodrag Vlahovic* writes:
The new Law on Religious and Freedoms of Opinion was adopted by the Montenegrin Parliament in December 2019, after almost five years of continuous talks and consultation between Government of Montenegro (GoM) and all religious communities in our country. Unfortunately, the Serbian Orthodox Church (Metropolitan of Cetinje) repeatedly refused to take part in this process, claiming that Montenegro and its legal institutions have no right to legislate on religion.
The Venice Commission of the Council of Europe, which is responsible for reviewing the constitutional legislation of member states, thoroughly analyzed the draft Law, and confirmed that the provisions fully correspond and comply with the highest European criteria and standards, in addition to suggesting some amendments. Two of the Commission’s members dissented – the representative of Bosnia, from Banja Luka, abstained, and the representative of Serbia voted against.
The Government and Parliament of Montenegro adopted all the non-binding expert suggestions, with one exception – obligatory religious education in schools, inappropriate for our country’s multicultural and multi religious traditions. The goal was to replace the previous out-dated and inappropriate Tito-era regulations, in order to provide for equal legal status for all religious communities and for their members and followers (Orthodox Christian, Muslim, Catholic, Jewish and others), as well as for non-religious people.
In response, the Serbian Orthodox Church, both in Montenegro as well as its leadership and clergy in Serbia, has started a destructive political campaign, fully backed by the most radical national-chauvinist political parties, media and “intellectual” circles in both countries. That campaign has all the characteristics and narrative that dominated political and public life in ex-Yugoslavia in the early 1990’s and which promoted, provoked and, afterwards, tried to justify the tragic Yugoslav wars and to minimize or deny the crimes and atrocities committed.
The core of the dispute with Serbian church is related to three articles of the Law, which stipulate that all the property which was for centuries Montenegrin state property – and especially prior to 1918, when Montenegro was brutally, illegally and unconstitutionally annexed by Serbia – shall be re-registered as state property of Montenegro. Full legal procedure and protection are provided for, including the possibility to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
No other religious community in Montenegro had any substantial objection or opposition to the Law; they fully support equal and balanced treatment for all.
The Law also requires mandatory registration of religious communities with the Montenegrin authorities, a formality that the Serbian church repeatedly and vehemently rejects, claiming that the Serbian church in Montenegro cannot be subjected to Montenegrin law. The Serbian church is duly registered in all other countries, including Serbia itself, their numerous European dioceses, and those in the US, as well as in Argentina and in Australia, without any objection. In addition, the Serbian church does not want to pay taxes for its diversified and growing business activities in Montenegro.
For almost two months prior to coronavirus shutdown, the Serbian church organized so-called religious processions, with participation of clergy from other countries.
Montenegro remains fully committed, as a member of NATO and as an aspirant for EU membership, to continuing its democratic and overall development, based on its historic traditions and values. Our positive and successful policies in recent history, including the preparation and organization of the peaceful and democratic referendum on independence in May 2006, were based on our functioning multi-ethnic and multi-religious governments. This was true throughout the Yugoslav wars.
These are the values and principles we shall defend, maintain and further promote. We are absolutely committed and ready to resolve any issue related to the implementation of the new Law on Religious Freedoms though negotiations and with mutual respect and correctness, fully protecting and securing the secular nature of Montenegrin state structures and on the basis of our multicultural, multiethnic and multi-religious society.
Just before the global breakout of the virus, the GoM and the Metropolitan of Cetinje agreed to start negotiations concerning the new law. The position of the Church is that three articles related to property issues should be abolished. The position of GoM is that only the implementation of the Law should be discussed. That deadlock was temporarily put aside. Post-virus Montenegro will have to return to these issues.
*Montenegrin ambassador to the Holy See and a former foreign minister of Montenegro, but the views and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the official Montenegrin positions.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
National disgrace
The American response to the Covid-19 is a well-documented national disgrace. Warned early, President Trump and his Administration minimized the risks, delayed acting, and failed to mount the effort to produce protective equipment and testing required to get the country safely back to work. Encouraged by the President, states that have never taken sufficient social distancing measures are now “opening up,” which will guarantee new infections and delay further a return to normality. In addition, the President has been encouraging people to try unproven and dangerous remedies, including internal use of intense light and disinfectant.
Incompetence at this level is hard to come by, but the Administration is not so dumb when it comes to something it cares about. Republicans have quietly ensured that the legislation intended to help the country meet the Covid-19 economic challenge includes massive tax breaks for the very rich, even as they worry loudly about how $600 per week in unemployment payments might discourage the poor from working. It will take months to discover all the gimmicks they’ve written into the tax code.
Meanwhile, the rest of the world is coping fairly well. Even Italy and Spain, which had big early outbreaks, are seeing their curves flatten and turn downwards. Some countries like Greece, Turkey, and Sweden are seeing a resurgence, but most seem to have things under reasonably good control. In much of the Middle East and Africa, we’ll likely never know the number of cases and deaths because of lack of ability to trace and count them. What we’ll see is an uptick in mortality due to unknown causes.
Even in the US, there is reason to believe that we are undercounting. The total will likely fall in the 70-100,000 range, a death count that should make Americans ashamed. The information, the science, and the know-how were all available in January, February, and March, when the President dithered and tried to minimize the epidemic. The result is a shocking rise in the death toll to over 2000 per day:
The economic toll is likely to be just as devastating. Conference Board scenarios include losses of between 3.6 and 7.4% for the year:
That would make the downturn sharper, though perhaps shorter, than 2008. Even so, the economy would not be back to its third quarter 2019 level before the end of this year.
The political implications are not good for Donald Trump. He has been weakening in key battleground states. The states that followed the President’s push for reopening will suffer second waves of infection, possibly just before the US election. We can hope a recovery will be in progress by November, but the economic losses will still be all too evident. The losses of life will also still be hurting: more than half a million people will by the time of the election likely have a family member who has died of Covid-19.
Donald Trump has made himself the personification of government reaction to the epidemic, by appearing almost every day on TV to misinform the public. Apparently convinced that his mendacious performance was a mistake, he is now abandoning the habit. But he should still be held accountable for the damage and disgrace he has brought on the country. It’s not WHO, it’s not the Chinese, it’s not the Democrats: Donald Trump and no one else is to blame for the failure of the US to confront Covid-19 with the many tools at its disposal. This disaster is his, and his alone.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The Arab world is vulnerable
The Arab world is facing a global coronavirus recession and the associated oil demand shock. On April 22, the Arab Center Washington DC hosted a panel discussion on “The Oil Market and the Economic Impact of COVID-19 in the Arab World.” The discussion featured three speakers:
Garbis Iradian: Chief Economist for Middle East and North Africa, Institute of International Finance
Bessma Momani: Interim Assistant Vice-President of International Relations and Professor of Political Science, University of Waterloo
Khalil E. Jahshan: Executive Director, Arab Center Washington DC, moderated
The oil market and Arab states
Iradian stated that Russia and Saudi Arabia have reached an agreement to cut crude oil production by 9.7 million barrels, but this agreement will not be enacted until May. West Texas Intermediate has crashed into negative territory. More than sufficient oil supply and limited storage capacity is causing oil companies to give out oil for free. Iradian expected oil prices for the second quarter of this year to bottom around $30. The prices for the second half of this year will depend on recovery of global economy, especially from the COVID-19 pandemic. But prices will remain low in the long-term.
Iradian mentioned that Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Kuwait could cope with low oil prices for at least 2-3 years because their ratio of public debt to GDP is modest. These countries have large financial buffers, including official reserves and sovereign wealth funds that can finance their current deficits.
Algeria, Oman, Bahrain, and Iraq, however, are encountering greater risks. Oman’s and Bahrain’s ratio of public debt to their GDP is high. Neither has sufficient official reserves and sovereign wealth funds, so they are cutting spending and diversifying their economies. Low oil prices will create more incentives for some oil exporters to reform. Both Algeria and Iraq have provided stimulus packages to lend to SMEs at concessional terms.
Oil importers, such as Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, Jordan, Lebanon, and Sudan could benefit a little from low oil prices. The economic contraction, however, will have a negative impact on them due to the decrease in tourism, remittances from the GCC, and investment.
A grim outlook
Momani is pessimistic about the current global liquidity crisis. The Middle East depends on multilateral organizations and official development assistance from the West. The West, however, doesn’t have the incentive to give financial resources to the Middle East. Although the Arab states have reserves, they will slowly dry up because the global economy will not recover in the short-term.
Momani believes that this is a semi-permanent situation that will induce restructuring in every sector. The decline in oil prices is problematic to many Arab states as they are dependent on oil exports. In Iraq, the cost production of crude oil is $5/barrel, and in Saudi Arabia the cost production is $10-15/ barrel. If low oil prices persist, it will lead to revenue shortfalls. Some Gulf states intend to diversify their economies, but tourism, airlines, and big sports events are all at a standstill.
Momani listed several more economic challenges that the Gulf faces:
- Most states without enormous reserves have low tax bases.
- The lack of social safety net means public health services are inequitably distributed between the rich and the masses.
- Guest workers in the Gulf face both unemployment and discrimination.
- The intergenerational family structure prevents Middle Eastern families from combating COVID-19 effectively.
- Universities in the Gulf, most of which are subsidized by Gulf states, are facing difficulties.
- The UAE, which depends on port infrastructure, will come to a standstill as the movement of goods and services between China and the Middle East halts.
- Oil exporters depend on US dollars but cannot print them, they are hostage to the US Federal Reserve and the Trump administration.
- The crisis could induce the collapse of small entrepreneurial sectors.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
CCP’s challenges in COVID-19
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is using the COVID-19 pandemic as an opportunity to expand its influence around the world. On April 17, Hudson Institute hosted a panel discussion on “Meeting the Challenge of the Chinese Communist Party During and After COVID-19.” The discussion featured four speakers:
Eric Brown: Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute
Patrick Cronin: Asia-Pacific Security Chair and Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute
John Lee: Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute
Lewis Libby: Senior Vice President, Hudson Institute, moderated
Current Context
Lee said that the CCP is promoting its decisive and effective response in contrast to America’s chaotic efforts. The masks, ventilators, and doctors that China has sent around the world are meant to show that China is saving the world, while democracy in the US is floundering. He believes that China will return to a powerful position because of its strong national capabilities.
One of the challenges that China is encountering, however, is the lockdown in neighboring states, which prevents them from absorbing China’s excess supplies. In the long term, China needs continued access to external markets, capital, and innovation. Lee points out that Europe is considering toughening its industrial polices against China.
Brown indicated that the US thought cooperation with China throughout the 1990s would let the CCP relinquish some control. The CCP, however, was not prepared for further liberalization. After the 2008 financial crisis, the party re-asserted more control over economic, political, and ideological discussions. President Xi attempted to turn China against the US, causing deterioration in US-China relations and leading to limited market access.
Adding that the pandemic could trigger a change in CCP tactics because the criticism of the one-party system has deepened, Brown noted that people have been thinking about a fundamental change in the CCP regime. The regime, hence, could redouble its police state buildup and become more aggressive.
Is China winning?
Cronin believes that the pandemic crisis should neither lead us to count America out, nor assume China’s peaceful rise, for three reasons:
- US retrenchment from the Pacific is not irreparable. It will, however, accelerate the disentanglement of US supply chains and high-tech innovation sources. Meanwhile, China is not filling the gap due to its internal troubles and its poor track record of trust and transparency.
- The CCP is adaptable and agile, characteristics the US has underestimated. The Covid-19 crisis, nevertheless, could be a Chernobyl moment for Xi’s leadership.
- The US and its allies are in a competition with China. Their strategies can include both preventing the rise of the hegemon and finding cooperation based on reciprocity in contrast to China’s narratives.
What can the US do?
Lee and Brown both agreed that the US can either restrict China’s access to the international market or block its transactions in US dollars. The US also needs to coordinate with Europe. Additionally, American universities should restrict Chinese students’ participation in joint projects with strategic implications. Brown added that the pandemic forces US political leaders to face the choice between national security and international financial markets. The best arrangement should cover both national security concerns and economic concerns.
Here’s the video for this panel discussion:
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, April 25
– Here in the United States the picture is historically grim.
– But don’t forget the millions abroad who depend on remittances.
-It doesn’t help when cronyism matters so much.
-GOP operatives say go after China.
-Meanwhile, CNAS has an excellent analysis of comparative US & Chinese economic tools and vulnerabilities. I’ve never seen anything as clear and helpful as the charts on pp 20-21 and 33-34.
Take care; it’s not just the Social Security crowd in danger.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
RSS - Posts
