Day: January 5, 2022
Siyasa Podcast: Episode 2: The Lebanese Crisis — with Randa Slim
Second episode of podcast Siyasa, which discusses Middle East policy and politics. The first episode, with Vali Nasr, is here.
Host Ibrahim Al-Assil discusses with Dr. Randa Slim different dimensions of the Lebanese crisis, the domestic conditions, and the regional dynamics.
You can also listen to the podcast on:
Spotify
Google Podcast
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Sanctions for destabilizing and corrupt activity
The US Treasury’s announcement today of sanctions on Milorad Dodik and Alternativna TV merits reprinting in full. I don’t expect this will have any immediate effect on Dodik or his TV station, both of which presumably anticipated it. Dodik probaby does most of his personal business in cash anyway. The TV station may have some trouble with international transfers. But more importantly this decision will have a PR and psychological effect. It is a clear and unequivocal signal that the United States wants Dodik gone and a warning to those politicians who support his destabilizing activities. The impact will be greater if European Union member states join in:
WASHINGTON — Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated Milorad Dodik (Dodik), who is a member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), as well as one entity under his control, Alternativna Televizija d.o.o. Banja Luka, in response to Dodik’s corrupt activities and continued threats to the stability and territorial integrity of BiH.
Today’s action, the first designations under E.O. 14033, builds on the Biden Administration’s commitment to promote accountability for those who, among other things, undermine the stability of the Western Balkans region through corruption and threats to long-standing peace agreements. Dodik has undermined BiH institutions by calling for the seizure of state competencies and setting in motion the creation of parallel institutions in BiH’s Republika Srpska (RS) entity. Furthermore, Dodik has used his official BiH position to accumulate personal wealth through graft, bribery, and other forms of corruption. His divisive ethno-nationalistic rhetoric reflects his efforts to advance these political goals and distract attention from his corrupt activities. Cumulatively, these actions threaten the stability, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of BiH and undermine the Dayton Peace Accords, thereby risking wider regional instability.
“Milorad Dodik’s destabilizing corrupt activities and attempts to dismantle the Dayton Peace Accords, motivated by his own self-interest, threaten the stability of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the entire region,” said Under Secretary of the Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Brian E. Nelson. “The United States will not hesitate to act against those who pursue corruption, destabilization, and division at the expense of their own people, as well as against those who enable and facilitate this behavior.”
DODIK’S DESTABILIZING AND CORRUPT ACTIVITIES
The Dayton Peace Accords (DPA), signed by the Presidents of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and Serbia in 1995, brought an end to ethnic conflict in BiH and established the present-day constitution of BiH. Treasury previously designated Dodik on January 17, 2017, pursuant to E.O. 13304, for having actively obstructed or posed a significant risk of actively obstructing the DPA. Today’s actions build on this legacy by targeting his ongoing destabilizing activity with respect to the DPA, as well as his abuse of his official position to engage in widespread corruption, which undermines state institutions in BiH.
Dodik has also openly called for, and has taken action toward, the unilateral transfer of state competencies from the BiH government to the Republika Srpska (RS), one of two entities that comprise BiH along with the Brcko District. Dodik has also publicly opposed the internationally appointed High Representative for BiH and the composition of the BiH Constitutional Court. Additionally, Dodik has publicly denigrated other ethnic and religious groups within BiH, further sowing division and political gridlock. Dodik, therefore, is being designated pursuant to E.O. 14033 for being responsible for or complicit in, or having directly or indirectly engaged in, a violation of, or an act that has obstructed or threatened the implementation of, the DPA.
Dodik is also being designated pursuant to E.O. 14033 for being responsible for or complicit in, or having directly or indirectly engaged in, corruption related to the Western Balkans. Specifically, he has established a patronage network in BiH from which he and his associates benefit. As one example of his corrupt actions, Dodik has provided government contracts and monopolies in the RS directly to close business associates. With his corrupt proceeds, Dodik has engaged in bribery and additional corrupt activities to further his personal interests at the expense of citizens in the RS.
DODIK’S PERSONAL MEDIA STATION
Alternativna Televizija d.o.o. Banja Luka (ATV), a media outlet based in Banja Luka, RS, is privately owned by a company closely linked to Dodik’s family. However, Dodik himself exerts personal control over ATV behind the scenes, such as by requiring personal approval on media stories related to politically sensitive topics. Dodik acquired ATV to deliberately and expressly further his own agenda, which includes his efforts to denigrate other political figures, burnish his public image, and advance his own personal and political goals.
Dodik has awarded ATV-related contracts directly to members of his family, which he has used as yet another avenue for corruption. He has funneled money directly from public companies to ATV for corrupt purposes. Dodik has substantially increased funding for ATV in recent years and engaged in malign social media influence campaigns through ATV to publish content that advances his political and personal goals.
ATV is being designated pursuant to E.O. 14033 for being owned or controlled by, or having acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, Dodik.
SANCTIONS IMPLICATIONS
As a result of today’s action, all property and interests in property of the individual and entity above that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons are blocked and must be reported to OFAC. In addition, any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, 50 percent or more by one or more blocked persons are also blocked. Unless authorized by a general or specific license issued by OFAC, or exempt, all transactions by U.S. persons or within (or transiting) the United States that involve any property or interests in property of designated or otherwise blocked persons are generally prohibited. The prohibitions include the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any blocked person, or the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.
For identifying information on the individual and entity designated today.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Voting rights can cure the fantasy
The prevailing wisdom these days is that America is polarized. Accordng to PBS, Democrats and Republicans are living in alternate realities. Both see the threat to democracy as real, but coming from two different directions. The implication: we need to come together and heal our deep divides before something even worse than the January 6 attack on the Capitol happens.
This is nonsense
We are not living in alternate realities. Some of us are living a fantasy. They think Biden stole the election, that COVID-19 is not a big problem, and that public health requirements infringe on their freedom. They deny that the January 6 riot was a riot, that Trump incited it, or that Trump supporters were violent.
None of this is true. The evidence is plain. No one has demonstrated election fraud capable of affecting the outcome of the 2020 election. COVID has killed more than a million Americans. Wearing a mask and social distancing are not the equivalent of the Nazi requirement that Jews wear a yellow star and live in ghettoes and concentration camps. January 6 was a violent insurrection Trump encouraged to block consitutionally-mandated certification of the election results. The courts have already convicted 75 of the miscreants and are prosecuting hundreds more.
The fantacists among us are lying, not putting forward an alternate hypothesis.
The “other side” is firmly based on reality. Biden was elected in accordance with the Constitution. Stemming the epidemic requires vaccination, masks, and social distancing. Trump’s supporters stormed the Capitol on January 6 and violently tried to block a constitutionally mandated procedure.
There is no doubt about these things. Fantasy is not an alternate reality.
The question is why?
Why would people choose a fantasy, one they know the facts do not support?
The main purpose is to consolidate identity. To be a Republican these days, you have to say you believe at least parts of the fantasy. That’s what holds the party together. It has no coherent governing proposals. It was not only unable to formulate an alternative to Obamacare but also abandoned fiscal conservatism during four years in the White House. Under Biden Republicans helped pass a giant infrastructure spending bill, but now oppose his social spending bill on fiscally conservative grounds.
Republicans now have an identity, one that its adherents can be relied upon to sustain, however flimsy its contact with reality. That identity is tightly entwined with white supremacy. The dog whistling about election fraud is all about tacitly claiming that black people can’t be trusted to count votes. The opposition to sensible public health measures originated when Americans thought the epidemic was mostly affecting black people and other minorities. The January 6 rioters were good people, as they were overwhelmingly white and Trump supporters.
Voting rights are the only cure
January 6 was a violent protest against a shift in demographic power. America is no longer as dominated as once it was by whites who alternate politely in power. It is doubtful whether any Republican can win a majority of the popular vote. Only one (George W) has done so, once, since 1992. Biden’s Electoral College margin was the same as Trump’s when he beat Hillary Clinton. But Biden ran 7 million votes ahead of Trump, even though Trump ran millions of votes ahead of his own popular vote count in 2016.
The January 6 rioters know this. Those who enouraged the riot also know that the Electoral College and the Senate favor less populous, more Republican states. And they know that state legistures, according to the Constitution, have the power to determine how Electoral Votes are cast, even if all have long since decided to do it in accordance with the popular vote. Republicans control more state legislatures, which are busy trying to restrict voting, get rid of non-partisan election officials, and open the possibility of determining themselves how the Electoral Votes will be case, no matter the popular vote outcome.
The only cure is national voting rights legislation, not “coming together.” If it forces Republicans to compete fairly in 2022 and 2024, they will see the need to drop the dog whistling and lying. They might even return to their former role as fiscal conservatives. Senate Majority Leader Schumer had better not be bluffing in promising limits on the anti-democratic filibuster, which has so far prevented passage, by January 17.
Remember January 6 for what it was: an attempted coup against a democratically elected President. Make sure it can’t happen again. Voting rights can cure fantasy.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Those who ask for more than individual rights deprive others
Here are some reasonable questions a reader posed yesterday:
One question I have for you though? In your opinion, what can and should be expected from the citizens to take to prevent a possible escalation of the situation?
And one more question? Sometime in 2006, a constitutional program for Bosnia and Herzegovina was proposed. It is the so-called “April package” of 2006 proposed by the Americans and the EU. [It] was reportedly not accepted because one or two votes were missing. No one knows reasons why. Some politicians today still talk about the rehabilitation of the April package. I’m interested in your opinion on that? I was very young then, and do not have a notion of what “April-package” is?
Citizens are the key
Citizens are the key to preventing escalation. Only if popular opinion in Republika Srpska turns against Dodik will he moderate. Ultimately how citizens vote in the next election will determine his fate and the fate of the much-needed constitutional reforms. The Americans and Europeans can help. They can hold Dodik accountable with sanctions and ensure transparency about his finances and his relationship with Moscow.
What reforms, should citizens support? My own preference is a Bosnia and Herzegovina that reduces its elaborate system of protection of (ethnic) group rights towards better protection of individual rights. Several European court decisions have pointed in this direction, which EU membership will require. Best to get it done sooner rather than later.
The current, ongoing negotiations about the country’s electoral law are not going to produce that kind of reform. To the contrary, the current ethnic group leaders will use these negotiations to consolidate their own hold on power and eliminate competition that could come from politicians whose appeal crosses ethnic divisions. EU and US leadership of the negotiations, which have marginalized the citizens, risks making the situation worse.
The April package failed because of narrow-minded politics
The April package was a complicated array of constitutional reforms negotiated in 2005/6 by all the main Bosnian political parties (caveat emptor: that was done with support from the US Institute of Peace under my supervision). Notably, it included an “EU clause” that ensured to the Sarajevo government the authority required to negotiate and implement the requirements of EU membership.
The package failed to gain a two-thirds majority in parliament by two votes, both of which belonged to members who broke party discipline to vote against. But that was not the real issue. A major political party that had been involved in every aspect of negotiating the April package voted against it. Its leader wanted to win a seat on the collective presidency and railed against the April package in ethnically explicit terms. He won his seat and the opportunity for serious constitutional reform evaporated.
What now?
The future direction is up to Bosnia’s citizens. If EU membership is the goal, the right approach is constitutional reform that protects individual rights. Even if some member states diverge from it, liberal democracy is a prerequisite for EU accession. Strengthening individual rights would ensure people of all ethnic groups an equal say in how power is exercised and limited . No individual should ask for more. Those who do, often in the name of group rights, are depriving others of their most fundamental liberties.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, January 5
– Cook Political Report says redistricting is a wash.
– Defense appropriations heading to higher figure.
– Austin & Blinken together testify on Afghanistan before SFRC next week, in closed session.
– DefenseOne criticizes US hypersonic missile program.
– Vox sees flaws in legal opinion on SEAL refusal to vaccinate.
Charlie also published this yesterday:
I’m always looking for good cases to illustrate the policy process. For diplomatic and military policies, the supply is vast. For foreign economic policy, however, I haven’t found many. Until this week, when I finally had a chance to read Edward S. Miller’s 2007 book for the Naval Institute Press, Bankrupting the Enemy: The U.S. Financial Siege of Japan before Pearl Harbor.
Miller also has a revealing summary of U.S. economic sanctions policies starting with World War I, showing how reluctant U.S. officials were to use sanctions for foreign policy purposes. The key law empowering the president for almost any economic sanctions, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act [IEEPA] of 1977, is actually based on a section of the 1917 Trading with the Enemy Act. That law resulted from a bureaucratic fight between the Commerce Department, which historically ran export controls, and Treasury, which claimed jurisdiction over financial transactions laws. Treasury won that fight, not least because the assertive secretary was also President Wilson’s son in law.
A similar bureaucratic struggle occurred in 1940-41 over Japan.Secretary of State Cordell Hull, the key interlocutor with the Japanese, resisted harsh sanctions because he considered them too provocative. Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau, however, favored pressure but had only an advisory role on sanctions. In key meetings with FDR in July, 1941, the president decided on freezing Japanese assets in the United States and restricting exports of various commodities but not a full embargo. Roosevelt and his cabinet officers even expected to sell oil to Japan, but only after some delay and on a case-by-case basis.
At the sub-cabinet level, however, Dean Acheson dominated the interagency committee that wrote the rules implementing FDR’s executive order and did so to prevent any oil shipments to Japan, a red line that many historians argue made war inevitable. Hull was upset to learn of the impact of the rules when he returned from medical leave, but was reluctant to force a change that might be viewed as favorable to the Japanese. FDR himself was preoccupied with his meeting with Churchill in August and the growing naval conflict with Germany and did not force a change back to his original policy.
Miller cites a 1976 paper by a researcher at the National Archives which has even more details of the hawkish cabal in the bureaucracy on the broad range of export restrictions on Japan, including redefining “aviation gas” so as to prevent any oil exports.
The key lesson for me is the power of the sub-cabinet bureaucracy to shape policy by implementation rules, regardless of presidential-level decisions. It happens all the time. The formal policy was to deter Japan from greater conquest by limited but significant export restrictions, not a full embargo. The actual policy Japan faced was an existential threat.
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
