Month: May 2022
Stevenson’s army, May 10
– Politico says war has forced change in Biden trade policy.
– Atlantic article says Russia has failed to use air power in Ukraine.
– NYT says US is deeper into Ukraine war.
– China angry over changes in US website about Taiwan.
– Both US parties seen as extreme.
– Army analyst doubts US ability to fight war of attrition.
– Peter Beinart hits Biden on Iran deal.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I 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:
Stevenson’s army, May 9
– Signal has this summary of Putin’s Victory Day speech:
In the end, Russian President Vladimir Putin threw the experts for a loop again.
In his Victory Day speech in Moscow a few hours ago, he didn’t formally declare war on Ukraine, announce a general mobilization, or claim even a partial victory in the conflict. In fact, he didn’t utter the word “Ukraine” a single time. Rather, he framed the conflict as a justified Russian response not only to a threat posed by the “neo-Nazis” in Kyiv and their NATO backers but also to 30 years of broader mistreatment at the hands of a decadent and hostile West. In perhaps the only real clue about Moscow’s intentions, he called the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine “our land” but didn’t mention any other parts of the country.
In the end, this was a cautious speech, one meant to bolster Russian support for continued action in Ukraine, but without raising the stakes too high too soon for the Russian public. Of course, Putin still can declare a mobilization or a war anytime he likes.
– In the New Yorker, Jill Lepore hits originalism by noting other missing words.
– FP writer warns of India’s delusions.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I 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:
Stevenson’s army, May 7
– The best case I’ve seen for Commandant Berger’s radical restructuring of the US Marine Corps is this WOTR piece by a Chief Warrant Officer.
– Peter Baker has newer, more disheartening statistics on our hyperpartisanship: the number of Americans who don’t want their kids to marry outside their party has grown.
– In FT, Simon Schama summarizes Ukraine’s history.
– Taliban are reimposing the burqa.
– TPM has more from the Esper memoir.
– WSJ sees careful distinctions in US intelligence sharing with Ukraine.
– Study in FP shows where foreign aid goes.. According to our calculations, of the $51 billion in U.S. aid tracked by ForeignAssistance.gov in fiscal 2020, about 40 percent was spent by the U.S. government itself to buy goods and pay salaries, for example. Another 20 percent was administered by U.S.-based firms and nonprofits. A little more than 30 percent went to international organizations—the United Nations and other multilateral bodies—and international NGOs. Of the small remainder, foreign firms and nonprofits, mostly based in recipient countries, received just above 5 percent. That leaves partner country governments in the developing world the recipients of just 3.9 percent of U.S. aid spending. Take out Jordan, which receives a large part of U.S. bilateral development aid, and that drops to a mere 0.7 percent.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I 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:
Prospects for real peace in Syria: not good
The sixth pledging Conference for the Future of Syria and the Region met in Brussels yesterday and today. On the margins, Baytna, a Syrian organization committed to empowering civil society, hosted a discussion (Peace in Syria: possibility or fantasy?) assessing the prospects for a real, sustainable peace. Not good, in two words.
Justice and accountability
The UN Commission of Inquiry and its Independent, Impartial and Independent Mechanism (IMMM) as well as the use of universal jurisdiction to prosecute war criminals in Germany are important tools. But they have not produced substantial results. Only a few political prisoners have been freed, out of well over 100,000. So far the accused are a few small fry. There will be a great deal more to do once the opportunity arises.
A political transition is vital. Justice goes beyond accountability, especially for women. A broader framework of rule of law and security is needed.
Failure to hold people accountable in Syria has encouraged Russian abuses in Ukraine. Impunity for Bashar al Asad has taught others that they can escape accountability.
The economy
The situation today is disastrous. The overwhelming majority of Syrians are poor and in need of assistance. That is partly due to international sanctions. Once real peace arrives, a strong central authority will still be needed to manage the economy. When the time comes for lifting of sanctions, the international community needs a plan to do it expeditiously. [I missed some of the presentation on the economy, so apologies for that].
Rights and government
Syria needs radical political decentralization. The constitution should limit the powers of the presidency. Elected local authorities should control education and some taxation authority. The government needs to respect the social, cultural, and political rights of minorities. We can learn from the recent constitution in Tunisia, which instituted decentralization as a principle of the state. The existing provisions for decentralization in Syria are not adequate.
Social cohesion and peacebuilding
Local actors are key. They have a deep understanding of how things really work at the community level. We need to understand their political and social agendas and respond to their context and priorities. Funding should be flexible and accessible, aimed at strengthening civil society organizations that set their own priorities, regardless of who the local authorities are. We should not create or impose risks on Syrians trying to meet local community needs.
On the pathway to peace, an audience member suggested Syrian representation is an issue. It is not enough just to exclude those “who have blood on their hands.” Inclusiveness has hampered negotiations. The course of the war in Ukraine suggests helping Syrians to defend themselves might help. Only the Syrian people will be able to remove the regime and rebuild civil society. It’s a long road. We need to invest in people inside Syria who will make a difference.
As my Arabic is miserable, I missed most of the discussion. But the bottom line was clear enough: prospects for real peace in Syria in the short run are not good.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, May 6
-Scotusblog has the best analysis I’ve seen about the Supreme Court leak: look at the bylines and what happened before.
– Votes on a non-binding motion to instruct have no legal force or effect, but the supermajority vote on Iran puts a new deal in jeopardy.
– NYT show what the war looks like to Russians.
– Nicaragua wants to connect with US.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I 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:
Stevenson’s army, May 5
Court decisions on campaign laws opened a big loophole that led to an amazing development in the Ohio Republican Senate primary. As CRS noted,
Unlimited Contributions to Independent-Expenditure-Only Political Action
Committees (Super PACs)
On March 26, 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held in
SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission24 that contributions to PACs that make only independent expenditures—but not contributions—could not be constitutionally limited. As a result, these entities, commonly called super PACs, may accept previously prohibited amounts and sources of funds, including large corporate, union, or individual contributions used to advocate for election or defeat of federal candidates. Existing reporting requirements for PACs apply to super PACs, meaning that contributions and expenditures must be disclosed to the FEC.
Peter Thiel formed such a super PAC, gave it $15 million, which went for campaign activities for J.D. Vance, who had few ads or activities funded by his own campaign. Since the law forbids “coordination,” the super PAC puts its key information including polls and suggested messages in an obscure place online. It even posted its oppo research findings on Vance, so he could know what attacks might be made.
In other news: NYT says US shared intelligence with Ukraine that helped them target Russian generals.
Reuters says US has offered security assurances to Sweden if it seeks to enter NATO.
Defense News says some key congressional figures are now open to F16 sales to Turkey.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I 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
