Month: January 2023
Stevenson’s army, January 9
– The House votes today on a package of rules for the 118th Congress. Much of it is public, but Punchbowl News reports there is a secret 3 page addendum.
The rules package was at the center of McCarthy’s fight for the speakership. The 55-page document lays out the GOP priorities for the next two years and the procedures Republicans will use to run the chamber.
However, there’s also a secret three-page addendum that McCarthy and his allies hashed out during several days of grueling negotiations with the House Freedom Caucus. This pact includes the most controversial concessions McCarthy made in order to become speaker – three seats on the Rules Committee for conservatives, freezing spending at FY2022 levels, a debt-ceiling strategy, coveted committee assignments and more.
WSJ confirms the plan includes defense spending cuts.
A sobering piece in Foreign Affairs warns that the US faces “a period of protracted regime instability, marked by repeated constitutional crises, heightened political violence, and possibly, periods of authoritarian rule.”
Sweden says it can’t meet Turkish demands for NATO membership.
Politico says Wagner Group is active in Europe and Africa.
Military Times summarizes the year of US strikes in Somalia.
WaPo says social media helped bring out the violent mobs in Brasilia.
I don’t normally see the Washington Monthly, but it has released its latest edition,which looks to have some interesting reads.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, January 8
– Bob Gates & Condi Rice warn that time is not on Ukraine’s side
– Ross Douthat says the GOP now has a policy vision “that’s mostly performative gestures and fiscal apocalypticism”
– NYT correctly tracks GOP chaos to the tactics of Newt Gingrich.
– WaPo has video timeline of the attack inside the Capitol on Jan 6.
I missed yesterday’s. Here it is:
Another Army scholar calls civilian control of the military a “useful fiction” in the same publication.
US announced another $3 billion in arms aid to Ukraine.
Lawfare is now the site for all released January 6 committee materials.
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, with occasional videos of my choice. 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, January 6
– Former CJCS Dunford and Harvard prof Graham Allison stress need for nonpartisan military.
– RAND analyst says we need to revise our war games to get useful results.
-WaPo says new cyber strategy has real teeth.
– TNSR article shows how hard it is to change military doctrine. [because of bureaucratic politics]
– Hawley relents on DOD nominees after TikTok deal.
– Appropriators question USAF budget plans.
– Corporations gave to election deniers, despite promises.
– Newsweek spreads rumors about Putin illness.
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, with occasional videos of my choice. 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, January 5
– It can happen! Ohio and Pennsylvania have just elected speakers in their state legislatures with bipartisan candidates.-
– David Ignatius interviews Jake Sullivan.
– Analysts propose a “Better Biden Doctrine.“
– Politico’s NatSecDaily reports on efforts to make State Dept less risk averse:
THE RISKY BUSINESS OF U.S. DIPLOMACY:Many State Department employees are unsure how much risk they can take and whether they can fail without undermining their careers, according to recent survey results.
The findings were laid out in a Dec. 20 email to State Department staffers from BRIAN McKEON, who recently ended his tenure as deputy secretary of State for management and resources. The survey was conducted as part of Secretary of State ANTONY BLINKEN’s effort to modernize the department.
McKeon’s note, obtained by our own NAHAL TOOSI, framed the results this way: “Nearly 75 percent of respondents said they did not receive clear communication from their leadership on risk tolerance; over 50 percent said they rarely or never participated in formal risk assessment activities; and over one-third did not feel empowered or equipped to manage risk. Moreover, a significant number of respondents associated risk with threat and related concepts like risk aversion, fear of failure, career, and security.”
“The bottom line is clear,” McKeon wrote. “If we are to succeed in advancing U.S. priorities, the department’s perception of risk must evolve. We need to be risk aware, not risk averse. We must accept the possibility of failure when taking risks, and risks must be viewed as opportunities for mission success, not just as threats.”
McKeon hinted at upcoming initiatives to “foster a culture of ‘failing well.’” Already, he pointed out, the department is trying to make it easier to open diplomatic facilities, which is never simple given security concerns.
A State Department spokesperson, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss an internal matter, said in a statement that Blinken wants to “shift the culture of the department to lead in the face of, rather than avoid, risk.” The spokesperson added: “The department defines risk as anything that has the potential to negatively (threats) or positively (opportunities) impact the Department’s capability to achieve its objectives.”
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, with occasional videos of my choice. 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:
What difference does a Speaker make?
A few words about the debacle unfolding in the United States Congress. The (slight) Republican majority has failed to unite to elect a Speaker after six ballots. What difference does it make? What does it signify for the future?
The Speaker matters
The Speaker is number three in the presidential succession. If something were to happen to President Biden and Vice President Harris, the Speaker would become both head of state and head of government. This has never happened in US history, but it could. The notion that Kevin McCarthy or any of the other Republican candidates would take over despite the Republican loss in 2020 is daunting.
The Speaker also presides over the House of Representatives, setting its agenda and timetable. Arch Democrat Nancy Pelosi was Speaker in the years 2007 to 2011 and again from 2019 to 2023. I’m sure Republicans during the Trump presidency regarded the prospect of her succession with as much horror as Democrats do McCarthy’s during the next two years.
The insurgents matter too
It is significant that the insurgents preventing McCarthy’s election come from the extreme right wing of the Republican Party. The twenty who have refused to vote for him deny the validity of the 2020 election, oppose vaccinations and legal abortion, support discrimination against LGBTQ+ people, advocate for religion in public life, want radical cuts in government spending as well as more restrictions on voting, and will devote enormous resources to investigating Joe Biden and his son Hunter.
Whether or not McCarthy is elected Speaker, these people will control not only the process but the substance of the House agenda for at least two years. Rumors this afternoon are that negotiations between McCarthy and the insurgents are progressing. That can happen only if he conforms to their demands, as he already has on many important issues. And they will only vote for an alternative if he or she adopts their program.
The news is not all bad
This means the House will be in the hands of the extreme right for the duration of the 118th Congress. If they stick together, they will be able to pass legislation. But if it lacks bipartisan support it will die in the Democratic-controlled Senate. They will also be able to hold interminable hearings on inane subjects (Hunter Biden’s laptop!) and subpoena witnesses. But the real problems will start when the Treasury needs to raise the debt ceiling, an unnecessary requirement that needs a majority in both the House and the Senate. The current limit will be reached some time this year. Failure to raise the debt ceiling would risk a US government default.
Apart from that eventuality, we can anticipate that for the next two years the course of the economy and the war in Ukraine will be key issues. If inflation continues to subside and the Fed manages to avoid a hard landing, Biden will be in an excellent position to win a second term. If in addition the Ukrainians win their war against Russian aggression, Biden will have foreign policy bragging points as well. No amount of Republican investigating will come close to offsetting those wins.
No predictions
But we should all understand that there is no predicting the outcome of US elections. 2024 will be as unpredictable as 2016 and 2020. That’s a feature, not a glitch. But two years of extremist wackos running the House of Representatives are not going to help a Republican candidate beat an incumbent president with a good economy and a victory for democracy in Ukraine.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, January 4
– NYT says Ukraine is shooting down Russian drones with missiles that cost far more than their targets.
– WSJ says defense industry consolidation impedes increased production.
– Soldier cellphones make them targets.
– Franklin Foer says maybe we need the old folks in Congress.
– Military Times is happy with the number of veterans in the new Congress.
– WaPo column says cheating with AI-written essays can be curbed by requiring hand-written submissions. It also explains why handwritten notes make you smarter than typing them.
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, with occasional videos of my choice. 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
