Month: September 2023
Stevenson’s army, September 29
– The Senate went back to its old dress code. Good.
– House used its Holman rule to try to cut SecDef Austin’s pay to $1. Bad.
– DOD lists defense spending by state. It matters to Members.
– The Hill notes end of the trade consensus.
– Just Security has much harsher view of Menendez actions helping Egypt.
– WSJ says India’s spy agency does covert ops abroad.
– Former Marine doesn’t like GOP ideas about attacking Mexico.
– RAND scholar wants to avoid long Ukraine war.
– Steve Walt examines ethical issues in Ukraine war.
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:
Stiffening the approach to Serbia
Kosovo police and NATO forces in the Serb-majority north of the country over the weekend foiled an armed uprising. One Kosovo policeman and three terrorists were killed and others arrested. But most seem to have escaped. Serbia and its Srpska Lista political proxies in Kosovo have declared a day of mourning. That confirms their support for the insurrection. The little green men appear to have found safe haven inside Serbia.
Serbian President Vucic met subsequently with the Russian Ambassador. Vucic complained about “brutal ethnic cleansing” in Kosovo, for which there is no evidence. We have no confirmation that Vucic ordered the armed uprising. But one of his mainstays in northern Kosovo was involved. Such things don’t happen without Belgrade’s knowledge. Vucic could have stopped it in advance or denounced it after the fact. He did not do either.
What this incident tells us
This incident is confirmation that Vucic does not intend to normalize relations with Kosovo. The Belgrade/Pristina dialogue with that objective is a cover for his real goal. He wants separation of the four northern Serb-majority municipalities. He would prefer de jure partition and hopes that Russian success in annexing parts of Ukraine will validate that objective. But he would settle, for now, for de facto separate governance, in the form of an Association of Serb-majority Municipalities.
Pristina has demonstrated that its police can handle, with NATO backing, a heavily armed group of several dozen determined militants. But it is just as clear that Serbian armor could move into Kosovo with ease. It is less than 25 miles, maybe an hour’s tank drive, from the nearest Serbian border crossing to north Mitrovica. NATO has recently beefed up its forces in Kosovo. But it is not clear whether they are equipped or trained for anti-armor warfare.
American and European diplomats think Serbia will not attempt such a move because of the political consequences. But Vucic knows better. He is trying to convince the world that Serbs are being ethnically cleansed from Kosovo. That could validate a claim his tanks protect civilians. That is why he repeatedly claims, without evidence, that such ethnic cleansing is ongoing, as he did yesterday in a meeting with the Russian Ambassador.
The American and European response
The Western response has been weak so far. Brussels and Washington have appealed to “both sides” to prevent further violence and escalation. This implicitly equates the sterling performance of the Kosovo police with an illegal armed uprising that could have caused instability throughout the Balkans. Those responsible for Balkans policy in both capitals are unwilling to admit failure of their efforts to lure Serbia westward. Instead, they are urging a quick return to “the dialogue.”
An alternative approach would denounce Belgrade’s support for the armed uprising, labeling it a terrorist act and levying sanctions against Vucic and his defense and national security officials. NATO would prepare its forces in northern Kosovo for defense against an armored invasion. The West would praise the Kosovo police and urge a fair and speedy trial for the perpetrators in Kosovo courts. Ambassadors to Belgrade would be withdrawn for consultations.
A new policy is needed
They could be sent back quickly with a single message: the era of appeasement is over. If Belgrade wants EU membership, Serbia needs to quickly:
- arrest and turn over the terrorists to the Kosovo authorities.
- drop its insistence on separate governance of Serbs in Kosovo.
- align with Ukraine sanctions on Russia.
- support Kosovo membership in international organizations, including the United Nations.
If Belgrade refuses, the EU should announce it is freezing accession talks. The US should suspend military cooperation with Serbia, including cooperation with the Ohio National Guard.
Washington and Brussels should also prepare to spur Pristina to reach out to northern Serbs to find alternatives to Srpska Lista. In addition, Pristina should seek to ensure that there are no anti-Serb incidents throughout Kosovo, in order to invalidate Vucic’s claims of ethnic cleansing. Pristina should promptly investigate any incidents that do occur. The courts should promptly try perpetrators.
It is time to reconfigure Western policy on Serbia and Kosovo. Renewal of the current approach will bring new failures. A firmer approach with Belgrade is the necessary first step.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Cold comfort is better than none at all
“Above all,” he says (at 18:49), “Iran must face a credible nuclear threat.” This is Prime Minister Netanyahu implicitly acknowledging, whether intentionally or not, Israel’s own nuclear weapons and stating against whom they are targeted. At the same time, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is making it clear that he intends to match Iran’s nuclear capabilities:
Turkish President Erdogan has made a similar pledge.
This raises the disturbing question: are we at the brink of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East? I had a look at this question last spring with two Middle East Institute interns. Our conclusion then was that the situation needs monitoring. I can say a bit more now.
Can a Saudi nuclear capability be blocked?
While it is rarely mentioned in public, an amped-up Saudi non-proliferation commitment is likely a key part of the Biden Administration’s current negotiations with Riyadh for a bilateral security agreement. That wouldn’t be a popular proposition on its own in the U.S. Congress. But if it comes with a Saudi commitment not to develop sensitive nuclear technology (especially enrichment, reprocessing, and weaponization), it might be more attractive on both sides of the aisle. American security relations with both Japan and South Korea, on which the press reports the Administration is modeling a possible agreement with the Kingdom, include de facto commitments not to develop nuclear weapons. West Germany’s entry into NATO included such a commitment as well.
But the US/Saudi negotiations aim primarily at formal normalization of Saudi relations with Israel, for which in exchange the Saudis want concessions to the Palestinians. The Crown Prince is sounding soft on that score. He wants improvement in the life of the Palestinians. Netanyahu is not going to find it easy to get his ultra-nationalist coalition partners to offer even that. Nor is it clear he wants to. A substantial non-proliferation commitment from Saudi Arabia could however sweeten the deal from Netanyahu’s perspective. He won’t want some future, less friendly, Crown Prince to wield nukes.
The Saudis have indicated they intend to upgrade their non-proliferation safeguards agreement with the IAEA. That is a good step in the right direction, but it falls short of the strictest arrangement known as an Additional Protocol. That is where the U.S. should want the Kingdom to arrive.
What about Turkey?
Erdogan already has American nuclear weapons in Turkey. Were he to push for Turkey’s own nukes, those might be withdrawn, as they really don’t serve much military purpose. But Ankara is taking risks these days in many directions, exercising its right to a far more independent foreign policy than in the past:
- Participation with Iran and Russia in managing the conflict in Syria.
- Purchase of Russian air defenses, even if now mothballed due to the American reaction.
- Mediation of the grain deal between Russia and Ukraine.
- Opposition to Finland’s and (still) to Sweden’s membership in NATO.
- Support for Azerbaijan’s military operation to take back Nagorno-Karabakh.
It would not be surprising if Erdogan concluded that nuclear weapons would be an appropriate bulwark for this more independent course.
Could Egypt be far behind?
Likely yes, as things stand today. President Sisi has stated that he wants Egypt to be like Germany: a great power without nuclear weapons. Neither Egypt’s economy nor its army are currently in a position to resist American and Israeli pressure against Egypt acquiring nuclear weapons. But if Riyadh and Ankara were to get them, Cairo would want to follow suit. When would then be the question.
Iran sets the pace, but might stop short
Israel’s nuclear weapons, which have existed for more than 50 years, did not ignite an arms race. Iran’s nuclear capabilities, which have been advancing rapidly, could well do so. Israel kept its nuclear program behind a (sometimes thin) veil of secrecy. Iran is unable to hide its progress, as even hindered IAEA inspections provide a good deal of transparency. If Tehran decides to build a nuclear weapons, the world is going to know it, sooner rather than later. Ignoring that development would be difficult for both Saudi Arabia and Turkey. In the Middle East, Iran is the nuclear pace setter.
But Tehran might stop short of full weaponization. Its own national security is the reason. If Iran gets nuclear weapons, the slightest doubt in Israel about whether a missile is being prepared for launch with a nuclear warhead could lead to Armageddon. It would be far wiser for Tehran to make it clear that it has stopped short of weaponization. Being a few weeks from becoming a nuclear power would give Iran most of the benefits of becoming one without all of the risks.
That is cold comfort. But cold comfort is better than none at all.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, September 25
While the Senate decides how to handle almost any given measure by a Unanimous Consent agreement [UC], the House votes on special rules from the Rules Committee. To pass 4 appropriations bills in one package, Rules has reported this 63-page rule. But as Politico points out, Speaker McCarthy faces a huge dilemma. I don’t see how we can avoid at least a short shutdown.
One of the reasons for party polarization and leadership dominance of House and Senate is the competition for control. As this chart shows, party control in House, Senate, or White House has changed in at least one of the three every two years since 2013. In fact, the same is true since 2006. The fear of losing, or the prospect of gaining, the majority has led the congressional leadership to control floor action tightly, often blocking any amendments from the minority.
A new political science study says it’s impossible to pick which campaign ads work.
NYT says China is creating a very military Coast Guard.
Admit it, Trump is advocating violence.
I agree with Peggy Noonan on the Senate dress code.
—
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, September 23
– The indictment of Sen. Menendez [D=NJ] certainly makes him look sleazy.
– He is accused of taking bribes and then acting officially, including on matters of Egyptian arms sales.
As I read the indictment, however, several of his actions as SFRC chairman do not appear outrageous. Telling the Egyptians the number [but not the names] of American and Egyptian nationals working at the Cairo embassy doesn’t seem significant. Alerting Egyptians of his dropping a hold on an arms package isn’t inappropriate. Meeting with Egyptians and listening to their concerns is normal.
As required by Senate Democratic rules, he has stepped down from SFRC chairmanship. It’s unclear whether he will be succeeded by Sen. Cardin [D-MD] or Sen. Shaheen [D-NH]. CRS has more on the rules regarding indicted members.
In other news, NYT says US and Ukraine are arguing over military strategy.
But US and China are reopening lines of communication on economic matters.
And if you’ve just upgraded your Apple devices, check this out.
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, September 22
– To try to avoid a government shutdown, Sen. Schumer plans to take up the FAA re-authorization passed by the House as a vehicle for a CR to fund the government. Using a bill with an HR number avoids any blue slip problems because revenue measures must begin in the House and makes the question in the House whether to accept a Senate version.
– CRS has some good background pieces on how the USG functions in a lapse of appropriations. Some FAQs and some broader background.
– Academics at the old Monkey Cage site have launched a new site, Good Authority.
– Among their good first articles are: Sarah Binder on the Tuberville holds; Andrew Rudalevige on the Schedule F problems; and Michael Tesler on GOP isolationism.
– In 2016 candidate Donald Trump didn’t run a typical campaign, just media. LATimes notes this year his campaign has done the nitty gritty work to get delegates, and it’s working.
– This week I ran across an article from last March profiling Trump’s last, acting SecDef, Chris Miller. While it’s mildly sympathetic, I stand by my low opinion of his performance and his views.
I somehow missed yesterday’s edition:
– Unclear what happens next after confirming 3 Chiefs.
– Same with the budget, though House may use King of he Hill amendment process.
– GOP group opposes Ukraine aid. Here’s their letter.
– GOP also divided over expiring PEPFAR
– FT says India spy agency operates abroad
– WSJ says US wants Israel to support nuclear program for Saudi
– Atlantic has long article on Gen. Milley
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
