Month: January 2025
Democracy doesn’t favor a serious peace
The headlines today say Hamas and Israel have reached a Gaza ceasefire deal that will
- allow exchange of hostages/prisoners,
- get Israeli troops to withdraw, and
- infuse humanitarian assistance.
All that is good.
What it is
But it is still only a ceasefire, not even a formal end to hostilities never mind a peace settlement. The ceasefire is to last seven weeks, during which negotiations on future arrangements for Gaza are to continue. As Tony Blinken put it yesterday:
The ceasefire deal itself requires the Israeli forces to pull back and then, assuming you get to a permanent ceasefire, to pull out entirely. But that’s what’s so critical about this post-conflict plan, the need to come to an agreement on its arrangements, because there has to be something in place that gives Israelis the confidence that they can pull out permanently and not have a repeat of the last, really, decade.
That is a good reminder. A ceasefire won’t last if there is no mutually enticing way out of the conflict. What might that be?
The rub
Therein lies the rub. The obvious way out would be a demilitarized Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. It could be run by a successor to the hapless Palestinian Authority. The current Israeli government is dead set against that. Even if Prime Minister Netanyahu could accept it, which is doubtful, his coalition partners would not. A new Israeli government will be needed for any post-war settlement that appeals to most Palestinians.
But this government has been successful in doing what Israelis wanted in Gaza and Lebanon. It has diminished Hamas and all but disemboweled Hizbollah. It has also weakened Iran. Netanyahu would likely win a new election, but have no clear path to a parliamentary majority. Nor would anyone else. The pattern of indecisive Israeli elections would continue. There is no sign of a majority that favors a Palestinian state. Democracy does not favor a serious peace settlement.
Trump’s challenge
This is a big problem for the newly elected Trump Administration. It has assembled a mostly pro-Israel diplomatic team. It is difficult to picture Ambassador Huckabee bludgeoning the Israelis into accepting a Palestinian state. Trump’s threat that “all hell will break lose” absent an agreement was intended to threaten Hamas, not Israel.
Trump could turn the table and speak out for a Palestinian state. He did it at least once in his first term. But then he deferred to the Israelis:
If the Israelis and the Palestinians want one state, that’s OK with me. If they want two-state, that’s OK with me. I’m happy if they’re happy.
That is not resounding support for a Palestinian state.
The Saudi factor
It will be up to Riyadh to make it happen. Saudi Arabia wants normalization with Israel as well as a defense and nuclear agreements with the United States. It would be willing to help finance Gaza reconstruction. But it has to get a “concrete, irrevocable steps in a three to five year time horizon” to a Palestinian state in the bargain.
Israel wants normalization with the Saudis as well. Can fragmented Israeli democracy, American pro-Israel diplomats, and a Saudi autocrat combine to produce a Palestinian state? Anything is possible.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Things in the Balkans can get worse
My post yesterday on Biden’s less than sterling foreign policy legacy disappointed my Balkan fans. They thought his weak performance in their region merited attention. So here is a moment of attention. Let’s start with Trump’s first term, 2017-21.
Trump disappointed
In 2020, then President Trump signed with Kosovo Prime Minister Hoti and Serbian President Vucic separate agreements on “economic normalization.” The US Administration advertised these agreements as great achievements. They provided for highway and rail connections, financing for small and medium enterprises, entry of Kosovo into what was then labeled a “mini-Schengen” zone that included Serbia, Albania and Macedonia, mutual recognition of diplomas, prohibition of “untrusted” (read: Chinese) 5G vendors, as well as a number of other provisions that have little or nothing to do with economic normalization between Belgrade and Pristina. The other economic provisions were even more minimal, except for a promise to Belgrade of more US investment.
These agreements mostly went unimplemented. Israel recognized Kosovo and Pristina located its new embassy to Israel in Jerusalem. Serbia got lots of new US investment. The most important provision, Serbia’s suspension of its anti-recognition campaign, never happened so far as I can tell.
Everyone had high expectations for Biden
People in the region, especially in Bosnia and Kosovo, had high expectations for the Biden Administration in 2020. Senator Biden had been a vigorous advocate of US interventions in the Balkans. Secretary of State Blinken knew the region well. Ambassador in Belgrade Chris Hill had been deeply involved at Dayton and thereafter at Rambouillet and as ambassador in Macedonia. Derek Chollet, Counselor at State, was likewise knowledgeable.
To my surprise, they decided to turn American policy in a decidedly pro-Belgrade direction. They also decided to back Albanian Prime Minister Rama to the hilt. I knew that Biden had favored Belgrade getting candidacy for the European Union, without having met the requirements. I had opposed him on this issue while testifying in the 2000s. But I did not understand this reflected a generalized lean towards Serbia. For much of the Biden Administration, Gab Escobar, former DCM in Belgrade, led on the Balkans at State. He made creation of the Association of Serb Majority Municipalities his exclusive priority. That meant giving Belgrade what it wanted most while giving Pristina nothing. That was never going to work, and it didn’t.
But Biden’s people kept on leaning towards Belgrade. When Serbia kidnapped two Kosovo police from Kosovo territory, they said nothing meaningful. When Vucic sent rioters to Kosovo to attack NATO peacekeepers, Washington said little. When Serbia organized and equipped a terrorist attack in Kosovo, they did nothing. In Bosnia, the Biden people prioritized getting rid of a Bosniak nationalist politician. They left the much-sanctioned Serb and the equally odious Croat for another time.
What to expect now
I don’t expect better of the second Trump Administration. Jared Kushner, Trump’s Saudi-funded son-in-law, has been prospecting for investment projects in both Serbia and Albania. So far as I am aware, he hasn’t even visited Bosnia or Kosovo. You can expect Trump to do nothing that will endanger Kushner’s projects or his Saudi money. That means a continued tilt towards Belgrade and away from Pristina, though not away from Tirana. Albania and Serbia agree on many things, including the need for their presidents to stay in power without serious opposition. The Americans have been supportive under Biden. That will continue under Trump.
People in the Balkans will be watching Marco Rubio’s confirmation hearing today for any questions involving the Balkans. That could be a hint of where things are going. But I wouldn’t bet on any Balkan issues getting raised, unless someone prompts one of the Senators to do it.
Mico Vlahovic quotes outgoing Assistant Secretary James O’Brien as saying:
We do not want to it to seem that one [US political] party or the other is taking responsibility, because in America both parties believe that a strong relationship is important – both for our country and for Serbia.
That implies continuity in the appeasement of Belgrade.
It could be worse than that, if Washington returns to wanting to partition Kosovo on ethnic lines. But neither appeasement nor partition will bring peace and stability. The route to that is strengthened sovereignty for all the region’s countries. In these waning days, the Biden Administration is pushing “strategic dialogues” with both Belgrade and Pristina. That’s not the worst idea I’ve heard, but it all depends on the agendas.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
A stronger American still fumbles
President Biden made a farewell appearance at the State Department yesterday. As a former Foreign Service officer, I’m of course delighted that he did this. It is especially important and timely because the Department now faces Donald Trump’s threat of loyalty tests and mass firings.
Biden’s understandably directed his remarks at justifying what his Administration has done on foreign policy. So how did he really do?
The bar was low
Certainly Biden can justifiably claim to have strengthened America’s alliances. The bar was low. Both in Europe and Asia the first Trump Administration had raised doubts. Allies could not depend on Washington’s commitment to fulfill its mutual defense obligations. Biden’s claim that compared to four years ago America is stronger because of renewed and expanded alliances is true. He is also correct in claiming he has not gone to war to make it happen.
The extraordinary strength of the American economy is an important dimension of this strength. Voters decided the election in part on the issue of inflation. But the Fed has largely tamed that and growth has been strong throughout. Manufacturing is booming, including vital semi-conductor production. Investment in non-carbon energy sources has soared. The defense industrial based is expanding.
Biden is also correct in asserting that America’s antagonists are worse off. Russia has failed to take Ukraine because of the US effort to gather support for Kyiv. Iran and its allies in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria are weaker. Only the Houthis in Yemen are arguably stronger than four years ago.
China is facing serious domestic economic and demographic challenges. But I don’t know why Biden claims it will never surpass the US. On a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis, it already has, though obviously per capita GDP in China remains much lower.
Some claims gloss over big problems
Biden is rightly proud that there is no longer war in Afghanistan, but he glosses over the chaotic withdrawal. He also doesn’t mention the failure of the Taliban to keep its commitments.
He vaunts progress on climate change, but without acknowledging that the goal of keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees centigrade will not be met.
Biden talks about infrastructure in Africa. But not about its turn away from democracy, civil wars in Sudan and Ethiopia, and the unresolved conflict in Libya.
He urges that Iran never be allowed to “fire” a nuclear weapon. That is a significant retreat from the position that Iran should never be allowed to have one.
Biden mentions the impending Hamas/Israel ceasefire. But he says nothing about Israel’s criminal conduct of the war in Gaza. Nor does he blame Israel’s right-wing government for the long delay in reaching a deal.
Biden’s legacy
At the end, Biden seeks to bequeath three priorities to Trump: artificial intelligence, climate change, and democracy. He no doubt knows that Trump isn’t going to take the advice on climate or democracy. He might on artificial intelligence, as his Silicon Valley tycoons will want him to.
Sad to say, Biden’s legacy will lie in other areas. Fearful of nuclear conflict with Russia, he failed to give Ukraine all the support it needs to defeat Russia. He was reluctant to rein in Israel for more than a year of the Gaza war. He failed to stop or reverse the Iranian and North Korean nuclear programs. America is stronger than it was four years ago, but it has not always used that strength to good advantage.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Defending against Trump’s worst moves
I’ve already said what could go wrong in 2025. I’m not inclined to change any of that. If anything, the past two weeks has confirmed much of what I said on January 3. Trump has doubled down on his stupid proposals for Greenland, Panama (where China does not operate the Canal), and Canada. That is smokescreen. He is preparing to meet Presidents Putin and Xi. Those meetings have often led to unwarranted concessions on Trump’s part. Despite rumors of Trump’s dissatisfaction with Musk and MAGA’s attacks on him, Elon remains strong. He has also moved rightwards, to open racist and sexist tropes as well as support for fascists in Europe.
We are now a mere week from Inauguration Day. The issue now is how to defend against Trump’s worst moves.
Defeat these nominees
Presidents have more leeway on foreign than most areas of domestic policy. Unless it involves foreign aid, the President can do just about anything he wants abroad. This applies in particular to the US military and national security issues in general. It is crucial that the Secretary of Defense be someone trustworthy, reliable, and honest. Trump’s nominee, Pete Hegseth, is none of those things. Republicans willing to think about the risks should also be willing to vote against him.
The same applies to Tulsi Gabbard, the nominee for Director of National Intelligence. While that job is not the most important in the intel community, she is a disaster waiting to happen. She has been a shill for Syrian President Assad and Russian President Putin. As a candidate for an intel position, she would not get even a low-level a security clearance. She certainly shouldn’t get a top level one for the government’s main coordinator of 17 intel agencies.
One domestic policy issue on which a President can have his way is prosecutions. The nominee for FBI Director, Kash Patel, has spend the last four years listing Trump opponents he wants prosecuted. He has also fantasized about Trump’s revenge in, of all things, a children’s book. He should be blocked from confirmation by any Republican Senator who believes in the rule of law.
Other Trump nominees are dangerous. Pam Bondi as Attorney General and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Health and Human Services are both incompetent and deluded. But both jobs are pretty well insulated by law and regulation from the worst of what they want to do. They will try to change both the laws and the regulations. It will be up to Congress and the courts to restrain their worst instincts.
Hope Rubio and Waltz prevail
I don’t like any of Trump’s nominees, but some are better than those above. Mike Waltz as National Security Advisor and Marco Rubio as Secretary of State are within the spectrum of respectable. Both have been strong supporters of Israel in Gaza and Lebanon. Both have said they want to end the Ukraine war soon. Those wouldn’t be my positions, but they are not outlandish.
The problem is that these more respectable and knowledgeable names are not alone. Trump has also named Ric Grenell to handle Ukraine. Grenell is a failed Trump-appointed ambassador in Germany, special envoy for the Balkans, and Acting Director of National Intelligence. Trump has nominated Mike Huckabee as ambassador to Israel and Steve Witkoff as special envoy for the Middle East. Huckabee is an evangelical Christian and supporter of Netanyahu’s Greater Israel ambitions. Witkoff’s views on Israel don’t seem to be know. He is a New York lawyer and real estate tycoon.
I suppose in other circumstances this variety of nominees would garner praise. But there is a real risk that Waltz and Rubio are fig leaves intended to hide the junk. Grenell tried to partition Kosovo during the first Trump Administration. He will no doubt try that with Ukraine as well, if he gets a chance. None of the nominees seem prepared to rein in Israel. But Huckabee and Witkoff would be more likely than Rubio and Waltz to give Netanyahu a blank check. The portfolios of Rubio and Waltz will include relations with the Arab Gulf.
The problem from hell
Trump’s worst instincts have manifested on immigration. He has promised mass deportation. There can be no doubt that his nominees want to do it. Stephen Miller as White House deputy chief of policy and Tom Homan as border czar as have impeccable anti-immigration credentials. No one would accuse them of insincerity on the issue. But Homan has been trying to lower expectations. This is an area where law and regulation do constrain the new administration.
In the meanwhile, an intramural verbal spat has erupted between longtime MAGAtes like Steve Bannon and newcomers, especially Elon Musk. Musk and other tech giants want to keep or even increase H1B visas they use to import cheap foreign labor. Trump does likewise for his hotels and resorts. Musk and company will win this one, but the result will be an even more draconian crackdown on asylum-seekers. The MAGAtes regard them as “illegal” immigrants, though entering the US to seek asylum is legal.
The irony is that the US needs immigrants. Not only is the current labor market tight. We are not reproducing enough to grow the population at the rate needed to fund Social Security and other programs. Colleges are closing and we soon won’t have enough graduates. So while Republicans quarrel over H1Bs, the funding and personnel shortfalls get worse.
Immigration is the problem from hell because there is no political formula for doing what is needed. We need reform that will provide the person power while cracking down on real illegality.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
What could go wrong in 2025
The next year promises to be a challenging one, both at home and abroad. I’ll leave the prognosticating inside the US to others. Abroad I expect the new Trump Administration to disappoint in many ways.
Ukraine
Trumpians have already proposed to Russian President Putin an end to the Ukraine war along current confrontation lines. Ukraine would stay outside NATO for 20 years. The Europeans would monitor the ceasefire. But Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov has labeled this generous armistice offer a non-starter. The Russians want all of Ukraine, not a piece of it. They want President Zelensky out and their own puppet in. And they want a permanent bar on NATO membership for Ukraine.
It was of course a mistake for Trump to float a peace proposal even before taking power. That is by definition a moment of weakness. But Trump has never shown strength in dealing with Putin. His failure to support the Ukrainians will allow Russia to continue to gain territory. Unless Moscow suffers an economic or political collapse, the war will continue with Ukraine disadvantaged. Biden neglected to give Ukraine everything it wanted. Trump will refuse to give it everything it needs.
Middle East
That will have repercussions in other areas. Russia will retain its bases in Syria. It will use them to protect the Alawite-plurality west from alleged Damascus abuses. That will de facto partition Syria, just as Russian policy has de facto partitioned Ukraine. Trump will hesitate to lift sanctions on Syria, limiting the peace dividend to Syrians. He will withdraw the American troops, weakening the Kurds. More extreme armed groups in Syria will strengthen. Pro-democracy forces will weaken.
Trump will support the expanded Israeli role in the region. This will include security control not only over the Gaza and the West Bank, but also Lebanon south of the Litani River, the Golan Heights, Jordan, and Sinai. Israel will involve the US in an attack on Iranian nuclear sites that will succeed in setting back the program. But it will also give Tehran reason to redouble its nuclear efforts.
The Houthis will continue their attacks on Israel and shipping in the Red Sea. Intensified US and Israeli bombardment will fail to dislodge them from Sanaa.
Balkans
Russia’s success in Ukraine and Syria as well as Israel’s in neighboring countries will encourage irredentist ambitions in the Balkans. Serbia will continue to look for a pretext to move into northern Kosovo, claiming Serbs there are mistreated. If Belgrade invades, NATO troops would fail to repel the Serbian army. Albania would then propose a referendum on union with Kosovo. The net result would be ethnic cleansing of Serbs from Kosovo south of the Ibar and Albanians from southern Serbia. Republika Srpska would secede from Bosnia and Herzegovina, precipitating ethnic cleansing and split of the state into three parts.
China and Taiwan
Under the influence of Elon Musk, Trump will allow Bytedance to continue to operate TikTok in the US.
But he will go through with heightened tariffs on imports from China, which will retaliate with tariffs on US goods. The resulting trade war will send the world economy into a tailspin.
Unwilling to fulfill American alliance commitments, Trump will encourage South Korea and Taiwan to get their own nuclear weapons. That will cause Beijing and Pyongyang to accelerate their own nuclear buildup, worsening the security situation in the Pacific.
What I missed
Trump will ignore the several wars in Africa. He will end US efforts to deal with climate change. He will continue to blabber about taking over Canada, Greenland, and the Panama Canal but those ambitions are smokescreens. Trump’s real ambition is to make everything about him. He has no fear of failure because he is confident he can spin whatever happens as success. That is what he is really good at. At least half of America believes it.
RSS - Posts
