Category: Uncategorized
Stevenson’s army, March 20
It’s time to remind of a significant cultural difference showing up now in the pandemic crisis: The American military — and much of the rest of US government — does a lot of after action reviews and calls them “lessons learned” studies. The British military, more accurately,calls them “lessons identified.”
Now we know they knew — but didn’t act. NYT reports 3 major studies of a possible pandemic were conducted by HHS over the past 4 years. They identified many of the same problems now occurring. But little or nothing was done to better prepare.
Politico offers some lessons from WWII mobilization.
Sen.McConnell is now in talks with others about his recovery bill. It has several tax law provisions, meaning that Constitutionally the bill; must originate in the House. SInce the Senate wants to act first and quickly, they’ll have to take some other House-passed measure and tack on the massive new bill. It then has to go back to the House for approval.
I’m beginning to feel that this pandemic will be the defining event of the 21st century, at least for a long time to come. It has world-reshaping and devastating impact. The differences between Before and After will be profound. So I urge your attention this new FA article and to this revised Risk Assessment by the Eurasia group.
And if you’re not worried enough, see what Ebola czar Ron Klain predicts.
WOTR has a balanced assessment of the new Cybersecurity Solarium Commission report.
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).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Yesterday’s cold, today’s warmth
Kosovo’s Ambassador to the United States, Vlora Citaku, has published this personal reflection on her country’s 12th birthday on her Facebook page (republished here with her concurrence):
It was a cold February and I had a secret.
I distinctly remember that cold February day. All of us remember it. It was frigid, but the heat in the atmosphere could already be felt for a few days. I was even more tense than the air itself, because I had a secret that I could not share with anyone. Not even my closest family members.
I was leading part of the processes that were related to the Declaration of Independence but no one was to know about these processes. The press conference for international media had to be prepared, but no one was to know what the conference was being called for. The security preparations had to be made, but not even the police were to know what they would be protecting, and when they would be protecting it.
I had a big secret in my heart, and sometimes I would chuckle to myself because of the news that warmed my heart. The “Newborn” monument was being prepared, but no one was to know when we would give birth to the newborn.
We had reason to be joyful, and even more reason to be prepared for the worst. Serbia was ruled by a nationalist with a nefarious agenda. There were warnings of possible violence and electricity shutdowns. The verbal aggression had reached its peak.
Nonetheless, it was clear that we would not prolong the process since every other avenue, from the negotiations in Vienna to the visits of the troika (Ishinger, Wisner, and Borcan Haracenko) had been exhausted. The enemies of independence had nowhere left to run. There will be independence – said the wise [former Finnish] President Ahtisaari – but it will be supervised until it is proven that minorities and the whole society will be better off and have more power because of the creation of the state, not less.
As an MP, I knew that I would be one of the elected representatives of the people (not the provisional self-governance institutions) who would declare independence. We would complete the statehood of our nation. The Declaration of Independence had to be written in secret, with calligraphy that was noticeably rushed at the end, because the entire population of Kosovo was in a rush. We could not withstand another minute of
delay for that which was pursued for an entire century.
Since the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire, since the time of Isa Boletini, since the time of my ancestor Shote Galica, since the time of Shaban Polluza, since the time of the partizans who fought Nazism but were betrayed by the Communist Party. Since the time of the establishment of the University of Prishtina, since the time of dissidents, incarcerations, and false hopes. Since my time as a member of the “generation of the
republic” who were left without schools, poisoned, and ignored by Europe.
We could not withstand another minuted, since the time of our armed resistance, the time of the soldiers whom I followed step by step as a translator for the largest international media, the time when we faced genocide against civilians perpetrated by the century-old occupier.
It was cold on that February day, colder than ever. But I had a secret in my heart that warmed my soul.
To be completely frank, I cried just as much as I laughed on that day. Precisely because of the life that we lived, the sacrifice of my mother and father, the sacrifice of my friends. The sacrifice of the elders and that of the most vulnerable.
These are the feelings that I remember today, 12 years later. Though climate change has not doubt made February warmer and snowless, my feelings resurface just the same when I remember how we became a country and how steep a price we paid for our right to exist as such. A century of pain.
However, as the saying goes – no pain, no gain.
And gain we did, much more than many other oppressed peoples. We won our Declaration of Independence, and the declaration was recognized by the world’s biggest democracies.
It was recognized with a new map in an elementary school by Sarkozy of France, the France of the revolution that brought about human rights as a fundamental concept. It was recognized by the Italy of humanist renaissance that placed the human at the center of the universe. It was recognized by Germany, the global example of rebirth after the catastrophe of the Second World War. It was recognized by the United Kingdom. And it
was recognized by the United States of America, to whom we will always be indebted.
A few years ago, an American diplomat confessed to me that it was not only Hashim Thaci who had to be convinced to delay the declaration of independence by a few months, from the end of 2007 to 2008. His resistance was great, but it was matched by that of President Bush who told his diplomats “I have promised independence to a people, and independence I will deliver”.
Twelve years later I reckon, many things could have been done better. The expectations of people that we would instantly become Switzerland, and everything would improve, that we would have jobs and wealth, were broken by the burdens of transition.
However, the same burdens broke many peoples across all of Eastern Europe after the fall of communism. Unfortunately, not rarely, and even criminally, not everyone had the same opportunities for growth in our new country. The solidarity, love, and boundless happiness we had for each other did not last forever.
Nevertheless, love must not be replaced by hatred. Independence is final, and will never be called into question. I am saddened to hear when some still doubt this. When some deny it. When they disrespect our flag. But today, I will not write for them.
It was cold on February 17th, 2008. But it was also the warmest day in a century.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Kosovo age 12
VoA’s Milan Nesic asked some questions on the 12th anniversary of Kosovo independence. I replied:
Q: Is Kosovo on a steady path of becoming a fully functional independent state?
A: No state’s path is steady, but Kosovo has just recently formed a democratically mandated government on the basis of free and fair election results. The media is mostly free. The Constitutional Court has demonstrated its independence repeatedly. It has a lively civil society and strong opposition. The economy has grown well, especially considering the slow growth in the EU. I don’t know many countries that have done a lot better in their first 12 years.
Q: What are the main obstacles?
A: Kosovo faces active efforts to undermine its institutions and constitution by its largest and most powerful neighbor, Serbia. Serbia’s anti-recognition campaign and its efforts to maintain political control over the Serbs who live in Kosovo are serious obstacles.
Kosovo suffers from the perception of high levels of corruption, which is a problem throughout the Balkans. Government procurement and nepotism seem to be the main problems. I expect the new government to crack down as best it can, if only to eliminate privileges that its competition established during its years in power.
Q: Is this the year in which Kosovo will become a member of the UN, Interpol, and UNESCO, or that process is still under great deal of uncertainties?
A: Still highly uncertain I would say, due to Serbia’s and Russia’s opposition. Interpol and UNESCO can be done in an hour if Serbia agrees. I think it should. The UN is a tougher goal, because quite apart from Belgrade, Moscow will try to extract a high price from the Americans, which Washington won’t want to pay.
Q: Are Kosovo and Serbia any closer to concluding an agreement by Kurti’s appointment as the prime minister?
A: Prime Minister Kurti has made it clear he will insist on reciprocity in relations with Serbia. I don’t think Belgrade is ready for that, even if I think Kurti is right to insist on it. I don’t expect any big move before the Serbian parliamentary election in April.
Q: Will Thaci be left out as a participant in the future negotiations?
A: He is trying hard to remain in the game by playing up the air transport agreement Special Envoy Grenell dreamed up, but the Constitutional Court has determined that negotiations with Belgrade are the responsibility of the Government, not the Parliament or the Presidency. Thaci is in his last year as President, with a government in power that includes his most vigorous opponents. He is not in a strong position.
PS: I should add another comment since the news this morning includes President Thaci signing transportation agreements with Serbia about which the Kosovo Prime Minister and Speaker of Parliament have declared their ignorance. This strikes me as extra-constitutional behavior that reflects poorly on both the Americans involved and the President.
This interview has also been published in Serbian, or whatever you want to call the region’s main Slavic language.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Kinship and insurgency
Christopher Merriman, a second year student at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, writes:
At a February 12, 2020 talk hosted by the SAIS African Studies department, Assistant Professor of Political Science at George Washington University Janet Lewis proposed a theory that networks of ethnic kinship in Uganda help rebel groups expand from upstart organizations into viable groups.
Lewis’ research looks at 16 incipient rebel groups that have operated in Uganda since 1986. Her research question asks, “What factors enabled four of these groups to become ‘viable’ while the other 12 failed?” Lewis defines a rebel group as “viable” if it reaches a “minimal threshold of threatening the authority of the central government.” This threshold includes being based in the target country for more than 3 months and having at least 100 troops.
Lewis’ study found that the four rebel groups that became viable operated in ethnically homogeneous areas. Meanwhile, all of the 12 groups that failed to become viable operated in ethnically heterogeneous areas. Ethnic homogeneity is a necessary but not sufficient condition for a rebel group to become viable. Not all groups from homogeneous areas became viable but viable groups all came from homogeneous regions.
Lewis grounds her argument in the precondition that incipient rebel groups are vulnerable to civilians telling the government of their existence. Rebel groups depend on civilians to keep their secrets. They are more likely to keep quiet if they have a favorable impression of the rebel group or think that the group will likely become “viable.”
According to Lewis, kinship networks in ethnically homogeneous regions facilitate the spread of positive information about the rebel groups. Members of ethnically-based kinship networks in homogeneous societies are much more likely to pass along information than groups of different ethnicities living in heterogeneous societies. Lewis conducted a study of two villages in Uganda that found that news traveled eight times more widely in a homogeneous village than in a heterogeneous one. These kinship networks will not necessarily spread “good news” about the rebel groups. However, kinship networks are necessary in order to spread favorable views of the rebel groups that prevent civilians from reporting the rebel group to the government. Kinship networks represent a necessary but not sufficient condition for a rebel group to become viable.
Lewis also found that the grievances of rebel groups are sometimes fueled by government responses to initial violence. Local grievances are often cited as a major reason for the formation of rebel groups or insurgencies and for their subsequent success. However, Lewis finds that rebel groups sometimes initiate violence, and only then gain grievances against the government due to government reprisals. She cited this as a reason for studying all rebel groups early on in their formation, not just those who become viable to the point that they become well-known.
Lewis does not consider group ideology a major factor in her analysis. In my view, this as a shortcoming of her model. For example, she compared two groups (one that became viable and one that did not) and argued that the main difference between the two was operating in a homogeneous/heterogeneous area. However, one group was fighting to return deposed president Milton Obote to power. Surely, this affected how the local people viewed this rebel group.
There are currently no rebel groups operating in Uganda. Lewis attributed this largely to the reign of president Yoweri Museveni, who himself started as a rebel. According to Lewis, Museveni understands the importance of controlling the flow of information. As a result, he has installed a “deeply penetrative civilian intelligence network.” Every village in Uganda has a security representative. As a result, no one bothers trying to start a rebel group anymore.
Museveni has been able to maintain security in Uganda by controlling access to information to the point that he can prevent incipient rebel groups from forming in the first place. Lewis, however, noted the negative side of this penetration. Uganda is a very repressive country with few civil liberties or viable opposition parties.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, February 8
-SAIS grad John Gans laments the “Trumpification” of the NSC staff.
– Former DHS head Jeh Johnson laments the breakdown between branches over the war power.
– Politico sees hope in Pompeo’s deputy.
-Academic notes armed groups are now hiring DC lobbyists.
– Just in case, Lawfare explains the laws about quarantines.
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. If you want to get it directly, 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 27
The big Washington news today is the NYT report that John Bolton’s forthcoming memoir confirms that President Trump specifically linked Ukraine aid to investigations of the Bidens and Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Analyzing a leak is like figuring out a murder mystery. First ask cui bono — who benefits? The answer: Bolton himself, since his book was due to be published March 17; also the House Managers of the impeachment trial, though they presumably did not have access to the manuscript; and the administration officials who believe that the president should be removed from office [people like Anonymous, who has always been vaguely cited as a “senior official”]. The Times story identifies who has copies of the manuscript:
drafts of a manuscript he has circulated in recent weeks to close associates. He also sent a draft to the White House for a standard review process for some current and former administration officials who write books.
Of course the publisher also has copies. While it could have been someone in the WH, my guess is it’s more likely to be a Bolton friend who supports impeachment. And he didn’t mind that it got reported.
Curiously, the Haberman-Schmidt story has no actual quotes from the manuscript, suggesting that they relied on descriptions or agreed not to use quotes. Another curiosity is that only a second NYT story, by impeachment reporter Noah Weiland, quantifies the sourcing, saying
Multiple people described Mr. Bolton’s account. This suggests that the original recipient of the leak got others to admit that they had seen it and confirmed the account. But what’s important is that many people knew and were willing to talk.
Despite the hype, in fact Bolton merely confirms — though at first hand — what his subordinates have already testified.
This morning, Peter Baker has an analysis.
In other news, SecState Pompeo is being properly chastised for mistreating an NPR reporter — and for poor management of State.
NYT has background on the development of the administration’s Arab-Israeli “peace plan,” which will be discussed with leading Israeli politicians this week.
Fred Kaplan reports on Congress’ truncated effort to understand presidential controls over nuclear weapons.
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. If you want to get it directly, 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
