Tag: 2020 Election
Stevenson’s army, September 10
The former head of DHS intelligence says he was pressured to withhold reports on Russia and white supremacy to avoid embarrassing the president. Here’s the formal complaint.
Peter Feaver of Duke warns the US military to retreat from the election battles. Here’s what the new Woodward book says about Trump and national security officials.
NYT on US troop cuts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
What’s going on in the eastern Mediterranean?
Vox writer gives US sanctions policy a failing grade.
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:
Peace Picks | September 8 – 11, 2020
- Election 2020: Challenges & Opportunities for U.S. Policy in the Middle East | September 8, 2020 | 11:00 AM – 12:00 PM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
The Middle East is going through one of the most unstable periods in its recent history. Each country in the region faces its own unique challenges, but there are also cross-cutting issues ranging from proxy conflict and terrorism to climate change and water security that permeates throughout the region. The Middle East Institute (MEI) is pleased to launch Election 2020: Challenges and Opportunities for US Policy in the Middle East. The briefs in this book offer policy insights from MEI scholars on key issues in the Middle East and serve as a contribution to the broader discussion about the challenges and opportunities for US policy in the region.
What are the key issues the next administration must prioritize? In what ways can the US pursue and achieve its policy goals in the Middle East through diplomacy, conflict resolution, and military engagement? How can a concerted regional strategy address region-wide issues and their global impacts?
Speakers:
Amb. Gerald Feierstein (Moderator): Senior Vice President, Middle East Institute
Paul Salem: President, Middle East Institute
Randa Slim: Senior Fellow & Director, Conflict Resolution & Track II Dialogues Program, Middle East Institute
Gen. Joseph Votel: Distinguished Senior Fellow on National Security, Middle East Institute - U.S. Policy in the Middle East: A Conversation With Assistant Secretary of State David Schenker | September 9, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:15 AM EDT | Brookings Institution | Register Here
The United States has been very active diplomatically in the Middle East as of late, despite public focus elsewhere, on issues ranging from the crisis in Lebanon, to maritime tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean, to U.A.E.-Israeli normalization of relations.
On September 9, the Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings will host a discussion with David Schenker, assistant secretary of Near Eastern affairs at the U.S. Department of State to examine the current state of U.S policy and diplomacy in the region and its future trajectory. Assistant Secretary Schenker will be returning from a mission to the region, which includes stops in Kuwait, Qatar, and Lebanon and will offer thoughts on his recent meetings. Natan Sachs, director of the Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings, will moderate the conversation.
Speakers:
Suzanne Maloney (Introduction): Vice President & Director, Foreign Policy, Brookings
David Schenker: Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, U.S. Department of State
Natan Sachs: Director, Center for Middle East Policy, Brookings - Rising Political Polarization in Southeast Asia | September 9, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:30 AM CEST | Carnegie Endowment | Register Here
Rising levels of political polarization are hurting democracy in many Southeast Asian countries. Drawing on a recent Carnegie Endowment report on the topic, this event will examine three critical cases—Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand—to gain a regional understanding of why polarization is increasing, its political effects, and how political and civic actors can take steps to address it.
This event is being held in collaboration with the Institute of Asian Studies.
Speakers:
Thomas Carothers: Senior Vice President for Studies, Carnegie Endowment
Janjira Sombatpoonsiri: Associate Fellow, German Institute for Global & Area Studies
Naruemon Thabchumpon: Deputy Director for Research Affairs, Institute of Asian Studies, Chulalongkorn University
Eve Warburton: Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Asia Research Institute, National Research University of Singapore
Bridget Welsh: Honorary Research Associate, Asia Research Institute, University of Nottingham Malaysia - A New Direction for U.S. Policy on North Korea | September 9, 2020 | 5:00 – 6:30 PM EDT | U.S. Institute of Peace | Register Here
Since the February 2019 Hanoi Summit failed to reach an agreement, the United States and North Korea have been mired in a diplomatic stalemate with minimal negotiations. At the same time, Pyongyang has continued to advance its nuclear and ballistic missile programs while reversing many of the inter-Korean tension reduction measures achieved in 2018. The next U.S. administration, whether Republican or Democratic, will have the opportunity to break this deadlock with a North Korean regime that is increasingly confident in its nuclear capabilities but still insecure about its longevity.
The next U.S. administration will encounter a North Korean regime that has promised to demonstrate a “new strategic weapon” in its nuclear weapons program and vowed to withstand the international sanctions campaign. The policy approach taken by the next administration will help determine whether Pyongyang will cling to its nuclear weapons or if the two countries will set a new course for building peace and reducing tensions on the Korean Peninsula.
Speakers:
Frank Aum (Moderator): Senior Expert, North Korea, U.S. Institute of Peace
Christine Ahn: Founder & Executive Director, Women Cross DMZ; Co-Founder, Korea Peace Network
Suzanne Dimaggio: Chair, Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft; Senior Fellow, Carnegie Endowment
Markus Garlauskas: Nonresident Senior Fellow, Atlantic Council; Former National Intelligence Officer for North Korea, Office of the Director for National Intelligence
Van Jackson: Senior Lecturer in International Relations, Victoria University of Wellington; Former Senior Defense Strategist, U.S. Department of Defense
Ankit Panda: Stanton Senior Fellow, Nuclear Policy Program, Carnegie Endowment - Ecological Threats to Peace | September 10, 2020 | 1:00 – 2:00 PM EDT | U.S. Institute of Peace | Register Here
Global warming, extreme weather events, and rising sea levels are already adversely affecting food and water security throughout the world—leaving the least resilient countries with an increased risk of political instability, social fragmentation, and economic collapse. A more accurate measurement of levels of exposure to tomorrow’s ecological threats is key to helping these countries maintain peace today and can enable others to better prepare and adapt for the future.
The new Ecological Threat Register (ETR), produced by the Institute for Economics and Peace, synthesizes and visualizes data on environmental indicators to estimate which countries, regions, and areas are most vulnerable to environment-induced conflict. In particular, the ETR underscores that 141 countries are vulnerable to ecological threats, and that approximately 1.2 billion people could be displaced globally by ecological disasters in the next 30 years.
Speakers:
Tyler Beckelman (Moderator): Director, International Partnerships, U.S. Institute of Peace
Sagal Abshir: Nonresident Fellow, Center on International Cooperation, New York University
Michael Collins: Executive Director, Institute for Economics & Peace
Dr. Joseph Hewitt: Vice President for Policy, Learning, & Strategy, U.S. Institute of Peace - Jihadism at a Crossroads | September 11, 2020 | 9:00 – 10:00 PM EDT | Brookings Institution | Register Here
Almost 20 years after 9/11, jihadi groups are no longer in the spotlight. However, ISIS, al-Qaida, and al-Shabab remain active, and new groups have emerged. The movement as a whole is evolving, as is the threat it poses.
On September 11, the Center for Middle East Policy will host a virtual panel event to discuss the current status of jihadi groups. The panel will feature Thomas Hegghammer, senior research fellow at the Norwegian Defense Research Establishment and author of the new book, “The Caravan: Abdallah Azzam and the Rise of Global Jihad.”Other panelists will include Tricia Bacon, assistant professor at American University, and Bruce Riedel, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Brookings Senior Fellow Daniel Byman will moderate the discussion.
Speakers:
Daniel L Byman: Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy, Brookings
Tricia Bacon: Professional Lecturer, School of Public Affairs, American University
Thomas Hegghammer: Senior Research Fellow, Norwegian Defence Research Establishment
Bruce Riedel: Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy, Brookings
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, September 7
What better proof that the US is far from a socialist country than the fact that we celebrate labor day, honoring workers and unions, in September, while much of the rest of the world does it on May 1st. Since I like to remind you of the availability of CRS reports on many topics, see this on the evolution of federal holidays.
[There’s other good stuff there, such as these short reports on export control reforms and China and coup-related restrictions on US foreign aid.]
Rosa Brooks reports on the election wargames she helped run that warn of enormous public unrest.
WaPo notes that the new 117th Congress will have freshman members from the political extremes of both parties.
Legal analyst disagrees with DOD IG report saying border deployments did not violate Posse comitatus act.
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:
Stevenson’s army, September 4
Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg cites 4 unnamed sources to report disparaging remarks Pres. Trump made about US military personnel, including calling war dead “losers.”
AP has confirmed the story. [Since Goldberg is close to Jim Mattis, I suspect Mattis and John Kelly as likely sources.]
WSJ says WH is likely to nominate Koch Institute analyst who favors rapid US withdrawal as ambassador to Afghanistan. Previous ambassadors were career diplomats.
FP says political appointee to USAID conflict prevention bureau has done damage there.
SAIS prof Ed Joseph has background on Serbia-Kosovo conflict with WH meeting today.
A student in Congress class shares a “reform Congress’ article from the late John DIngell [D-Mich].
CJR editor explains how ratings drive TV news coverage at CNN and MSNBC
Reuters reports US troops to Lithuania because of Belarus unrest.
More from Military Times poll: troops want to rename bases.
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:
Stevenson’s army, September 3
Senate Intelligence Chairman Rubio says his panel will get in person briefings, contrary to earlier DNI announcement.
I agree with Norm Ornstein’s call for keeping the Senate filibuster but requiring 40 members to show up to keep one going. I’d also end filibusters on the motion to proceed.
I also agree with Dan Drezner’s conclusion that Pompeo rather than Tillerson has been the worst ever Secretary of State.
Profiles of 2 presidential advisors that have no legal authority, but are powerful because they have the evident backing of the president: Navarro and Atlas.
On the other hand, the president once again issued a press release disguised as a legal order telling OMB to stop funding Democrat-run cities. If you read the actual document, it just says to see if any current law lets the agency do this sort of thing.
And Facebook says it won’t allow any new political ads in the week before the elections.
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:
What isn’t said is revealing
President Trump and Vice President Pence are assiduously trying to hide why the President made an urgent visit to Walter Reed last year. Trump explicitly denied it was due to strokes, which may be the cat out of the bag. But whatever it was, you can be pretty sure it was important from the effort they are making to cover it up.
The same is true for Rod Rosenstein’s ending the investigation into Trump’s financial ties to Russia when he turned the FBI’s work over to Special Counsel Mueller, who should never have accepted a truncated mandate. Rosenstein may not even know what he was hiding, but as Deputy Attorney General he repeatedly did the President’s bidding. If the instruction came from the President, you can be pretty sure whatever was covered up in this maneuver was important.
So now, in addition to his many more blatant disqualifications from a second term, we’ve got two partially hidden reasons to be worried: the President could be both financially beholden to Vladimir Putin and unfit for office by reason of his health. There really isn’t much doubt that these issues. That Trump relied on Russian money he acquired via Deutsche Bank is at this point well-established. No one rushes a President to Walter Reed without good reason.
These are serious matters that require elucidation, but they are unlikely to get it before the election. They would be reason enough for me to vote against Trump, if I hadn’t decided that five years ago on other grounds. I’m hoping a few of the fence-sitters will now think twice: do you really want a President who can’t tell us why he made a rushed visit to Walter Reed? Do you really want one who might be selling out the country for the sake of Russian financing for his real estate? Remember: he still hasn’t raised with Putin Moscow’s bounties to Taliban for killing Americans. Nor has he objected to the Kremlin poisoning of Alexei Navalny, the single most important opposition figure in Russia.
Never mind Trump’s mindboggling defense of a 17-year-old vigilante accused of murder for killing two protesters in Kenosha, Wisconsin, or his failure to offer to visit the family of a man shot seven times in the back there by a policeman. The President excused that violent act with the allegation that he must have “choked,” like a golfer. The President’s preference for white perpetrators over their black victims is no surprise, but no less reprehensible for its predictability.
Worried about other issues? No one pays any attention now, but
- The budget deficit was ballooning even before Covid-19 due to Trump’s tax cut for the wealthy. GNP and job growth had slowed below the pace set in the Obama Administration.
- The Chinese are not meeting their obligations under the agreement that suspended the tariff war to import vastly more agricultural products from the US.
- The promise of more spending on infrastructure has gone unfulfilled.
- The Social Security/Medicare tax holiday the President declared will leave many people with a giant tax bill at the end of the year, so most companies are not opting to implement it.
- The suspension of housing evictions just announced comes without the $100 billion in funding the Democrats have included in the latest Covid relief bill that the Republicans refuse to consider.
These are all relatively undiscussed issues that even the most ardent supporters of Trump should contemplate. Instead, the President expects them to respond to the siren call of “LAW AND ORDER,” intended to appeal to white suburban fear of minorities and stem the hemorrhaging of Trump’s support there. Anyone who falls for that deserves what they get: an unqualified president who has failed at almost everything, except lining the pockets of the wealthy and appointing equally unqualified judges to the Federal courts. That’s another subject too few are talking about.
RSS - Posts
