An article former SAIS student James Mina and I wrote on ‘Circumventing Hormuz’ appears in the February–March 2014 issue of Survival. The International Institute for Strategic Studies today published this related post:
Tag: Gulf states
Diversifying Hormuz protection
While my career in recent years has focused on politics, especially in the Balkans and Middle East, I have a long history with energy issues. They were already big in 1972, when I was on the secretariat for the first UN Conference on the Human Environment. Even then global warming was on the agenda. I worked in the mid-1970s at the National Center for Analysis of Energy Systems at Brookhaven National Laboratory and in the late 1970s and early 1980s, handled energy issues as Science Counselor of the US Embassies in Rome and Brasilia.
In 1984 I became director of ‘energy consuming country affairs’ at the State Department, a role that included representing the United States at the International Energy Agency’s Standing Committee on Emergency Questions.
It was while oil prices were low in the mid-1980s that we convinced our IEA partners to put in place the ‘coordinated early stock draw’ procedures that are today an important part of the global response to an oil supply disruption.
But proud as I am of that achievement, I’ve come to believe that we missed opportunities to go much further in building up civilian responses to the problem James Mina and I discuss in my Survival article, ‘Circumventing Hormuz’. Over-reliance on military instruments has been costly and counter-productive. We should long ago have pressed non-IEA oil importers (especially China and India) to increase stocks (and coordinate their drawdown) and oil exporters to ensure supply by building pipelines and using them to their maximum capacity.
The current increase in US oil and gas production, while it does not insulate us from the economic harm due to an oil-supply disruption and the resulting price spike, provides an opportunity to beef up these civilian responses, redistribute burdens and lower American military costs. It also provides an opportunity to make protection of oil flow through Hormuz a multinational responsibility, with contributions from major Asian oil importers. This would relieve some of the burden on the US Navy and make it less likely Iran will ever disrupt Gulf oil supplies.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Tags : China, Gulf states, India, United States
Sectarian politics in the Gulf
Tuesday Frederic Wehrey, senior associate at the Carnegie Middle East Program, presented his new book, Sectarian Politics in the Gulf: From the Iraq War to the Arab Uprisings (Columbia University Press, January 2014). Marc Lynch, professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University, moderated.
Wehrey has a sense of déjà vu looking at the resurgence of sectarianism in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Reading the Middle East this way is not new. The sectarianism lens is an appealing way to look at a very complex region, but it plays into the hands of sectarian leaders. They use sectarianism to justify their iron grip. Sectarianism is important, but along with other identities such as social class or nationality. It is important to look at these other explanations for conflict. The antidote to sectarianism isn’t a greater US presence in the region or good relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Ultimately, it is local institutions. Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Tags : Gulf states
Peace picks, January 13-17
A bit late, but as good as ever:
1. Battlefield Earth: Reassessing U.S. Responses to Terrorist Threats
Monday, January 13 | 12:15 – 1:45pm
New America Foundation, 1899 L Street NW Suite 400
In 2001, the U.S. Congress authorized the president to use “all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.” This Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) set no limits on time, location, or target.
In just the last 12 months, the AUMF was invoked in support of the war in Afghanistan, but also unconventional operations in Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, Somalia and possibly elsewhere — operations such as targeted killings using drones, raids and captures by U.S. Special Forces, and, in all probability, cyber warfare.
As Heather Hurlburt writes in “Battlefield Earth” in Democracy: A Journal of Ideas’ Winter 2014 issue, out this month: “public debate over the use of force in Syria and the revelations concerning National Security Agency surveillance suggest that Americans are increasingly uncomfortable with actions being undertaken in their name. President Obama appeared to acknowledge this reality in May [2013] when he said he looked forward ‘to engaging Congress and the American people in efforts to refine, and ultimately repeal, the AUMF’s mandate.’”
With combat in Afghanistan winding down at the end of the year, does the AUMF continue to authorize force against any terror suspect linked to al-Qaeda, anywhere? Will Congress or the Administration move to “refine” or “repeal” it, and if so, how?
Join the New America Foundation’s National Security Program and Democracy for a panel discussion assessing the politics, legal alternatives, and policy implications of a 13-year-old piece of legislation that makes the planet an open-ended battlefield.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Tags : Afghanistan, Gulf states, Iran, Nuclear weapons, Pakistan, Russia, Turkey
The 2013 vintage in the peace vineyard
2013 has been a so-so vintage in the peace vineyard.
The Balkans saw improved relations between Serbia and Kosovo, progress by both towards the European Union and Croatian membership. Albania managed a peaceful alternation in power. But Bosnia and Macedonia remain enmired in long-running constitutional and nominal difficulties, respectively. Slovenia, already a NATO and EU member, ran into financial problems, as did Cyprus. Turkey‘s long-serving and still politically dominant prime minister managed to get himself into trouble over a shopping center and corruption.
The former Soviet space has likewise seen contradictory developments: Moldova‘s courageous push towards the EU, Ukraine‘s ongoing, nonviolent rebellion against tighter ties to Russia, and terrorist challenges to the Sochi Winter Olympics. Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Tags : Afghanistan, Africa, Al Qaeda, Asia, Balkans, Burma, Central African Republic, China, Cybersecurity, Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, European Union, Gulf states, Iran, Iraq, Israel/Palestine, Japan, Kurds, Libya, Mali, NATO, Nigeria, North Korea, Nuclear weapons, Pakistan, Russia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Nations, United States, Yemen, Zimbabwe
A decent Syrian election: result, not prelude
Jimmy Carter and Robert Pastor propose an election to resolve Syria’s civil war. They suggest three principles that would have to be accepted as preconditions for negotiating the war’s end:
● Self-determination: The Syrian people should decide on the country’s future government in a free election process under the unrestricted supervision of the international community and responsible nongovernmental organizations, with the results accepted if the elections are judged free and fair;
● Respect: The victors should assure and guarantee respect for all sectarian and minority groups; and
● Peacekeepers: To ensure that the first two goals are achieved, the international community must guarantee a robust peacekeeping force.
And they spell out first steps: Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Tags : Africa, Al Qaeda, Algeria, China, Democracy and Rule of Law, European Union, Gulf states, India, Iran, Iraq, Latin America, Libya, Morocco, Pakistan, Russia, Syria, Turkey, United Nations, United States, Yemen
Where do you find free cheese?
In what may be the biggest auction since Moscow and Washington vied for influence in various third world countries during the Cold War, Ukraine (pop: 45 million) is attracting some hefty bids. Russian President Vladimir Putin yesterday upped the ante: he plunked down $15 billion to buy potentially worthless Ukrainian government bonds and cut the price of Russian natural gas (by what I figure is one third). At the same time, he said he wasn’t insisting on Ukraine joining his Eurasian customs union. He figures the European Union won’t be willing to match that.
That does not mean “game over,” because the demonstrators are still in Maidan calling for President Yanukovich to sign an association agreement with the EU, one that Catherine Ashton is claiming will not hurt Russia’s interests in Ukraine. It would open Ukrainian markets and force its producers to adjust, which is why Yanukovich is asking for another 20 billion euros (per year!) from Brussels. I suppose he may still get some substantial fraction of that, provided he didn’t make the mistake of promising Putin he would not sign with the EU. The parliamentary opposition is threatening to block the Russian deal, prompting the choicist comment I’ve heard on the situation: Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Tags : Asia, China, European Union, Gulf states, Iraq, Kurds, Russia, Ukraine
RSS - Posts
