Tag: Israel
Stevenson’s army, June 2
Ransomware is big business. New Yorker explains how it works and how payments are negotiated.
Israel is asking for extra military aid.
Fred Kaplan lists the laws limiting military freedom of speech.
Bloomberg says Iran expects nuclear talks to continue in July.
Late addendum:
Summertime means more time to read books stacked in my study. Here’s another book worth checking out.
For me, the 1962 Cuban missile crisis was the two weeks of American crisis decision-making detailed by Graham Allison, Bobby Kennedy, Arthur Schlesinger Jr., and Ted Sorensen. Now we have a superb account that includes what was happening in Moscow, and on the ground in Cuba.
Serhii Plokhy, a Ukrainian-American history professor at Harvard, has written Nuclear Folly. Instead of the typical story of smart decisions that avoided nuclear war, Plokhy says he wants to tell about the many mistakes that came close to making that catastrophe a reality. And there were many, at the strategic and operational levels.
Graham Allison explored the bureaucratic behaviors and missteps over U-2 flights that were foolishly cancelled when needed and carried out when they were quite provocative and Navy blockade rules that almost triggered a Soviet nuclear exchange. Plokhy shows the same for the Soviet military.
His basic conclusion is that Kennedy and Khrushchev deescalated the crisis because both feared nuclear war. Both overcame strong pressure to risk actual combat.
Plokhy also details Kennedy’s extraordinary efforts to keep secret the fact that he agreed to withdraw medium-range Jupiter missiles from Turkey as part of the deal. The media seized on the narrative that Kennedy won by being tough while Khrushchev backed down. In fact, there was a deal which gave important concessions to both.
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).
Stevenson’s army, May 19
-WH is letting it be known that Biden was tougher in call to Netanyahu than he has been in public. NYT says this is a Biden pattern. Politico says US officials claim they blocked ground invasion.
-Axios says Biden will waive NordStream 2 sanctions.
– European Parliament is freezing investment deal with China.
– Lobbyist’s delight: NYT says bipartisan bill for science investments to counter China is becoming vehicle for grabbag of special projects.
-Newsweek says US has 60,000-person force of undercover operators doing “signature reduction.”
-Reports: CFR has new study of major power rivalry in Africa. Georgetown group says AI can power disinformation operations.
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).
Stevenson’s army, May 18
Sally Quinn says there’s not much left of the DC social scene.
Dan Drezner explains the lack of leaks from the Biden WH
Politico says DOD may keep Trump boost in DOD psyops.
Administration approves new arms for Israel, probably too late for Congress to block.
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).
Stevenson’s army, April 27
Census numbers show gains for GOP-controlled states. Republicans will be in charge of drawing new maps in 187 congressional districts this year, compared with 75 for Democrats, down from the GOP’s 219-44 advantage a decade ago, according to the Cook Political Report. The other seats are in states where power is split, a commission is in charge of the maps, or the states have only a single House seat.
Here’sthe full Cook Political report analysis.
– Combatant commanders want more information declassified.
-WSJ says troop phones put operations at risk.
– Kerry denies Zarif claim about Israeli attacks.
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).
Stevenson’s army, April 21
– WaPo explains the State/HHS fight over refugees and Biden’s overruling Blinken on admissions.
– NYT says Biden has to choose between solar panels and punishing China for human rights violations.
– Centcom commander says fighting terrorists will be harder after Afghan withdrawal.
– US loses air superiority to drones.
– Russia is fighting ISIS in Syria.
– Chad president’s death raises many issues.
– Iran shaken by Israeli attacks.
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).
The UAE as peace brokers
In this episode of Battlegrounds, H.R. McMaster and Yousef Al Otaiba discuss the Abraham Accords, the threat from Iran, and great power competition in the Middle East. Speakers and their affiliations are listed below:
Yousef Al Otaiba: United Arab Emirates (UAE) Ambassador to the United States (US)
H. R. McMaster: Fouad and Michelle Ajami Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University
The Abraham Accords and Normalization with Israel
The defining feature of the discussion between Ambassador Otaiba and McMaster was the rapidly evolving dynamics of both the Gulf and the Middle East writ large. Nowhere is that more true than with respect to Israel and the recently signed Abraham Accords. Otaiba in particular stressed that people in the region are tired of decades-long conflicts and are increasingly desirous of new approaches to old problems. One indication of how widespread this desire for change is is how quickly three countries followed the UAE’s lead in normalizing relations with Israel.
McMaster called attention to an op-ed penned by Otaiba prior to the Accords in which he argued that annexation would critically inhibit the ability of countries like the UAE to negotiate with Israel. Both agreed that the signal sent by the publication of this opinion piece–which was also published in Hebrew–served as an effective opening salvo of signaling that ultimately facilitated the negotiations that generated the Accords.
Iran, the Gulf, and Extremism
McMaster pointed to the name of the Accords themselves as an attempt to transcend the religious and sectarian divisions that have plagued the region in recent decades. He also pointed to Iran as an actor that has consistently complicated these aims. In particular, he identified Iran’s support of proxy actors in conflict, attacks on oil tankers in the Gulf, and the promotion of ideological justifications for sectarianism and theocracy as ways in which Iran has complicated the dynamics of peace processes in the region.
Otaiba also identified Iran’s support for violent extremists as a significant complicating factor in peace processes. Notably, he argued that it was not only the rise of Shia extremism at issue, but also the way in which Iran’s rhetoric has motivated Sunni extremism as well. Otaiba pointed to the UAE’s work to combat extremism as an important step in this regard. For example, the UAE invited the Pope to visit the country and developed a complex that included a synagogue, mosque, and church. By doing so, the country aims to challenge the perception among some that extremists are the true guardians of community and society.
The Future of the Region
Otaiba argued that the way in which Iranian rhetoric has reinforced Sunni extremism is indicative that the future of the region will not be defined by a Sunni-Shia fault line, but rather a debate over the role of religion in governance. This fault line will be divided, according to Otaiba, between those who believe in a separation between church and state–as he does–and those who believe that religion ought to be incorporated into governance.
McMaster and Otaiba also believed that the Biden administration will differentiate itself from the conciliatory approach to Iran that characterized the Obama administration. This difference in outlook is largely attributed to the Trump administration’s policy of maximum pressure, which has given this new administration a stronger hand with which to leverage more concessions out of Iran. While both were fairly optimistic that the Biden administration will maintain a strong line against Iran, Otaiba expressed some concern about the prospects of the administration’s push for peace and withdrawal in Afghanistan. The UAE has taken some steps away from this theater in recent years, diminishing its ability to leverage its role as a broker to achieve peace. While Otaiba expressed that the UAE was willing to accept the outcome of any agreement between the US, the Taliban, and the government, he also expressed disbelief that all three parties could come to a durable agreement.
To watch the event in full, please click here