Tag: NATO
Stevenon’s army, May 13
I just finished former SecDef Mark Esper’s memoir, A Sacred Oath. It’s a good, informative book about his service as Secretary. Unlike many such books, he spends little time on his life before the Pentagon, then tells revealing stories about fighting the bureaucracy, fighting the NSC staff, and, of course, pushing back on Pres. Trump’s crazy ideas. The Trump stories are scattered chronologically, showing what a constant problem he faced.
– Ukraine aid stalled by Sen. Paul’s objection.
– Sweden moves closer to NATO membership.
– Something happened to a secret Navy ship.
– WOTR has good ideas on building a cyber force.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I 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, May 12
– Russia sees that as a threat.
– Task & Purpose says Russia isn’t good at info war.
– 57 GOP voted against Ukraine aid in House.
-WaPo reports limits on intelligence sharing with Ukraine.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I 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, May 5
Court decisions on campaign laws opened a big loophole that led to an amazing development in the Ohio Republican Senate primary. As CRS noted,
Unlimited Contributions to Independent-Expenditure-Only Political Action
Committees (Super PACs)
On March 26, 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held in
SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission24 that contributions to PACs that make only independent expenditures—but not contributions—could not be constitutionally limited. As a result, these entities, commonly called super PACs, may accept previously prohibited amounts and sources of funds, including large corporate, union, or individual contributions used to advocate for election or defeat of federal candidates. Existing reporting requirements for PACs apply to super PACs, meaning that contributions and expenditures must be disclosed to the FEC.
Peter Thiel formed such a super PAC, gave it $15 million, which went for campaign activities for J.D. Vance, who had few ads or activities funded by his own campaign. Since the law forbids “coordination,” the super PAC puts its key information including polls and suggested messages in an obscure place online. It even posted its oppo research findings on Vance, so he could know what attacks might be made.
In other news: NYT says US shared intelligence with Ukraine that helped them target Russian generals.
Reuters says US has offered security assurances to Sweden if it seeks to enter NATO.
Defense News says some key congressional figures are now open to F16 sales to Turkey.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I 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, April 29
-WaPo notes new anti-NATO group in GOP.
– Axios sees disagreement in Biden administration over China tariffs.
– Semper fighting: former top Marines disagree over commandant’s plans.
– Time has big piece on Zelensky
– Old Soviet weapons going to Ukraine.
– RollCall doesn’t find pay increases on Hill, despite new law.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I 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, April 26
– Gen Milley says time is not on Ukraine’s side.
– US will re-fill allies who ship to Ukraine.
– Reuters reports Finland and Sweden will seek to join NATO next month.
– Axios has Big Facts on defense spending worldwide.
– WSJ says Russia is hiding economic data.
– Yes, Macron won but big test in June in parliamentary elections.
– Also good news in Slovenia.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I 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:
The odds are bad, but Biden is aiming high
President Biden has often talked about Ukraine in recent days, but he never specifies clear goals. He presumably wants to avoid raising expectations and leave himself the option of settling for less. Can we interpolate his goals from what he and the Ukrainians say and do in public?
The evidence
I think so. Here are some hints:
- He has disappointed the Ukrainians by ruling out a “no-fly” zone. This is intended to avoid a direct military confrontation of NATO with Russia. But one way or another Biden has managed to send all the kit they have asked for. That apparently now includes aircraft or aircraft parts. If there is anything still lacking, it might be air defense systems. But those are complicated and difficult to operate without extensive training.
- The Ukrainians don’t complain about lack of intelligence information. Their success in the first phase of the war appears to have been due in part to an uncanny (and likely well-informed) ability to anticipate Russia’s moves. The Ukrainians anticipated the assualt on Kyiv.
- The sanctions the US and EU are imposing on Russia and Russians are close to the maximum ever. It will not be easy to dial these back so long as Russian troops remain in Ukraine, even if only in Donbas and Crimea. The sanctions are going to crater the Russian economy. That will drive Moscow into economic dependence on and subservience to China, if President Xi is willing. There is no sign the US is planning for a return to the status quo ante.
- Biden has called out Putin as a war criminal responsible for genocide. That rules out any Western negotiation with him as well as any chance for rehabilitation. The President has made it clear his statements were not intended as an official legal determination. But neither he nor any Western leader other than Hungary’s Prime Minister Orban will ever risk meeting with Putin again.
- Biden has explicitly expressed the hope Putin will not remain in power after the war.
What Biden wants
The evidence is clear: Biden is seeking a resounding defeat of Russia, including if possible complete withdrawal from Ukrainian territory and Putin’s removal from office. Of course the Americans may have to settle for less. The human costs to Ukraine of chasing Russia completely from Donbas and especially Crimea could be high. Putin may cling to power, as his pal Bashar al Assad has done in Syria. Though he is still popular in Russia, Putin won’t allow a serious, competitive election. He has murdered and imprisoned his two principal antagonists and shut off the rest from media access.
The laws of politics have not been revoked
Biden himself faces an important mid-term election in Novmber. One-third of the Senate and the entire House are at stake. Current odds favor the Republicans. Biden needs a hat trick to turn the tide in his own favor:
- The COVID-19 epidemic needs to definitively subside.
- The economy needs to continue to grow but inflation needs to decline sharply.
- The Ukraine war nneeds to turn out well for the Ukrainians, or at least seem to be heading in that direction.
The odds for all three of these outcomes are low. At 50/50 for each, we are talking a 1 in 8 chance of success, if I’ve calculated right. But what were the odds that President Zelensky would turn out to be an effective communicator and international statesman? Who knew that Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine would flee away from the Russian invasion? What were the odds the Ukrainian army had learned to fight so well in the years since failing to confront the Russians effectively in 2014? What were the odds that Ukrainians would prove brave patriots?
RSS - Posts
