Tag: Nuclear weapons
Foreign policy is also made by omission
Secretary of State Blinken outlined Biden Administration foreign policy yesterday. Here is the short version:
- End the pandemic
- Rebuild the economy
- Protect democracy
- Treat immigrants humanely but reduce incentives for migration
- Revitalize relations with friends
- Slow climate change
- Lead in hi tech
- Manage the rise of China
All of this is to be done with two things in mind: benefiting Americans and mobilizing other countries to carry part of the burden.
Tony is also at pains to underline that all these foreign policy issues have important domestic dimensions and that diplomacy will come before military action. The former is not new and underlay Trump’s “America First” slogan, especially on trade issues. The latter isn’t new either, but it is diametrically the opposite of what Trump was inclined to do. He thought cruise missiles and drones could get the US out of Syria without any need for talking with anyone. He tried talks with the Taliban, but did not wait for them to succeed before withdrawing half the troops.
It’s hard for me to quarrel with much of what Tony said. But there are things missing, as Tony acknowledges. Often in international affairs, as in domestic politics, what is not said is as significant as what is said.
Apart from the mention of China and some other geopolitical threats (Russia, Iran North Korea), there is no mention at all of specific regions and little of specific countries. My friends in the Middle East and the Balkans should take note. You are not going to get all the attention you crave. This is a major change from the traditional diplomatic “tour d’horizon” and suggests a shift from the State Department’s traditional emphasis on bilateral relations, as represented in its “geographic” bureaus and accentuated in the transactional Trump Administration, to “transnational” issues represented in State’s “functional” bureaus.
Among the “transnational” issues, one important one is omitted: nuclear non-proliferation. This may reflect a realistic recognition that with respect at least to North Korea and perhaps even Iran the cat is out of the bag: we are not going to be able to convince them to give up their nuclear ambitions entirely. It may also reflect a desire to leave room for some of our friends and allies to respond in kind. We’ve long exercised a tacit double standard with respect to Israel’s nuclear weapons. We might be willing to do so for other countries like Japan or South Korea whose neighbors threaten them with nukes. Trump famously uttered this heresy out loud, but his departure doesn’t make the issue evaporate. Confidence in the American nuclear umbrella fades as Pyongyang acquires the capacity to nuke Los Angeles.
Of course the urgent in foreign policy often comes before the merely important. Tony knows he won’t be able to ignore Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, the Palestinians, democratic backsliding in the Balkans, the coup in Burma, or the agreed withdrawal from Afghanistan, which the Administration needs to either confirm or postpone. This Administration’s minds and hearts are in the right place. But that does not guarantee success. They face a challenging global environment, not least from all the omissions.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
This isn’t easy, but it’s worth the try
President Biden has decided to ignore the attack on US forces deployed in Erbil, Iraq earlier this week and proceed with talking to Iran about returning to the nuclear deal, at the invitation of European allies. This move entails political risk, as surely Republicans and others will criticize talking with people who are rocketing American troops. But the alternative is worse: making a strategic priority subject to tactical moves of uncertain origin. Tehran may have ordered the attack in Erbil, or it may have originated with an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) proxy anxious to prevent US return to the nuclear deal. Or maybe someone else did it.
The US has little other option at this point. Iran is moving rapidly now to enrich more uranium, transform it to metallic form, and block some International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors. Tehran could be a good deal less than a year from being capable of making an atomic weapon. I doubt it will do so, as that would give others in the region unequivocal incentive to follow suit, and a nuclear Iran would be on a hair trigger alert with Israel every day of the week. But betting on the rationality of the IRGC and the Supreme Leader would be a serious mistake.
Four years of Donald Trump’s “maximum pressure” on Iran have yielded nothing but evidence that economic sanctions won’t cause Tehran to re-enter nuclear negotiations in order to deepen and extend their nuclear commitments. Trump also failed to get Iran to expand the talks to discuss the missile and regional issues, as America’s Israeli and Gulf allies would like. It remains to be seen whether Biden’s approach will work better, but the main thing for the moment is to restore as much as possible of the status quo ante, that is the situation from before the Trump Administration’s ill-advised and poorly executed withdrawal from the Comprehensive Joint Plan of Action (JCPOA, aka Iran nuclear deal).
This will not be trivial. The know-how Iran has gained can’t be reversed without killing scientists, which the Israelis have been willing to do. But if they continue, Iran will itself withdraw from the JCPOA. The current Israeli government might be pleased with that, as it appears to want a good excuse to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities. But their Gulf allies would quickly part company with that move. Their capitals all lie within striking distance of Tehran’s missiles, as do their oil tankers. The Abrahamic accords could quickly see the Gulf part ways with Israel as quickly as Ishmael and Isaac did.
The Biden Administration is entering a complex diplomatic maneuver. The Trump sanctions have unquestionably provided leverage, but history suggests you get what you want from sanctions not when you impose them but when you negotiate relief from them. That can be done gradually and in phases corresponding to Iranian moves. But some in Congress will be sniping at you from behind and some in Tehran will be trying to torpedo the effort with attacks on Americans throughout the Middle East. This isn’t easy, but it’s worth the try.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, February 19
– Fred Kaplan has more on Able Archer.
– Strat Prof Paula Thornhill says troops should be taught the Constitution,
-Fletcher prof says US has 3 conditions necessary for civil war.
–US seeks to restart talks with Iran.
-We’re still flying B-52s, but B1s are being retired.
– Army faces a common but painful trade-off: people [end strength] vs modernization.
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, February 12 and 13
I didn’t get to it yesterday, so here is two days worth:
February 13
– Major shakeup in Senate Appropriations — Sen. Leahy becomes chairman, but loses his chairmanship of State/Foreign Ops after many decades. Full roster here.
– State de-lists Houthis as terrorists.
– Biden keeps tariffs on European wine & cheese [Darn]
February 12
This is the year of the ox.
Technology issues are a major part of the Biden administration’s China policy. Note these:
Export restrictions expected.
Supply chain issues important.
Press reports say Jennifer Harris, co-author of War by other means [assigned for week 6] will be NSC director for foreign economic policy.
Fred Kaplan says Pence’s “nuclear football” was evacuated with him.
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, February 10
– NYT says Israeli intelligence reports it would take 2 years for Iran to build nuclear weapons, given recent problems.
– Army Times sees great danger from drones. Defense One suggests ways to counter them.
– Politico says SecDef Austin is hiring talented civilians.
– Defense One urges rethinking our various national stockpiles.
-AEI analyst has good summary of US ideas about China.
– EU diplomat humiliated by Russians.
– NYT says many in France say American “woke leftism” threatens French culture & society.
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, February 6
– Bloomberg says Biden administration wants to give economic incentives to Iran without lifting sanctions.
-SecDef Austin announces global review.
– FP deconstructs Biden foreign policy speech.
-Lawfare reviews Biden’s history on war powers.
– NYT reports “muddled intelligence” hindered police response to Capitol attack. See also their reporting on organized groups involved.
Ya gotta love the Senate [as I do]. It takes unanimous consent in order for Senators and staff to use electronic devices in the chamber. Hence this UC, which was adopted: Congressional Budget Resolution–Agreement: A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that for the duration of the Senate’s consideration of S. Con. Res. 5, setting forth the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2021 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2022 through 2030, the Majority and Republican managers of the concurrent resolution, while seated or standing at the managers’ desks, be permitted to deliver floor remarks, retrieve, review, and edit documents, and send email and other data communications from text displayed on wireless personal digital assistant devices and tablet devices; provided further that the use of calculators be permitted on the floor during consideration of the resolution; and that the staff be permitted to make technical and conforming changes to the resolution, if necessary, consistent with the amendments adopted during Senate consideration, including calculating the associated change in the net interest function, and incorporating the effect of such adopted amendments on the budgetary aggregates for Federal revenues, the amount by which the Federal revenues should be changed, new budget authority, budget outlays, deficits, public debt, and debt held by the public
RSS - Posts
