Tag: Turkey
Stevenson’s army, October 15
– Politico has a story about a lobbyist head-hunter.
– Economist says districts with military bases had 8% swing to Democrats in 2020.
– FP is starting a series on UN sanctions.
– Biden’s Turkey policy is complicated by order for F-16s.
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:
Syria: no attractive propositions, so Biden is staying the course
Secretary of State Blinken at a press conference with the Israeli and UAE foreign ministers today said more about Syria than I remember since the beginning of the Biden Administration, in response to a question about normalization that other countries are indulging in:
…let me talk about Syria first and then come to the second part of the – the first part of the question second.
First, to put this in focus, these initial nine months of the administration we have been focused on a few things when it comes to Syria: Expanding humanitarian access for people who desperately need that assistance, and we had some success, as you know, with renewing the critical corridor in northwestern Syria to do that; sustaining the campaign that we have with the coalition against ISIS and al-Qaida in Syria; making clear our commitment, our ongoing commitment to demand accountability from the Assad regime and the preservation of basic international norms like promoting human rights and nonproliferation through the imposition of targeted sanctions; and sustaining local ceasefires, which are in place in different parts of the country. So this has been the focus of our action for these last nine months.
As we’re moving forward, in the time ahead, keeping violence down; increasing humanitarian assistance and focusing our military efforts on any terrorist groups that pose a threat to us or to our partners, with the intent and capacity to do that. These are going to be the critical areas of focus for us, and they’re also, I think, important to advancing a broader political settlement to the Syrian conflict consistent with UN Security Council Resolution 2254.
What we have not done and what we do not intend to do is to express any support for efforts to normalize relations or rehabilitate Mr. Assad, or lifted [sic] a single sanction on Syria or changed [sic] our position to oppose the reconstruction of Syria until there is irreversible progress toward a political solution, which we believe is necessary and vital.
https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-and-israeli-alternate-prime-minister-and-foreign-minister-yair-lapid-and-united-arab-emirates-foreign-minister-sheikh-abdullah-bin-zayed-al-nahyan-at-a-joint-press-availab/
This is a restatement of well-established US priorities: humanitarian assistance, reduction in violence, counter-terrorism, and irreversible progress toward a political solution before reconstruction or normalization.
So nothing new. What’s missing? should always be the next question.
Tony fails to deal with the threat of a serious military clash between NATO ally Turkey and the Kurdish-led forces that are conducting the campaign against both terrorists and the regime in northeastern Syria, with American support. He is silent on concerns about Iran using Syrian territory to threaten Israel. Nor does he indicate that the United States opposes normalization by others, in particular Jordan and the UAE. And he is silent on brutality-laced Russian and Iranian support for the Syrian regime, which in due course may become capable of challenging the Kurdish presence in the northeast and the Turkish presence inside Syria’s northern border. So yes, continuity of a policy that is silent on important issues and has so far failed to produce substantial results.
Is there a better approach? We could certainly tighten sanctions so that jet-setting scions of the Syrian elite don’t roam Los Angeles in Ferraris, but that won’t change anything in Syria. We could help the Germans mount a “universal jurisdiction” case against President Assad himself, in absentia, but that would set a legal precedent that might boomerang on prominent Americans. We could try harder to mediate some sort of accommodation between the Syrian Kurds and Turkey, as we did once with a modicum of success between the Iraqi Kurds and Turkey. Or we could try to negotiate autonomous status for the Kurds within Syria in return for US withdrawal, though the regime would be no more likely than the Taliban to stick to the terms of a withdrawal agreement. The Kurds would likely revert to attacking inside Turkey as well as Turkish-controlled Syria in order to curry favor with Assad. It suits the Kurds and Turkey to have the Americans remain in Syria.
I won’t even bother with military options against the Russians or the regime. The Americans take some shots against the Iranians and their proxies in Syria, but they aren’t going to risk war with Russia or the civilian casualties that taking on the regime would entail.
So no, there are not a lot of attractive propositions in Syria. Especially after the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Administration can ill afford a comparable mess in Syria, never mind an influx into the US of tens of thousands Syrian Kurds and Arabs who helped the US during the past decade and have legitimate claims to asylum. No wonder Biden is staying the course.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, October 10
– NYT has long article on growing US-China tension over Taiwan.
– Xi calls for peaceful reunification.
– Nuclear proliferator A Q Khan dies at 85.
– CRS has recent backgrounders on Saudi Arabia, and 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 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, October 3
I’ve been traveling the past couple of days, but here is today’s edition:
– NYT explains Republican holds on State Dept nominations. What Sen. Cruz [R-TX] has been doing is objecting to taking up nominations by unanimous consent and thus forcing Leader Schumer to use the 3-day cloture process for every contested nomination.
-China has been sending warplanes to warn Taiwan.
-WaPo highlights the tough budget choices facing the Biden administration, whether to drop favored programs from budget reconciliation or make them temporary in order to meet future budget number targets.
– CRS has new report on international affairs budgets & appropriations.
Here are Charlie’s weekend items from yesterday, October 2:
– Politico has an updated version of “I’m Just a Bill.” Enjoy!
-Defense One notes that the administration is relying on 2001 AUMF for its continuing strikes. See DOD transcript.
-Will we sanction India over its S400 purchase?
– FP says Erdogan might be quite sick.
– Bloomberg says WH Sit Room needs updating.
– Are we really turning against each other? Sad story from Idaho.
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 29
– WaPo has a bunch of pieces on the DOD testimony to the SASC on Tuesday. Here’s a link to the statements and hearing.
– Fred Kaplan analyzes the session.
– Politico notes questions being raised about AUKUS.
– More on Turkey’s defiance of US.
– Fiona Hill has new article in Foreign Affairs.
Politico Pro has this on solar tariffs:
SOLAR TARIFF PETITION GIVES BIDEN A CATCH-22: The Commerce Department must decide by Wednesday whether it will open an anti-circumvention investigation that could result in tariffs on solar panels from Vietnam, Malaysia and Thailand.
The three nations are responsible for more than three-quarters of solar imports to the U.S. But American panel manufacturers say they only have that status because other importers reroute their solar components through those nations, in order to avoid anti-dumping and countervailing duties on China that have been in place since the Obama administration.
A third of solar projects at risk: If Commerce decides to extend the duties to the three Asian countries, solar project developers in the U.S. say it will force them to renegotiate prices or abandon projects altogether — hampering Biden’s goal to eliminate carbon emissions from electricity production by 2035. If the new duties on panels are approved, developers say, they could slash the rollout of solar projects in the U.S. by nearly a third over the next two years.
The new tariffs would be “absolute industry killers,” warned Ben Catt, CEO of Pine Gate Renewables, a North Carolina-based solar project developer. “If you were to put those tariffs on any of the projects we are doing right now, I just think the pricing structure gets thrown out the window.”
Climate “outside the scope”: Supporters of the tariff petition say that’s beside the point. If Commerce finds that importers are avoiding duties by rerouting their solar panels through the Southeast Asian nations, then by law the department must impose duties. Other concerns, like climate change, are “outside the scope of the case,” said Tim Brightbill, an international trade partner at Wiley Rein LLP, who is representing the petitioners.
Myriad trade issues: The tariff petition is just one of many trade challenges bedeviling the American solar sector. The Biden administration is also weighing whether to extend “Section 201” emergency safeguard duties that former President Donald Trump imposed on solar products from China, Taiwan and certain other suppliers in 2018. Those are currently set to expire in February, but petitioners want them renewed for four more years.
The administration is also considering new trade restrictions on solar panels and parts from the Xinjiang region, the center of human rights abuses in China that the U.S. has labelled a genocide. And American solar installers are also struggling with higher commodity prices and supply chain issues that are rippling through the economy.
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 27
I’ve been traveling and negligent about publishing Charlie’s daily take, but I’ll try to do better this week:
– Erdogan defends military purchases from Russia.
– Chinese unsettled by hostage release deal.
-US Supreme Court sees sharp drop in favorability.
– WSJ says US failed to build sustainable economy in Afghanistan.
– WaPo explains failure of Afghan security forces.
– Guardian profiles Jake Sullivan.
And while this is not a prediction, Steven Dennis of Bloomberg describes the way legislative fights often work out:
“How deals sometimes come together in Congress
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES TO BUDGET MODS IMMEDIATELY DIS NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES TO FRAMEWORK NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES”
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).
RSS - Posts
