Tag: United States
Ugly diplomacy in the Balkans
Today’s Serbia National Day message from the State Department includes this tidbit:
I am pleased our two countries recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding to create liaison positions for Serbian diplomats within the U.S. Department of State. This unique program will not only foster a better understanding of our respective foreign policy goals and objectives but will forge new channels of communication and build lasting partnerships.
This comes after avowal of support for Serbia’s EU ambitions and the umpteenth plea for Serbia to support Ukraine.
Where this leads
Serbia is not an allied country. It is not a member of NATO or a major non-NATO ally and has a policy of military neutrality. It has not joined the Western sanctions against Russia for its aggression against Ukraine. In fact, Belgrade is largely out of alignment with EU foreign policies it has promised to respect.
But the State Department has decided it can “win over” Belgrade. It is doing so by providing goodies up front. State is supporting Belgrade’s “Open Balkans” initiative, which aims at removing border barriers between Serbia and Serb populations in neighboring countries. State is also supporting Belgrade’s proposal to separate governance of the Serb-majority population of Kosovo from Pristina’s authority through creation of an Association of Serb-majority Municipalities.
That will create another de facto “Republika Srpska.” Bosnia’s Republika Srpska is now preparing to refuse the authority of Sarajevo’s courts. We can expect the same in Kosovo, if the Association is formed with the executive powers Belgrade seeks.
Ugly diplomacy
There is, sadly, more to the illogic of what the Americans are doing. Washington says it is supporting the EU-sponsored dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina. That aims at “normalization” of their relations. Having Serbian foreign service officers in the State Department while the dialogue proceeds will arouse understandable suspicions in Kosovo.
Such liaison officers learn a great deal about the inner workings of US diplomacy. Even if assigned to roles far from the European Bureau, the signal Washington is sending is clear: we favor Serbia’s perspective in the dialogue. The only way to make this move palatable is to offer the same to Kosovo in two days time, when it is Kosovo national day.
The heavy lean of the Americans toward Belgrade is ugly diplomacy. It favors the less friendly party while making the more friendly party uncomfortable. Washington expects its favors to Belgrade returned in some indefinite future, while demanding Pristina agree to Open Balkans and the Association right now. It won’t be hard for Belgrade to agree to “normalization” that includes validation of Serbia’s authority over the Kosovo Serb population. Once that is done, Serbia will expect the analog in Bosnia and Montenegro.
What Washington isn’t doing is delivering what Kosovo wants: Serbian recognition and membership in the United Nations. “Normalization” could come to mean international recognition for the Association of Serb-majority Municipalities but not for Kosovo’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. It is hard to imagine a worse outcome for Pristina.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The far right is steering Israel to disaster
I don’t have the time, energy, or expertise to deal with what the Israeli government is currently up to. But fortunately Jeremy Ben-Ami, the President of J Street does. He sent this message today:
For fifteen years, J Street has been warning of the dire threat posed to the future of Israel — its democracy, its values and its security — by the agenda of far-right ultranationalists and religious zealots.
We have spoken out about these looming threats because we care so deeply about the state and the people of Israel who are our family, our friends and our colleagues.
We’ve centered our work opposing settlements, demolitions and creeping annexation precisely on the point that never-ending occupation will ultimately take a toll on the occupier, not just on the occupied — and will lead to the erosion of Israel’s very democracy itself.
Sadly, the far-right — and the settlement movement at its core — that has single-mindedly pursued permanent control over the West Bank and dominance over the Palestinian people is now firmly in control of the government of Israel. Since taking office six weeks ago, they are moving at lightning speed to enact their agenda, threatening to make Israel unrecognizable to millions of Jews and others in the United States who care deeply about the country and its people, and who believe in the democratic values on which it was founded.
The actions now being taken by Israel’s government make its agenda clear to see: To ensure the coalition’s founding commitment to undemocratic control over all the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, they are advancing plans to undermine the very legal and democratic foundations of the state.
The so-called “judicial reform” package under Knesset consideration should be understood as part and parcel of the right’s annexationist agenda.
Thankfully, Israelis are taking to the streets to fight for their democracy and the rule of law. Former Prime Ministers, security chiefs and Supreme Court justices — and even the current President of Israel — are sounding the alarm. They understand that this is the most vital inflection point in Israel’s 75 years, one that will fundamentally shape the country going forward.
The sight of hundreds of thousands of Israelis in the streets, striking and protesting against the government’s plans, fills us with pride. J Street stands with the protesters in our commitment to the State of Israel and the values on which it was founded.
Here in the US, many Jewish communal and pro-Israel leaders have been slower to respond to these radical developments than we would have hoped. Perhaps some of these leaders held out hope that the worst would not come to pass. Some feared their critiques might be counterproductive. Others said that, even though US support has been vital to Israel’s development and survival, it is somehow inappropriate — even now — for Jewish Americans to criticize the policies of the Israeli government, or for the US government to meaningfully oppose those policies.
There is no longer any room or time for hesitation or excuses.
As Sunday’s cabinet meeting made clear, the government is moving full speed ahead: Advancing anti-democratic legislation that strikes at the core of the country’s commitment to the rule of law, legalizing illegal outposts, planning to expand settlements drastically, and transforming how the territory occupied in 1967 is administered.
These changes must be called what they are: De facto annexation of occupied Palestinian territory and a subversion of Israel’s democracy.
It is the moral and historic obligation of the leaders of American Jewish institutions to speak out clearly and immediately to challenge the actions being taken by this government.
Policymakers too must act. The Biden Administration must make clear to Israel — as a longtime and very close ally — that it will no longer stand in the way when the international community moves to hold Israel accountable under international law for its actions. Congress and the President must finally start to exercise far greater oversight to ensure that no US arms or taxpayer dollars are being used to further Israel’s de facto and illegal annexation of occupied territory.
To be pro-Israel in 2023 means standing with the hundreds of thousands of brave Israelis taking to the streets to defend their democracy. It means fighting to preserve the values that underpin the US-Israel relationship. It means standing up against the nightmare of permanent occupation and conflict.
Most importantly, it means confronting the troubling reality that, today, one of the greatest threats to Israel comes from the extremism of its own government.
I’ll be heading to Israel and the West Bank myself this week with a large delegation of Members of Congress and J Street leaders. I’ll be sure to share further thoughts with you on how things look from the region — and how our movement can continue to struggle for the better future we believe in.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Earthquakes and balloons need diplomacy
The earthquakes that have devastated parts of southern Turkey and northern Syria have already killed upwards of 25,000 people and made millions homeless. The spy balloons the US has been shooting down represent a far less immediate threat to human welfare. But it is the latter, not the former, that are attracting the most attention in Washington.
The balloons
The balloons are certainly not extraterrestrial. We know enough about other planets and moons in our own solar system to be sure there are no civilizatiions nearby capable of deploying them. Other solar systems are too far away to transport objects to ours, unless they possess technology far more advanced than our own. They wouldn’t be using balloons if that is the case.
So the balloons come from another country, most likely China. Whatever its purposes, if Beijing is the originator it has certainly managed to unite Washington as an adversary. It is difficult to picture that the data the balloons gather are worth the price. China’s satellites and its spies in the US should be capable of similar data collection, though perhaps at a higher price. Why would China, which is swimming in money, worry about the price of spying on its main adversary?
Beijing now claims Washington has been using balloons to spy over China. I suppose that is possible, though the same question arises. Why would Washington, even not swimming in money, worry about the price of spying on its main adversary? If it has used balloons, where are the Chinese photos to demonstrate it?
The earthquakes
The earthquakes pose a far less immediate threat to Americans, but they are nevertheless worthy of far more attention than they are getting. They will certainly kill over the next several months many more people, as cold weather, collapsing buildings, and limited medical, food, and water supplies take their toll.
The failure of international assistance to reach northern Syria in a timely way is particularly troubling. Damascus is blaming Hayat Tahrir al Sham, an extremist Islamist group. But it is likely we won’t know the true story for some time to come. Certainly Damascus has no interest in seeing relief reach the millions of oppositionists it has herded into the northwest corner of Syria.
It is impossible to predict the broader consequences of the earthquakes and the inadequate response to them. Turkish President Erdogan faces an election in May. Syrian President Bashar al Assad does not have that problem, as even at the next election in 2028 he is unlikely to allow serious competition if he still remains in power. But both countries already face serious economic problems that the earthquakes are likely to exacerbate.
Consequences
The results are unlikely to be salubrious. The US/China rivalry was already getting overheated. It would be a mistake to allow concern over balloons make it much worse. What is needed now is a return to President Biden’s normal mode of operation: less drama, more diplomacy. It shouldn’t be hard to convince Beijing that the balloons are counterproductive if it wants to maintain some equilibrium in its relations with the US.
As for earthquake relief, the issue is more complicated. Turkey appears to be getting the help it needs and distributing it fairly. Syria however is taking all it can from the UN but distributing virtually none of it to the opposition population that inhabits part of the country’s northwest. There is no reason to believe it will change that habit. Only an aggressive cross-border relief operation from Turkey can avoid a major humanitarian disaster. The UN needs to find the courage to act, which is impossible when Russia and perhaps China oppose doing so in the Security Council.
So here, too, diplomacy may be part of the solution, but so far quiet diplomacy has not worked. Maybe more drama is needed to deal with Syria.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, February 10
-WaPo says State Dept has program to publicize Chinese surveillance activities in over 40 countries.-
-WaPo also says Ukrainians say they rely on US for some targeting.
-WaPo says administration is asking Congress for approval to resume top secret use of Ukrainian operatives by US special forces.
-CNAS has backgrounder on Chinese military-civil fusion.
-FP says Starlink has cut off support it says Ukrainians use for drones.
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, with occasional videos of my choice. 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).
– House GOP says defense cuts could come from reducing civilian workforce.
– NDU prof hits general who talked of war with China
– MIPP student sees bureaucratic fighting over Okinawa bases.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Steps in the right direction
Alma Baxhaku of Kosovo’s Gazeta Express asked questions. I replied:
Q: PM Kurti presented six conditions for establishing the Association of Serbian Majority of Municipalities yesterday. How do you comment on this move?
A: I think it is helpful for the Prime Minister to have stated clearly what his conditions are. That is far better than simply rejecting the Association.
Q: Do you think Kurti finally is responding positively to Western pressure or these conditions are a new obstacle to establishing ASMM and achieving an agreement based on the Franco-German plan?
A: This is a positive response, but some of the conditions will clearly represent obstacles to an agreement. Negotiations should focus on those.
Q: One of the conditions set by PM Kurti is that the Association will enter into force after mutual recognition. Opposition parties suggest that he’s deceiving opinion and that by this he’s referring to the Franco-German plan which doesn’t contain mutual recognition. How do you see this?
A: You have to ask the Prime Minister to clarify this point. Unfortunately, we don’t have an official version of the plan, so it is difficult to comment. But I agree with the Prime Minister that the Association will look different to Pristina in the context of recognition.
Q: Do you think Serbia will accept an Association that is in accordance with the Kosovo Constitution and has no executive and legislative powers?
A: I don’t know. That is clearly not the kind of Association Belgrade has in mind. So you’ll have to ask President Vucic.
Q: And the final question, do you think that Kosovo should change its Constitution to accommodate Association and Franko- German if the parties reach an agreement?
A: I don’t yet see any reason for changes in the Kosovo constitution, which can accommodate an Association that accords with the Constitutional Court decision. Certainly there should be no changes in the Kosovo constitution without changes in the Serbian constitution.
PS: I understand some media in Kosovo have portrayed me as opposed to the Association. I am certainly opposed to it becoming a Republika Srpska inside Kosovo and think there is a serious risk, as that is what Belgrade wants. The Americans have promised that it won’t be allowed to become a de facto Republika Srpska, so I expect them to act as guarantors of any agreement on the Association. It is clear that only with recognition will the Kosovars feel comfortable with an Association that meets all the requirements of their Constitutional Court. Anything less leaves the door open to shenanigans.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
A balloon should not pop diplomacy
The Chinese balloon reminds me that I am among the few who have witnessed a balloon launch. It was in Sicily in the late 1970s. The Italians and Americans were launching a balloon to study the ozone layer. I was science counselor of the US Embassy in Rome. Why not enjoy a day or two in Sicily talking with scientists?
Uneventful
The launch itself was uneventful. With the helium bubble at the top of the balloon, it measured something like 100 meters high. It would round out into a ball only as the atmospheric pressure lessened with altitude. The launch sounded like the soft fluttering of a small flock of birds. It was nothing like the launch I attended several years later in Natal, Brazil of a US Air Force rocket with a similar purpose. Then we weren’t much more than 100 meters from a very noisy launch that seemed to fire the missile directly over our heads.
The Italian balloon lacked navigational capability. As it approached the Eastern Seaboard, the Americans decided it presented a threat to commercial aviation, so they asked the Italians to destroy it. That they did. Could the Chinese have destroyed the balloon had the Americans asked them to do it? Certainly the Chinese should have that capability, if only to prevent the balloon from interfering with one of their own aircraft. But they apparently did not.
What are the Chinese up to?
The Chinese unquestionably have better means of observing the US than a balloon. Their satellites may not be as good as ours, but they needn’t be to gather lots of information. I suppose the lower cost of a balloon may have appealed to someone in the bowels of the Chinese bureaucracy. The ready and apologetic acknowledgement on China’s part suggests it was not an intentional provocation.
If the Chinese were seeking to provoke the Americans, they have succeeded. Republicans in Congress are criticizing Biden for not shooting it down right away and also for postponing Secretary of State Blinken’s trip to Beijing. Of course they would also have criticized him if he hadn’t postponed the trip or if he had shot down the balloon.
What are the Americans up to?
President Biden decided to let the balloon proceed on its merry way to the East Coast. The alternative was to try to shoot it down. But if it was in fact flying at >90,000 feet over Montana, that may not have been easily doable. The Administration has cited concern about the remnants falling to the ground, but the missile would also fall. Its fragments could cause more damage than the balloon and its payload.
My guess is the Americans are exploiting the balloon’s progress to gather intelligence. Both the balloon’s data gathering and its operation likely present opportunities. It is not a bad idea to make sure we know what the Chinese are targeting and how they do it. This isn’t likely their first balloon. Nor is it likely their last.
The Americans shot the balloon down once it could be expected to fall in the Atlantic Ocean. Falling debris would then not be an issue. The Americns will try to recover the balloon and its especially its instruments. That would provide answers to a lot of questions.
Mutual surveillance
David Frum argues in The Atlantic that mutual surveillance is a good thing and ought to be encouraged, as it was once upon a time with Russia. An Open Skies agreement with China today is unlikely. Domestic politics in both the US and China would preclude it under current circumstances. But the Chinese are unlikely to have gained enough intelligence from this balloon to compensate for the embarrassment they have caused themselves. So net, US gains, so long as it is able to contain the domestic criticism and proceed in due course with Blinken’s visit to Beijing. A balloon should not pop diplomacy.
RSS - Posts
