Tag: United States
What isn’t said is revealing
President Trump and Vice President Pence are assiduously trying to hide why the President made an urgent visit to Walter Reed last year. Trump explicitly denied it was due to strokes, which may be the cat out of the bag. But whatever it was, you can be pretty sure it was important from the effort they are making to cover it up.
The same is true for Rod Rosenstein’s ending the investigation into Trump’s financial ties to Russia when he turned the FBI’s work over to Special Counsel Mueller, who should never have accepted a truncated mandate. Rosenstein may not even know what he was hiding, but as Deputy Attorney General he repeatedly did the President’s bidding. If the instruction came from the President, you can be pretty sure whatever was covered up in this maneuver was important.
So now, in addition to his many more blatant disqualifications from a second term, we’ve got two partially hidden reasons to be worried: the President could be both financially beholden to Vladimir Putin and unfit for office by reason of his health. There really isn’t much doubt that these issues. That Trump relied on Russian money he acquired via Deutsche Bank is at this point well-established. No one rushes a President to Walter Reed without good reason.
These are serious matters that require elucidation, but they are unlikely to get it before the election. They would be reason enough for me to vote against Trump, if I hadn’t decided that five years ago on other grounds. I’m hoping a few of the fence-sitters will now think twice: do you really want a President who can’t tell us why he made a rushed visit to Walter Reed? Do you really want one who might be selling out the country for the sake of Russian financing for his real estate? Remember: he still hasn’t raised with Putin Moscow’s bounties to Taliban for killing Americans. Nor has he objected to the Kremlin poisoning of Alexei Navalny, the single most important opposition figure in Russia.
Never mind Trump’s mindboggling defense of a 17-year-old vigilante accused of murder for killing two protesters in Kenosha, Wisconsin, or his failure to offer to visit the family of a man shot seven times in the back there by a policeman. The President excused that violent act with the allegation that he must have “choked,” like a golfer. The President’s preference for white perpetrators over their black victims is no surprise, but no less reprehensible for its predictability.
Worried about other issues? No one pays any attention now, but
- The budget deficit was ballooning even before Covid-19 due to Trump’s tax cut for the wealthy. GNP and job growth had slowed below the pace set in the Obama Administration.
- The Chinese are not meeting their obligations under the agreement that suspended the tariff war to import vastly more agricultural products from the US.
- The promise of more spending on infrastructure has gone unfulfilled.
- The Social Security/Medicare tax holiday the President declared will leave many people with a giant tax bill at the end of the year, so most companies are not opting to implement it.
- The suspension of housing evictions just announced comes without the $100 billion in funding the Democrats have included in the latest Covid relief bill that the Republicans refuse to consider.
These are all relatively undiscussed issues that even the most ardent supporters of Trump should contemplate. Instead, the President expects them to respond to the siren call of “LAW AND ORDER,” intended to appeal to white suburban fear of minorities and stem the hemorrhaging of Trump’s support there. Anyone who falls for that deserves what they get: an unqualified president who has failed at almost everything, except lining the pockets of the wealthy and appointing equally unqualified judges to the Federal courts. That’s another subject too few are talking about.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Serbia is oscillating, not turning
A Serbian friend writes:
Serbia has recently purchased refurbished Russian-made MiG-29 combat aircraft, Mi17, and Mi35 helicopters, Pantsir -S medium-range surface-to-air and anti-aircraft system, Chinese-built CH—92A combat drones (UCAVs) and according to some media reports the Chinese FK-3 anti-aircraft system. These purchases have made some in the West believe Belgrade is making a sharp Eastern turn, de-facto abandoning EU integration and decades of partnership with NATO within the Partnership for Peace (PfP). An influx of Chinese investments in the Serbian economy and infrastructure amplifies that impression. Is this a swing to the East or might be something else?
Let’s begin with the basics. Since 1999, the US and EU have paid little attention to the Balkans. The US was busy with Afghanistan, Iraq, the Middle East, and other conflict areas, delegating post-conflict stabilization of the Western Balkans to the EU. Despite the 2003 Thessaloniki declaration committing to integrate the region, the Union has hesitated. Slovenia and Croatia became member states, but Macedonia was on hold for decades due to the name dispute with Greece, and other countries are only slowly moving through the bureaucratic phases of the accession process.
The Western Balkans was too poor and too unstable for quick integration, which the EU didn’t want after its bad experience with Bulgaria and Romania. For nine years the EU tried to facilitate dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina, without tangible results. Bosnia remains divided. Nothing has dramatically changed in the region for decades. Many countries of the region struggle with the “Balkan Ghosts” of nationalism, corruption, negative stereotypes, poverty, and brain drain. The shadow of an autocratic collective mindset has never dissipated. Democratic processes and institutions are not safe from overpowering executive power, the judiciary is not truly free and independent, the grip of executive power and influential individuals over media has never disappeared. The NGO community, once strong, almost perished after funders lost interest. Few checks and balances remain. Populist right-wing movements got stronger, mobilizing masses for the political benefit of local elites.
The EU is also not immune to right-wing populism, nationalism, and xenophobia, which are growing trends in some member states. There is no linear progress and the everlasting victory of European democratic values, which are threatened by the heritage of autocratic mentality and collective mindset. Things turn quickly back to the “old track” if the population does not nourish and genuinely accept democracy.
Serbia in particular had its struggles after devastating sanctions, dictatorship, and conflicts in Croatia, Bosnia, and Kosovo, which not only crippled the economy but also damaged national values and consciences. Yugoslav identity collapsed. Many Serbs searched and tried to rediscover who they were and where they belonged. Their ambitious, intelligent, and arrogant leader, Slobodan Milosevic, did not understand the world after the collapse of the Eastern Block. Serbian policy was reactionary, hovering between the desire to protect Serbs in other former Yugoslav republics, a self-image of strength and greatness, and the general feeling of rejection by almost all others, including most of the international community. Isolated and outcast, Serbia ended up in limbo, with no proper way out. The policy of neutrality, which is to some extent based on non-alignment mindset from the Yugoslav communist era, was the only logical way to go. The result is Serbia tolerated by all, but not entirely trusted by anyone.
For 30 years, Serbia has not been able to decide to go either East or West. The pendulum swings from side to side. This requires constant juggling and balancing, which is dangerous, expensive, and unproductive.
China and Russia are far away and no country in the region is big enough to be an important ally.
Russian economic presence in Serbia is limited mostly to the energy sector (since 2009 the Serbian National Oil Company NIS is majority-owned by Gazprom-Neft) and media (Sputnik and some web portals). Russia is today not a big investor. Russian infrastructure loans are not fully utilized. Moscow sells arms cheaper than Western ones, but there are no free rides or brotherhood policy there. Serbia has also recently purchased Airbus H145M helicopters, and President Vucic recently announced that Serbia could purchase some weapons from the US and Israel. After its abortive effort to take over the Pristina Airport in June 1999, Russia abandoned Kosovo, as it has no profound geostrategic interest in the region. Moscow continued to help Serbia politically in difficult times, for which Serbia is grateful. Moscow keeps its foot in the door and tries to sustain its influence to prevent Serbian membership into NATO, which was never a real option due to the 1999 bombing and Serbia’s policy of military neutrality. Serbian and Russian interests coincide with the independence of Kosovo since Russia opposed it.
Russia has never however favored Serbia over other countries of the region. Croatia and Bulgaria were always crucially important countries for Russia. Almost 15 years ago Russian President Putin decorated former Croatian President Stjepan Mesic for contributing to the anti-fascist struggle. No one from Serbia ever received such an honor. During the Communist period, the Soviet leadership did not favor Serbs, who represented an obstacle to Communism due to their deep commitment to Orthodoxy, Serbian identity, and national traditions. During the 1990s Yeltsin did not favor Milosevic since his wife, Mirjana Markovic, openly supported Yeltsin’s opponents. Additionally, Yeltsin did not want to jeopardize relations with the US and the West over Serbia. Former Prime Minister of Russia Chernomyrdin allegedly delivered a threat to Milosevic that Serbia would be flattened if he refused to withdraw from Kosovo.
Historical ties to Russia are however strong. For decades former Yugoslavia purchased Soviet weapons, which with some modifications were sold to third countries. The Soviets turned a blind eye because they did not want to jeopardize fragile political relations between Stalin and Tito. Most Yugoslavs at that time, including the Serbian population, considered the Red Army and Soviets brothers and liberators. The Kingdom of Yugoslavia also hosted pro-czarist Russian emigrants who had fled after the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. These well-educated emigrants helped the progress of Serbian society since they worked as medical doctors, engineers, musicians, etc. They are deeply integrated into Serbian society.
Serbia belongs to Europe, and that Europe is a foundation of its foreign policy. Although there were some initiatives in a past to establish closer ties with Moscow (proposed by Vojislav Seselj’s Serbian Radical Party), it is hard to imagine any substantial alliance with no common border. Such an alliance would also be impossible since Serbia is surrounded by NATO member states. Christian Orthodox heritage and generally mutually positive sentiment are not sufficient foundations for a substantial deepening of relations. Therefore, although Serbian bilateral relations with Russia are stable, friendly, and good, that does not mean that Serbia is making a sharp turn to the East.
The same logic applies to China.
Serbia is just too small to play an important role in China. Beijing wants to expand throughout the Balkans to counter US influence, exploiting the historic relationship with Hoxha’s Communist Albania to spread its influence also to Kosovo, and Macedonia. As elsewhere, China is supporting infrastructure in Serbia as a part of its Belt and Road Initiative. Only $561 million of $ 2.2 billion in Chinese funds are investments however; the rest is loans. China has invested $8.9 billion in the UK. Does it mean that the UK is a pro-Chinese country?
Serbia is not going East or West. It will continue to trade with the EU, develop a substantial partnership with NATO, nourish friendly relations with Russia, and get cheap loans from China until a major shift occurs. Serbia is balancing many moving parts to survive until the EU decides to open its doors. Although the EU is Serbia’s largest trading partner as well as its biggest donor and investor, Belgrade is still in the outer lobby waiting for the Union to move forward. The main problem is that the Western Balkans is not high on the EU agenda. While the European idea is slowly fading away in the region, a vacuum is growing. It will not remain empty long.
Problems in the Western Balkans cannot be resolved with magic wands from Brussels and Washington. Although foreigners share responsibility for the current situation, the main responsibility falls on local people. If they can find a way to peacefully contain destructive spirits of the past, move on with life and profoundly reform their societies by rule of law and respect of fundamental values of democracy, no foreign help is needed. Local ownership is the key to sustainable progress. Healing the wounds from the past and dismantling the war generation of political leadership (which Pristina is currently experiencing – Belgrade underwent the same experience a decade earlier) are just initial steps, which will not lead to “collective catharsis” or mentality change.
Locals have more to do. They need to strengthen their administrative capacities, deepen their knowledge, dedicate more funds for R&D, and open their minds to be more cosmopolitan through hard work and education. They should travel more and interact with their neighbors, giving an honest chance to a mutual future. That will not be easy, since “dreams of a better past” and zero-sum interpretation of history are deeply rooted. The EU could help to strengthen knowledge-based education in the region, devoting more funds for education and science. The Union could also assist all nations of the Western Balkans to travel freely and enjoy Europe. Interaction of young people with their peers in the EU, US, UK, and other countries is crucially important for developing a prejudice-free post-war leadership generation. This is all within our reach. It does not require too much political capital for implementation. Breaking negative stereotypes is the first step to free our minds from the pitfalls of the past.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The hurdle in Lebanon is political
Randa Slim and I published a piece on Beirut reconstruction today in Foreign Affairs today. As we focus in the piece on investigation of the explosion and reconstruction, it did not treat the heinous behavior of the Lebanese security forces towards demonstrators, hence my temptation to include the video above from Human Rights Watch.
Lebanon is a failing state. It was failing even before the August 4 explosion that devastated a large part of the city center near the port. Such states offer profit opportunities to whoever holds power, while impoverishing everyone else. It is no easy task to help such a country without helping its power elite.
Randa and I offer in the Foreign Affairs piece a combination of two ideas for rebuilding the destroyed area: a contractual relationship for reconstruction and an internationally controlled but Lebanese-staffed “authority” to set priorities and do most of the actual contracting. The “contract” idea has often been used in recent years, at various levels of operation: the Millennium Challenge Corporation we site does it at the project level. The Afghanistan Reconstruction Trust Fund does it at a higher policy level. The European Union does it with candidate members. It amounts to conditionality: you get the money only if you do such and such.
The wise choice of “such and such,” and the willingness to follow through on the conditionality, are key elements of this approach. If our approach were to be adopted, the focus should be mainly on economic policy reform as well as transparency and accountability for government expenditure. But that creates an obvious problem: the international community would be asking for reforms from a central government that would not suffer any direct loss if aid were to be cut off. I think the importance of Beirut reconstruction to the government would be sufficient to mitigate this mismatch, but I’m in favor of examining downsides of any policies I suggest.
The idea of an International Beirut Reconstruction Authority is the more innovative of our propositions. Something like it existed in Sarajevo during the 1992/95 Bosnian war, but its capability was limited due to the siege and continued fighting. Randa and I cite the Afghanistan Reconstruction Trust Fund, but the entity we have in mind is more hands-on than that. It would actually contract for and execute the reconstruction, as independently of the Lebanese government as feasible. Critics will say that proposition would weaken the Lebanese government. I would suggest the government has even more important things to do by way of economic and political reform.
We went light on the political reform piece, which is fraught. Lebanon is in form a democracy. If only technically competent people formed the government, they would likely have little connection to the political forces in the parliament, whose cooperation is necessary for many reforms. Meaningful political reform would give less weight to Lebanon’s sectarian political organizations, including Hezbollah, and more to its vibrant and competent civil society, including the demonstrators abused in the above video. Shifting power in that way is an enormous challenge, even in a small country. And it will have to be Lebanese who design a political system that delivers more to citizens and less to sectarian leaders.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
America is at stake
NPR posted this video today. Here is what I wrote on the 50th anniversary of the March, in 2013.
This morning we are hearing that a 17-year-old self-appointed vigilante has been arrested for the murder of two Black Lives Matter demonstrators Kenosha, Wisconsin Tuesday night. We are also hearing Vice President Pence claim that the election is about whether America remains America.
Pence is right. If he and Donald Trump are re-elected, the United States will continue to deteriorate due to coronavirus, police violence against minorities, and an economy that generates wealth for only the few. This Administration has been committed to mistreating Latinx immigrants, blocking resettlement of refugees who flee their home countries due to violence, depriving millions of Americans of health insurance, suppressing voting, advantaging the wealthy, and loading the courts with incompetent and extremist judges. An Administration that claims to be in favor of law and order has generated more felony convictions for the President’s friends and supporters than any previous presidency.
No one in America any longer admits to being a racist. The days of George Wallace declaring “segregation now, segregation forever” are over. Still, it is white supremacy that permeates today’s ruling party. The President has declared himself a “nationalist,” which his supporters rightly understood to mean “white nationalist.” He has welcomed the support of blatant white supremacists. Last night, speakers at the convention lauded the police who shot a black man seven times in the back in front of his children. They failed to mention the homicidal 17-year-old vigilante. Anyone with brain cells understands what they are thinking: killing black people is necessary to maintaining white people’s hold on power, otherwise known as law and order.
I am certain that most Americans today do not agree with that perspective. Trump will lose the popular vote November 3, likely by a far larger margin than he lost by in 2016, about 2.7 million votes. The main question in this election is whether the added weight the Electoral College gives to mostly white, less populated states will grant Trump the margin he needs to get re-elected, despite the votes of a majority of American citizens. Two out of three elections won by Republicans since 2000 were won with a minority of popular votes.
There is another question, as a lawyer friend points out. If Trump finds the day after the election that he risks losing in the Electoral College, he will try to prevent Republican-governed states that voted for Biden from reporting their election results. This could block Biden from a majority in the Electoral College. That would throw the election into the newly elected House of Representatives, where each state has only a single vote. Despite the Democratic majority there, a majority of state delegations are Republican now and may continue to be in the new Congress, even if the Democrats win big in many states. So Trump has two chances to foil the popular will even after the election: in the Electoral College, and if he succeeds there, and in the new House.
So yes, Pence is right. America that re-elects Donald Trump will not be the America of “all men are created equal.” It will be an America in which a mostly white minority governs over the objection of the majority. George Wallace would be happy. I will not be.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
What to expect September 4
I’m getting questions about the September 4 meeting Ric Grenell has convened with Serbian President Vucic and Kosovo Prime Minister Hoti, allegedly to pursue economic agreements between them. Here are some of the Qs and As so far:
Marija Stojanovic of Daily Danas asked;
Q: What do you expect to be achieved at the upcoming between the Serbian President and Kosovo’s Prime Minister in Washington?
A: I’m really not sure. Maybe some more agreements to agree in the economic area, including on Trepca and Gazivoda. Or special economic zones along the boundary/border between Kosovo and Serbia. I doubt there can be agreement on the bigger political issues concerning normalization of relations, as Belgrade seems unwilling to recognize Kosovo as sovereign and independent and Pristina can accept nothing less. Prime Minister Hoti has a narrow margin in parliament and won’t want to risk an early election, which former Prime Minister Kurti is likely to win decisively.
Delvin Kovac of Vijesti.ba asked for my views on the push by Milorad Dodik, Serb member of the presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, to get Vucic to raise the status of Republika Srpska as part of the Washington talks:
Q: Mr. Dodik sees problems in everything: “Anti-Dayton behaviour of the high representatives,” international community, Constitutional Court…
A: When you see a problem with everyone else but not with yourself, maybe you have the wrong perspective.
Q: Mr. Dodik says that the “Western countries have double standards when it comes to the issue of the RS and Kosovo.”
A: It depends what your standard is. There is no strict parallel between the RS, which was created to secede, and Kosovo, which existed as a Federal unit within former Yugoslavia. RS is a permanent part of Bosnia and Herzegovina because that was the only way to end a war. Dodik should be thankful, in particular to the Americans: had the war continued for 10 more days RS would no longer exist. Kosovo is independent because separating it from Yugoslavia ensured war could not start again. In other words, if your standard is peace, the outcome in both places is reasonable.
Q: How do you think the Washington officials who will attend the meeting with Vučić and Hoti on September 4 will react to Vučić’s eventual mentioning of Republika Srpska during the talks about Kosvo?
A: You’ll have to ask them. If I were a US government official today, I would laugh, tell him he has done his duty, and move on to the next agenda item. Vucic would then be relieved, as RS independence would put him in a double bind: either recognizing and losing all prospect of EU membership, or not recognizing and losing Serb support. Vucic is quite happy to see RS making governance impossible in Bosnia, not in Serbia.
Veljko Nestorović of Dnevne novine Alo asked:
Q: Is it possible to get your comment on the news that President Trump could attend the meeting of representatives of Belgrade and Pristina in Washington? How do you look at it, and does that mean that a final agreement may be discussed?
A: Best to ask the White House. They are desperate for anything they can advertise as a foreign policy success. I doubt it will qualify as a “final” agreement, though of course that claim may be made. The President is a flim-flam man, and Grenell is worse.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, August 23
– SAIS Prof Hal Brands argues that the Federalist papers lay out good ideas for a grand strategy.
-There’s a new, well-reviewed documentary about the US-promoted coup in Iran in 1953. Be on the lookout for it.
– I just saw, and highly recommend, a documentary about the failed Iranian hostage rescue mission in 1980, Desert One. It has interviews with Iranians, senior US officials, and several military participants. It doesn’t discuss the aftermath or lessons derived from that failure, the most significant of which was the military reform movement leading to the Goldwater-Nichols Act. [I was involved in the SASC briefings and hearings after Desert One and worked with many of the people who developed GNA.]
FYI, I’ll be away a few days and unable to read my favorite broadsheet newspapers, so unlikely to send much around.
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
