Photo, above: Flag of Morocco, one of many countries whose geopolitical and military situations are explored on a new site, MilitaryEdge[dot]org   The centerpiece of the site is an interactive map of the Middle East and North Africa. With this map, users can easily access the known weaponry of any country’s military in the region.  Users can also compare the military arsenals of a variety of actors in the Middle East and North Africa, and learn which are qualitatively and/or quantitatively superior.  

JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW

Hour One

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 1, Block A: Josh Rogin, Daily Beast, in re:  Ukraine; Victoria Nuland, Asst Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs ["has a long history of mistrust of the Russians], and two juniors hold a conference call on unencrypted mobile phones; conversation recorded and put on YouTube.  Diplomatic disaster to last for decades. Nuland used an unacceptable vulgarity and   State spokesman exculpates US by scorning Russian tradecraft.  Vitaly Klitschko, the boxer, is suddenly raised to global status.  Kremlin laughs coldly.

https://www.youtube [dot] com/watch?v=MSxaa-67yGM

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 1, Block B:  Jillian Kay Melchior, National Review Online, in re: New York's outstanding union contracts.  City has no legal obligation to pay the $3.5 billion demanded in back pay; these simply demand the same 4% increases that other unions have got.  Pattern bargaining: "If they got X, we want X." 

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 1, Block C: Charles Blahous, Hoover, in re:  Social Security, Obamacare, the economy.

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 1, Block D:  Bruce Webster, AndStllIPesist; Webster & Associates,  in re:  In a project where hundreds of people contribute code, unless you have swift review of all code by qualified reviewers,  you have no idea if the material is secure or not, Security has to be designed in not just the software but in the actual process. Parallel: design a bank with no one checking the vaults, the locks, and the like.  Also, public websites attract attacks.

Byelorus: One of our clients is healthcare.gov.  Ooops.   One of the problems with Obamacare site dvpt process: a five-year project in two years, had to farm out coding  to a lot of places. "Backdoor" refers to security flaw you don’t know of; could just be a specific coded string built into source code such that when used it'll always open the site. Like having a locksmith change your lock and keep a copy of your key. Btw, this all easily saleable.  What's the exact size of the source code?  We have no idea. [more]

U.S. intelligence agencies last week urged the Obama administration to check its new healthcare network for malicious software after learning that developers linked to the Belarus government helped produce the website, raising fresh concerns that private data posted by millions of Americans will be compromised.  The intelligence agencies notified the Department of Health and Human Services, the agency in charge of the Healthcare.gov network, about their concerns last week. Specifically, officials warned that programmers in Belarus, a former Soviet republic closely allied with Russia, were suspected of inserting malicious code that could be used for cyber attacks, according to U.S. officials familiar with the concerns.

The software links the millions of Americans who signed up for Obamacare to the  federal government and more than 300 medical institutions and healthcare providers.  “The U.S. Affordable Care Act software was written in part in Belarus by software developers under state control, and that makes the software a potential target for cyber attacks,” one official said.  Cyber security officials said the potential threat to the U.S. healthcare data is compounded by . . .

Hour Two

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 2, Block A:  Malcolm Hoenlein, Conference of Presidents, in re:

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 2, Block B: Fouad Ajami, Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution; also Working Group on Islamism and the International Order; in re: It's fine for the Obama Administration to side with Iran – specifically, with the Shi'a of Iran, - but the sides aren’t balanced.  Graham Greene: "Innocence is like a dumb leopard who's lost his bell, wanders the world meaning no harm". Here, we've sided with Assad, with Maliki in Iraq, and have no policy there beyond offering Hellfire missiles as it wars against the Sunnis in Anbar.  If the US is to take sides in the internal war within Islam, let us know what that means.  Iran has pushed into the Arab world with very little resistance.  . . .  Arab monarchs are well-mannered, very shrewd players, need America, will give a hearing to the US.  When we see Pres Obama heading to Saudi, I think of the 1979 overthrow of Shah in Iran so Carter prevailed on Saudis to let US send a squadron of F-15 fighter planes. On the way, Carter announces that the planes are unarmed.  Obama goes to Riyadh unarmed, weak.  Is Pres Obama informed of the depth, the virulence, of the divide between Sunni and Shi'a, between Persians and Arabs?    This is the foreign policy of Dennis McDonough, of Ben Rhodes. No big mind here.  Shi'a are 15% of the Islamic world; if you start with the remise of engaging Iran – Obama entered ofc with his heart set on accommodating Iran.  Signalled that the US has no interest in democracy in Iran He's hell-bent on making a deal with Iran.

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 2, Block C: Jonathan Schanzer, FDD, in re: . . . Huge sanctions-busting corruption scandal: $4 or $5 million in shoe boxes in his home; another, €87 billion in gold; Erdogan acted unconcerned. When he saw that the US was set on friendship with Iran, Erdogan changed course. Turks see him as having faltered.  US Undersecy of Treasury has visited Turkey twice in a few weeks to warn Erdogan not to trade with Iran. Odd. Unfriendly and ineffective.   Mr Erdogan sees real opportunity in doing business with Iran, his next-door neighbor.  Gas-for-gold scheme.  White House pretended not to notice for six months, allowing Iran to pocket $7 billion. Saudi and Jordanians recall the Ottoman Empire with no love.  Al Qaeda financiers: Kuwait to Turkey to jihadists. Turks are matching the Iranians in duplicity: can be against what they’re for at the same time.  Israel's edge is dwindling – millions in arms to Iraq, which is a subsidiary of Iran. Gulf petrowealth is buying arms. Questions: capability – weapons increasing - and intent: if I were an Israeli war-planner now I’d have a lot of gray hair. 

military edge. org

The U.S. legal definition of QME is, “the ability to counter and defeat any credible conventional military threat from any individual state or possible coalition of states or from non-state actors, while sustaining minimal damages and casualties, through the use of superior military means, possessed in sufficient quantity, including weapons, command, control, communication, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities that in their technical characteristics are superior in capability to those of such other individual or possible coalition of states or non-state actors.”

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 2, Block D: Mohsen Sazegara, Iranian journalist,  pro-democracy political activist; in re: Iran: sanctions eroding? mood inside? regime vs. people?  If Rouhani wants to accomplish anything – improve anything – he'll have to confront the Supreme Leader.  Rouhani can criticize some policies and ask to change some regulations, can suggest changing laws to prevent so many executions.  Must all factions defer to the Supreme Leader's opinions? Not exactly: that is, yes, according to the constitution; but he's a dictator with many factions that have a big impact on him. He tries to keep a balance.  Revolutionary Guards are brutal, competing with Ministry of Intelligence. Some, like the Quds Force, are involved in terrorism and work directly for the Supreme Leader.

Hour Three

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 3, Block A: Malcolm Hoenlein, Conference of Presidents, in re: European boycott of Israel.  From Jerusalem, perspective is that it’s quite serious – not so much the application of the boycott, but Cathy Ashton is always making remarks, and John Kerry's comment: If these talks fail then Israel would be [brought to its knees] by a boycott/sanctions/divestment – as though the BDS movement were legitimate.    Explosive situations in Iran, Syria and elsewhere; Kerry is on his twelfth trip to the Middle East.  Obama is moving toward a detente with Iran.  This is a time of real uncertainty in the Middle East, including Jordan, Israel, and neighbors. SodaStream: Superbowl ad and Scarlett Johanssen's words: factories all over the world, incl one in a Jerusalem suburb, which has 500 Palestinians and 450 Israeli Arabs employed there. Hypocrisy of targetting companies in the forefront of people living together.  Burning Israeli products in the streets in Europe.

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 3, Block B: Khaled Abu Toameh, Gatestone Institute; in re: King Abdullah of Jordan going to Washington, fear that Jordan is being entirely left out of Kerry's multiple negotiations.  Million s of Palestinians camped in Jordan, and there's a border  _ the Jordan Valley – between Jordan and the Palestinian state.  Fear of "resettling" Palestinians in Jordan – which Jordanians do not care for.  Internal strife impels the king to go to Washington. Kg already feels much betrayed by Kerry, d=fear another Oslo-type accord without consultations on with Jordan. A senior Jordanian official: Let's revoke the citizenship of children born to Jordanian mothers married to Palestinian men.  Focus on Tzipi Livni who made an inopportune remark; the more we approach the April deadline for these talks the more Palestinians escalate rhetoric and blame Israel for failure.    Livni asked, If the talks fail, what? "I guess Abbas would have to bear part of the responsibility" – and in minutes a firestorm broke out asserting that Livni was threatening Abbas's life and had murdered Abu Ammar (Yasir Arafat).  Marketed as a threat. Irrational, dangerous.

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 3, Block C: Arif Rafiq, PakistanRisk, in re: Civilian Government Risks Army Backlash with Musharraf Trial  The Nawaz Sharif government has begun proceedings to try former military ruler Pervez Musharraf for high treason. Will the civilian government follow through with the trial? How will the army react to the prosecution of one of its own? [more]

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 3, Block D:   Robert Zimmerman, behindtheblack.com, in re:  Congress hovers over commercial space like a vulture   "We’re here to help you": A House subcommittee held hearings yesterday to consider updating the Commercial Space Launch Act that regulates the commercial space tourism industry. Forgive me if I'm pessimistic about anything Congress might do. So far, every time they've updated the law, Congress has increased the regulatory regimen, making it harder and more expensive for these companies to get started. Consider these words from Donna Edwards (D-Maryland), the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee:
 [More]

For a variety of reasons, SpaceX and NASA have agreed to delay the next Dragon cargo mission a few weeks to no early than March 16.  It looks as though it was a combination of minor issues that, when piled up, called for a delay.

Hour Four

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 4, Block A: Smart Power by Christian Whiton (1 of 4)

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 4, Block B: Smart Power by Christian Whiton (2 of 4)

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 4, Block C: Smart Power by Christian Whiton (3 of 4)

Thursday  6 February 2014 / Hour 4, Block D: Smart Power by Christian Whiton (4 of 4)

FEBRUARY 7, 2014  Smart Power for Hong Kong: a diplomat’s view  In a first for Diplomat, a book review from the realm of diplomacy. Brendan Warren examines Christian Whiton’s “Smart Power: Between Diplomacy and War”; by Brendan Warren

Christian Whiton’s Smart Power: Between Diplomacy and War – a recently published book on smart power and its absence vis-à-vis statecraft emanating from Washington – raises myriad issues that foreign diplomats based in Hong Kong engage on a daily basis. 

Whiton, a former senior diplomat in the U.S. State Department, offers a theoretically sound and nuanced discussion of smart power without getting bogged down in the minutiae of the concept. He offers his readers a sharp understanding of history through the use of historical examples to illuminate the smart power concept. Smart power, as the title declares, occupies the space between intergovernmental diplomacy and coercive military force. Obvious examples of tools in the smart spectrum are economic sanctions, foreign aid and political propaganda outputs.

However, Whiton declares that current foreign policy institutions in Washington are unimaginative (a key tenet of his critique). The smart power spectrum is much broader and can encompass “diverse diplomatic, political, cultural, military, technological, financial, economic, rhetorical, legal and espionage-related tools and practices.” 

The missing middle

A lack of appetite for fresh ideas and reform in Washington’s foreign policy institutions (i.e. State Department, Department of Defense, various intelligence agencies) and the well-publicized partisan political gridlock limit the President in his foreign policy options, particularly opportunities arising from this “missing middle” in statecraft. 

Whiton’s balanced approach makes for a straightforward read. Historical discussion of smart power includes the “light switch” concept of statecraft, whereby the failure of diplomacy leads directly to the flick of a switch that commences military engagement. In this case his example was the Gulf War during the George H.W. Bush Administration. 

The “Arab-Persian Spring” offers a more contemporary take on smart power; specifically a series of case studies on how not to employ smart power. One of the book’s strengths lies in its ability to collate historical and very contemporary examples of success and failure in smart power deployment. Moreover, the use of personal anecdotes to prove the validity of his perspectives lends well to the fluid and direct nature of his argument. 

Whiton’s aggressive approach [on China], especially from a Washingtonian envoy never posted abroad, may be tough for some in-country diplomats to take. 

Whiton: Tough on China

Not overly polemic, the account does have some choice words for certain people who, in his view, take a meek stance on China. He is particularly critical of China apologists – “panda huggers” he calls them – he claims staff various American government foreign policy apparatuses, particularly in the State Department’s China desk. China is an American adversary, Whiton purports, and its communist form of government provides the greatest threat to “a civilized [world] order”. He believes D.C.’s foreign policy establishment’s careful steps to avoid antagonizing Beijing are diametrically opposed to how Washington ought to treat Beijing in its diplomatic relations. 

This hard-nosed look at Beijing’s actions makes clear that Whiton does not adhere to the “peaceful rise” thesis regarding China. For a narrow look at contemporary Chinese actions without a nuanced discussion of Chinese history, cultural norms and perceptions, Whiton’s piece offers it. Otherwise perhaps read Whiton in concert with a book like “When China Rules the World” by Martin Jacques. 

Whiton’s discourse on China’s conduct on various issues – rescinding work visas for journalists who publish criticism of Beijing, currency manipulation, endemic corruption, rampant violation of human rights, and censorship of media to name a few – offers nothing new to a learned Hong Kong audience. What is more germane to Hong Kong specifically and East and Southeast Asia generally is Whiton’s discussion of Washington’s relations with its allies in Taipei and Tokyo and prescriptive options for the employment of American smart power against China.

Outlined as one of five illusions – that “ally neglect softens adversaries” – Whiton argues that rather than continuing to neglect criticizing Beijing’s abhorrent behaviour on issues like human rights, in favour of maintaining positive cordial relations, Washington should reprimand Beijing more strenuously on various counts. In addition, he recommends against criticizing allies in Taipei and Tokyo, treating them as liabilities.

If America were to adhere to a smart power strategy that focused on China, what would it look like? Whiton proposes various approaches: adjusting military posture in the Pacific (making the so-called “pivot to Asia” a reality); creating a coalition of governments united against Chinese expansion in the region; channelling discontent that is simmering in Chinese society into a formidable opposition; coalescing democracies in the region to stand up to Beijing as a means to wear down internal public confidence in the communist system; supporting various oppressed minorities (e.g. Tibetans, Christians, Uyghurs) as per American values; and pushing free media content into China to offer a perspective other than that of Beijing’s. Whiton persuasively argues that this smart power envelope would not detrimentally affect economic relations between China and other states. 

Whiton’s aggressive approach, especially from a Washingtonian envoy never posted abroad, may be tough for some in-country diplomats to take. He recounts a 2006 incident where he was told by a senior diplomat at the U.S. Consulate in Hong Kong that it did not want to be seen by Beijing of “fanning the flames of democracy here.” Western consulates, better known for promoting ideals and values, face the same questions about how aggressively to promote their ideas – if at all.

Cast your net wide and wider

Another criticism raised by Whiton with implications for consulates in Hong Kong pertains to how political analysis is conducted. He contends that the State Department over-relies on political analysis from information that derives from a limited range of political actors – such as foreign diplomats, academics, and government officials – and fails to properly reconcile information by opposition figures and exiled political players. This, he argues, skews the reliability of political analysis and could lead to a more favourable view of the very regimes that the U.S. government needs a clear picture of. Again, Hong Kong based consulates with political reporting responsibilities may consider the range of sources they use in making determinations to relay to HQ. 

Whiton provides ample fodder for discussion amongst the diplomatic, foreign affairs, academic, political, and governmental communities in Hong Kong and fittingly arrives on the scene during an intense public debate over the role of Beijing in Hong Kong affairs. Whether applied to the universal suffrage discussions for C.E. elections in 2017 or the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands debate, Smart Power is a worthwhile and pertinent read for a Hong Kong audience.

Author bio: Mr Whiton served as a U.S. State Department official from 2003-2009, as special advisor and then as a deputy special envoy. He is currently principal at DC International Advisory, a political risk consulting firm. He holds an MBA from UCLA Anderson School of Management.

Brendan Warren is a graduate of Queen’s University focusing on political studies and holds a master’s degree from the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs in Ottawa, with a specialization in intelligence and national security. He has held positions in the then-Canadian International Development Agency and the Consulate General of Peru in Hong Kong.

..  ..  .. 

Music

Hour 1:   

Hour 2:

Hour 3:

Hour 4: