Reflection

I did not post as much today, but I hope you enjoyed what I had to offer.  Remember, there will not be a "Morning Memo" tomorrow because I will doing my radio show.  I will try to podcast the show, but it might not work.  If not, you can hear it on WRKE 100.3 FM and streaming online at wrke.org.   It is on from 1:30-3:00 pm EST.  To sum up my posts today:

1. My first thought was how Obama could get his groove back
2. A conversation about foreign policy
3. Some thoughts about the Cancun Climate Conference

Cancun: Not Spring Break For These Climate Negotiators

All eyes are on the Cancun, Mexico Climate Conference that is currently taking place for the next two weeks to find a substantive agreement.  Last year was considered a bitter disappointment for Copenhagen where only a three page, non-binding accord produced very dismal results.  Copenhagen's less than stellar results stemmed from two problems, countries not wanting to commit to specific target ranges to cut greenhouse gas emissions and not meeting the commitment scientists wanted for a good climate agreement.  At Copenhagen, the leaders of several nations decided to collectively agree reduce emissions by 17% by 2020.  It also stipulated that developing nations, who feel the brunt of most climate problems would receive about $30 billion in aid over the next 3 years.  Translation, the U.S. as an individual nation would only reduce GHG emissions by 3% towards 1990 levels, when it should be closer to 17% on its own.

Since that dismal performance, the nations of the world are working to work towards a stronger agreement.  I would not count on an amazing agreement though.  The U.S. and China are biggest polluters and they have not hammered out any type of agreement that they both find satisfactory.  In addition, China gets very nervous whenever the word transparency is uttered to monitor emissions standards.  They think it will encroach on their sovereignty.  The U.S. also has very little leverage going into this meeting due to the fact that the senate has yet to pick up a climate change bill that passed the house last year.  That bill would have incorporated a new cap-and-trade system that many conservatives are very nervous about.

After listing all the negatives, what are some positives that will come out of this tropical getaway to solve the planet's biggest crisis.  Most likely, it will be a minor agreement with slightly bigger targets than last year.  Developing nations will probably receive a little more compensation for damage caused by the big polluters.  Other pollutants like soot and methane will also be regulated.  Finally, more action could be taken to stop deforestation, a big cause of global warming and environmental degradation.  Nothing substantial will probably come from the summit.  Every country has individual needs, so it will probably work better if individual blocks like the EU, developing nations, and China and the U.S. all signed agreements individually.  Yes, the system would probably be less fair and not as comprehensive, but at least that would get the talks rolling and something is better than nothing.

Photo Credit: The Guardian

Foreign Policy Conversation

A Little Political Humor Always Helps

Cartoon From Slate

Morning Memo: Tuesday, November 30

Good Morning!

Top Global Issues:

Wikileaks: China Believes Korea Should Be Unified

Worldwide Reaction To Wikileaks Documents

Middle East Fallout From Wikileaks

Small Hopes Of Success At Cancun Climate Conference

EU-AU Summit Opens In Libya

Abuse Claims In Ivory Coast Elections

Haiti's Instability And The Presidential Election

President Obama's Bipartisan Meeting On The Bush Tax Cuts

Federal Workers Pay Freeze Instituted

Figures of Note:





Opinions of Note:

Ross Douthat on The Partisan Mindset

Fareed Zakaria on Economic Growth Policies and The Federal Reserve

My First Thought: Who's In Control?

President Obama is now at a critical moment during the lameduck session of congress.  He has two of the most important bills that he should try to get through.  First is the extension of the Bush era tax cuts for the middle class only, which is the president's plan.  The Republicans want to extend all the tax cuts and are not budging on the issue.  Second is the ratification of the START Treaty by the senate for nuclear arms reductions with Russia.  Currently, several Republicans are blocking the ratification of this treaty, mostly for political purposes.  Even though this is only the lameduck session and Republicans will not get their majorities until January, it still is a critical juncture for the president.  Republicans are currently testing the president to see if he has the will to go through with his agenda or whether they can push him around.  I urge the president to force a vote on the Bush tax cuts, I dare the GOP to vote against the extension of the middle class tax cuts only to let them expire at the end of the year.  It is an all or nothing game here.  Unless President Obama stands up for his agenda now, you can definitely count on him being a pushover for the next two years.

Photo Credit: The Daily Telegraph

Reflection

So ends another day.  With the semester winding down and getting busy, my posts will be a little less than before.  Nevertheless, I still hope you enjoy them.  To sum up my posts for today:

1. My first thought was testing the alliance system
2. Paul Krugman talks about Spain's debt crisis
3. The new Wikileaks documents prove the diplomatic community is just like high school
4. Commentators discuss a new monetary system

The International Monetary System

The Diplomats Club Is Just Like High School

The media's overhype of the Wikileaks document dump brings about a sudden disappointment for those who wanted to read a good mystery about the State Department and its internal workings.  When they said "secrets" would be revealed, I thought it would be more about secret assassination attempts or secret coups plotted by the CIA or State Department.  Instead, Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, has produced nothing more than a series of embarrassing comments made by various diplomats.  This does not put the U.S. intelligence in any mortal danger, but it does reveal to the world how much the diplomatic community is very much like a bunch of teenage girls giggling over goofy secrets and spreading gossip about certain authoritarian dictators.

Anne Applebaum of the Washington Post expressed similar sentiments when she wrote:

I'm sure the Russian people will be shocked—shocked!—to discover that U.S. diplomats think the Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, "plays Robin to Putin's Batman." Italians will be equally horrified to learn that their prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, is considered "feckless, vain, and ineffective as a modern European leader," just as the French will be stunned to hear President Nicolas Sarkozy called "thin-skinned and authoritarian." As for the Afghans, they will be appalled to read that their president, Hamid Karzai, has been described as "an extremely weak man who did not listen to facts."

And anyone perusing the semi-secret diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks this week will find more of the same. Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe is a "crazy old man." Muammar Qaddafi of Libya travels with a "voluptuous blonde" whom he describes as his "senior Ukrainian nurse." In the coming days, there will be many things to say about the specific details of these newly public documents. But before we get into all that, let's not lose the main point: Above all, this leak contains a treasure trove of things people regularly say off the record that they never say in public. These aren't records of human-rights abuses, they are accounts of conversations. And—just like July's WikiLeaks revelations about Afghanistan—this one confirms much that was publicly known, openly discussed, and even written about before.

Let's face it, the international community is a political community.  People backstab and talk "shit" about one another.  So instead of drooling over which diplomat will sit at the cool kids table, Wikileaks should find something more substantive for the world to see.  Otherwise, Assange's attempt to be the next Daniel Ellsberg, the man who smuggled out the infamous Pentagon Papers during the Vietnam era, will be nil.

Photo Credit: Forbes

Spain, America, and Debt

In his latest column today, Paul Krugman continues to dissect the debt crisis.  His Friday column talked about Ireland's debt crisis, and today's talks about Spain.  While he does lean left, he still does an excellent job at explaining this complicated problem.  He says of Spain:

What’s striking about Spain, from an American perspective, is how much its economic story resembles our own. Like America, Spain experienced a huge property bubble, accompanied by a huge rise in private-sector debt. Like America, Spain fell into recession when that bubble burst, and has experienced a surge in unemployment. And like America, Spain has seen its budget deficit balloon thanks to plunging revenues and recession-related costs.

But unlike America, Spain is on the edge of a debt crisis. The U.S. government is having no trouble financing its deficit, with interest rates on long-term federal debt under 3 percent. Spain, by contrast, has seen its borrowing cost shoot up in recent weeks, reflecting growing fears of a possible future default.

His solution is for Spain to move off the Euro, of course he doubts the probability of that solution:

 Why is Spain in so much trouble? In a word, it’s the euro.

Spain was among the most enthusiastic adopters of the euro back in 1999, when the currency was introduced. And for a while things seemed to go swimmingly: European funds poured into Spain, powering private-sector spending, and the Spanish economy experienced rapid growth.

Should Spain try to break out of this trap by leaving the euro, and re-establishing its own currency? Will it? The answer to both questions is, probably not. Spain would be better off now if it had never adopted the euro — but trying to leave would create a huge banking crisis, as depositors raced to move their money elsewhere. Unless there’s a catastrophic bank crisis anyway — which seems plausible for Greece and increasingly possible in Ireland, but unlikely though not impossible for Spain — it’s hard to see any Spanish government taking the risk of “de-euroizing.”

A Little Political Humor Always Helps

Cartoon From Slate

Morning Memo: Monday, November 29

Good Morning!

After some time off, I am refreshed and ready to blog again!

Top Global Issues:

Arab Nations Wanted The U.S. To Attack Iran According to Wikileaks

Wikileaks: Israel And Abbas Coordinate Gaza War

China Wants Emergency Form Of Six Party Talks With North Korea

Ireland's Chunk Of The Bailout Contribution

Egyptians Hold Elections Despite Fraud Accusations

Spain's Regional Elections

Protests Amist Haiti's Upcoming Elections

Cancun Environment Conference Begins This Week

Figures of Note:





Opinions of Note:

Paul Krugman on Ireland's Bailout

Michael A. Levi on the Cancun Climate Conference

My First Thought: Alliances Will Be Tested

On Sunday, the first set of Wikileaks documents were released.  It was the biggest dump of documents that the organization has published.  Most of the documents are diplomatic cables, or telegrams, and internal memos between world governments and the U.S.  This will be very problematic because it will release public information about feuds that the U.S. is having with different nations and releasing plans that were classified to be on public display.  Allies will either turn away from the U.S. for releasing this information or they will just brush it off.  Either way, the alliance system for further negotiations will be tested.  In Cancun, Mexico, the annual climate conference is taking place to make decisions about emissions targets for global warming.  Here, the alliance system is critical.  If the U.S. makes a false move or irritates a critical nation, the hopes of any deal being signed will be dashed.  Now more than ever the U.S. must be careful in its diplomatic rhetoric and actions.  Otherwise, the consequences will be dire for global diplomacy.

Photo Credit: The Globe and Mail

Radio Show Today!

I will be on the air for my radio show called "The Independent Internationalist."  The show is on from 1:30-3:00 pm EST on WRKE 100.3 FM.  You can also listen online at wrke.org.  Hope you tune in!!!!

Friday Foreign Policy Roundup: 11/19.10

START Treaty 


Hillary Clinton and Robert Gates Support START

Obama vs. The GOP on START

U.S. Foreign Policy 


Israel and U.S. Deal

U.S. Policy Towards Sudan

Is Afghanistan a Lost Cause?

Is Obama's FP Agenda Stuck In Neutral?

The Deficit


America's Deficit Paranoia

Peter Orszag's Take On The Deficit Commission Report

Social Trends

Attitudes About Marriage

The Ignorance Agenda

Column: My Tips For New Congressman

Morning Memo Madness


Monday, November 15
Tuesday, November 16
No MM Wednesday
Thursday, November 17
Friday, November 18

Photo Credit: The Globe and Mail

This will last blog post for about week because I will be going on vacation for Thanksgiving.  So, I think I will take a break.  Happy Early Thanksgiving!

Is Blocking START A Bad Idea?

The Legislative Showdown: Obama vs. the GOP

The lameduck session of congress is becoming the ultimate predictor for the Obama administration about how they will handle the GOP when they come into power in January.  Currently, Obama's team is trying to pass its biggest foreign policy initiative, START, which is a nuclear arms reduction treaty between the U.S. and Russia.  The other big piece of legislation that Obama is trying to pass is the extension of the Bush tax cuts that will expire at the end of year.  The tax cuts are not something the president wants to extend, but they are a popular piece of legislation pushed by the GOP.

Yesterday, the Democrats reviled their plan to extend the tax cuts for the middle class only and possibly pass the tax cuts for the upper income brackets at a later date.  Republicans want all the tax cuts extended, either permanently or for at least 2 years.  The Republicans only want to pass the START treaty if the U.S. government provides funds to update nuclear weapons capabilities that are already in place.  While the Obama administration has made that offer, they are still being snubbed by the congressional leadership on that offer.  Of course, this legislation could pass after the lameduck session, but it could be changed with a GOP majority in the house.

The crucial test during the lameduck session is how the president handles compromising with the GOP.  If nothing happens, it will be an indication that he is not interested in cutting deals with Republican Party.  Think of this like the pre-season to the real legislative session next January.  This is a test of Democratic negotiating strategy, if it does not work then their agenda will be dead and since the GOP does not have a majority in both houses nothing will get done.  In this scenario, nobody wins.

Photo Credit: New York Times

Column (11/19/10): My Tips For New Congressmen

It appears that everywhere I turn some pundit is offering words of wisdom to the newly anointed freshmen class of the 112^th congress. Although that particular congressional session begins in January, hundreds of newly elected congressmen flooded the halls of Capitol Hill for an orientation session. The normal sermon was given by the speakers about being ethical, as congress does so well. Even Representative Eric Cantor provided his newest colleagues with Hit the Ground Running, a guide about being in congress.

Of course, I have never served in congress or worked in Washington (that could change someday), but from an outsider’s perspective there are some other rules the new freshman class should observe:

1. Tone down Your Rhetoric: For those in the Tea Party who pledged to “Take back America,” you probably will have to check that dream at the door. It is important to set realistic goals for yourself. Legislating is like a good exercise program: if your dream is too high, you will never achieve it. Give your constituents realistic expectations, if you do not want them showing up with pitchforks, ropes, and torches later.

Continue Reading Here...

Read More Headlines From The Brackety-Ack

A Little Political Humor Always Helps

Cartoon From Slate

Morning Memo: Friday, November 19

Good Morning!

"Today the real test of power is not capacity to make war but capacity to prevent it." -Anne O'Hare McCormick


Top Global Issues: 


NATO Plan For 4 Year Afghanistan Pullout Plan


Sanctions On Myanmar Could Be Lifted 


Iran's President Want's Pressures Lifted Before Talking To West


Some Effects After Attempted Madagascar Coup


Settlement Freeze Proposal For Israel Is Not Quite Finished


Guinea's Election Being Challenged By The Opposition


Cholera Outbreak Could Last For Years In Haiti


Jobless Aid Extension Blocked In The House


Harry Reid: Pass START Within A Year


Figures of Note: 








Opinions of Note: 


Fred Kaplan on START


Matt Miller on American Exceptionalism 


My First Thought: Covering Congress


Over the next several weeks, congress will be on the minds of the media.  Every move congress makes on the extension of the Bush tax cuts, START, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," and everything else will be heavily scrutinized by the media.  This means congressional procedure and back door dealmaking will be on display during the lameduck session.  When this happens, Americans became very cynical about the democratic process. Mainly, they see the system as corrupt.  We saw this during healthcare.  Every single step of that bill was covered from committee to signing day.  It also angered people about the type of deals that were cut to pass it.  These policies will not be any different.  Be prepared to get too close the legislative process, probably closer than you ever wanted to be. 




Photo Credit: CTV

Reflection

To sum up my posts for today:

1. My first thought was about avoiding the same debates
2. Climate change denial goes beyond climate change
3. India's microloan problem
4. Former OMB Chairman Peter Orszag on the deficit commission report
5. Interesting marriage trends
6. Why the deficit should not be the top priority

How Recessions Spur New Economic Theories?

Two Nobel Laureate economists, Joseph Stiglitz and George Akerlof, have written a very interesting piece about how the recession will forge a thousand theories for economists to ponder over for centuries to come and how new economic models will be created to stimulate future growth:

The economic and financial crisis has been a telling moment for the economics profession, for it has put many long-standing ideas to the test. If science is defined by its ability to forecast the future, the failure of much of the economics profession to see the crisis coming should be a cause of great concern.

But there is, in fact, a much greater diversity of ideas within the economics profession than is often realized. This year’s Nobel laureates in economics are two scholars whose life work explored alternative approaches. Economics has generated a wealth of ideas, many of which argue that markets are not necessarily either efficient or stable, or that the economy, and our society, is not well described by the standard models of competitive equilibrium used by a majority of economists.

Behavioral economics, for example, emphasizes that market participants often act in ways that cannot easily be reconciled with rationality. Similarly, modern information economics shows that even if markets are competitive, they are almost never efficient when information is imperfect or asymmetric (some people know something that others do not, as in the recent financial debacle) – that is, always .

 A long line of research has shown that even using the models of the so-called “rational expectations” school of economics, markets might not behave stably, and that there can be price bubbles. The crisis has, indeed, provided ample evidence that investors are far from rational; but the flaws in the rational expectations line of reasoning—hidden assumptions such as that all investors have the same information—had been exposed well before the crisis.

Just as the crisis has reinvigorated thinking about the need for regulation, so it has given new impetus to the exploration of alternative strands of thought that would provide better insights into how our complex economic system functions – and perhaps also to the search for policies that might avert a recurrence of the recent calamity.

Continue Reading Here...

Deficit Paranoia

Jonathan Chatt of The New Republic writes on his blog today:

I do think the long-term deficit is a serious issue that I'd like to see addressed. I don't understand the idea that this is an especially good political time to solve it. While many Democrats oppose any revisions to entitlement programs, the entire Republican party is in the grips of anti-tax dogma so powerful that not a single Republican in Congress has defied it for twenty years. Now, a moment of high Republican hubris, seems like a very unlikely moment to force the party to compromise its core policy commitment.

What's truly bizarre is this idea that it's the most urgent issue to address. Climate change seems clearly more urgent--and, what's more, it's probably irreversible. The economic crisis is also more urgent. But Washington elites are fairly removed from the cataclysmic effects of the economic crisis--they're not losing their homes or living in economic terror. And climate change is a "partisan" issue, unworthy of the urgings of a non-partisan wise man. And so, by dint of the peculiar isolation and sociological demands of the members of the political and media establishments, the deficit must become the top priority.

I would agree that climate change impacts are happening now, but the main events will probably start taking place around 2040-2050 at the earliest.  Interesting, the debt problem and the climate problem could happen at the same time, yet we choose to tackle the debt.  We don't prioritize very well in America.  A much broader point to make is the deficit is a problem, but it should probably be tackled after the recession when stimulus spending is needed to keep the economy going.

There are two main reasons Americans are freaking out about the debt right now.  First, Greece, and currently Ireland, had collapsing economies that they had be bailed out.  The part that is not mentioned is how Greece also made bad investments and cooked the books to make it look better for speculators than what was really happening.  The second problem is Americans have an irrational phobia of big numbers.  $1 trillion dollars sounds very scary to most people because they do not have that type of cash, and probably never will.  Really, the debt is only about 8% of the overall GDP and deficit reduction plans will probably bring it down to 2-3% of the GDP at best.  This is also normal during a recession.  So take a chill pill on the deficit, it will get fixed when the time is right.

Marriage Trends

The Pew Research Center, in conjunction with Time Magazine, has released a study indicating that marriage is starting to become obsolete to most people.  Here are some graphs from the study that I find interesting:

The charts that I chose were primarily focused on generational attitudes.  Some of them are good, like changing gender roles and views of different types of families.  Others were interesting like having a husband who provides a good income is high priority for women and education level does not score high percentage wise.

Peter Orszag On Debt Commission Report

The Council on Foreign Relations published an interview with the former Office of Management and Budget Chairman Peter Orszag to get his take on recent proposals by the bipartisan debt commission:

What does this draft proposal achieve, since it's not a piece of legislation or the finalized recommendation due December 1?

I always thought that the most likely mechanism through which the commission would exert its influence was through a proposal from the co-chairs. There has been a lot of focus on whether the co-chairs would be able to get fourteen or more votes in favor of a recommendation.  While that may or may not still be possible, the discussion that the co-chairs' suggestions has prompted shows it may not matter that much whether they ultimately get an official recommendation, since, as you see from the reaction to the proposal, it is generating substantial discussion.

Ultimately its impact will depend in part on how the administration decides to respond. That, in turn, will reflect a choice that the administration faces about whether it decides to tack to the left or tack to the center. From the initial reaction, it is clear that the left in particular is not very pleased with the proposals from the co-chairs.

Attacks have been launched at the proposals from both sides of the political spectrum. Does the draft strike you as partisan?

 No, it seems to have displeased both the left and the right, so it doesn't strike me at partisan. And on Social Security in particular, the reaction from the left seems off to me. If you look at the specific Social Security proposals in the co-chairs' set of recommendations, they include a change that makes the benefits formula more progressive; they include a change that makes the payroll tax more progressive; they include changes to make the index used to measure cost of living increases more accurate. Most importantly, the proposals don't include private accounts as part of social security, which, four of five years ago, had been the single most important thing that progressives were fighting against. The proposal now offers an opportunity to lock that in, because in ten, or fifteen, or twenty years, assuming there's not a reform now, those issues may well be back on the table. Private accounts as part of Social Security are definitively dead for now, so I don't fully understand why the left is not eager to lock in that victory.

Also, right now, the left is most concerned about a gap in aggregate demand, and the need for more stimulus, which is a concern I share. But additional stimulus currently has about zero chance of getting enacted. The more that's done to reduce the deficit in the out-years, enacted now but to take effect in the future, the more it becomes plausible that we could actually get another round of stimulus.

Continue Reading Here...

India's Microfinance Problem

Once the model for microfinance loans to the poor to start businesses, the industry is apparently seeing a sub-prime crisis of its own.  The New York Times reports:

The region’s crisis is likely to reverberate around the globe. Initially the work of nonprofit groups, the tiny loans to the poor known as microcredit once seemed a promising path out of poverty for millions. In recent years, foundations, venture capitalists and the World Bank have used India as a petri dish for similar for-profit “social enterprises” that seek to make money while filling a social need. Like-minded industries have sprung up in Africa, Latin America and other parts of Asia.

But microfinance in pursuit of profits has led some microcredit companies around the world to extend loans to poor villagers at exorbitant interest rates and without enough regard for their ability to repay. Some companies have more than doubled their revenues annually.

Now some Indian officials fear that microfinance could become India’s version of the United States’ subprime mortgage debacle, in which the seemingly noble idea of extending home ownership to low-income households threatened to collapse the global banking system because of a reckless, grow-at-any-cost strategy.

Is Afghanistan A Lost Cause?

AFGHANISTAN IS A LOST CAUSE (iq2us.org) from Intelligence Squared US on Vimeo.

Why Ignorance Wins?

I am always fascinated by climate change deniers.  I never understand their goal.  I put them in the same category with evolution deniers, flat Earthers, and atomic theory deniers.  Why does science get such a bum rap in the world of politics?  The answer lies in losing ground on social theories.

Before I get to that part, I am discussing this topic because Politico reported this morning that a climate change denier could be poised to chair the House Science Committee.  Representative Ralph Hall is from the great state of Texas.  He is also a Republican.  Hall's main point will be to have a discussion about the legitimacy of climate science.  Instead of focusing on actual policy discussions, the committee will talk about whether the field should really be considered a subject worth talking about.  That is like if a House committee on tax policy decided to debate whether the IRS should be a legitimate organization.

Anyway, this is not new.  The country just had 8 years of climate change denial under Bush.  What I find interesting is how politicians claim to know more than scientists who analyze this stuff for a living.  The truth is this group knows that slowly their theories about the world are shriveling away.  With knowledge about evolution, the cosmos, and disease increasing over the last century, pseudo-scientific theories like creationism have began to lose their sway.  This debate is not about climate change.  No, the debate is much broader.  It is about discrediting the scientific establishment.  It is the domino theory of scientific destruction.  If they can destroy one theory maybe others will follow and all will be right with the world.

Yes, the earth can go back to begin 6,000 years old and mental illness can be caused by demons.  In the end, the goal is for ignorance to win.

Photo Credit: Politico

A Little Political Humor Always Helps

Cartoon From Slate

Morning Memo: Thursday, November 18

Good Morning!

Politics and policy really should be separate entities

Top Global Issues:

The Irish Bailout

Voted Expected On START By End Of The Year

Attempted Coup In Madagascar

Guinea Declares State Of Emergency After Recent Elections

Russia And NATO Could Sign Arms Deal At Upcoming Summit

Muslim And Christian Tensions Rise In Egypt

Karzai Smooths Over Relations With U.S.

Turkey's Problem With NATO Missions In Islamic Countries

10,000 Could Die Of Cholera In Haiti

Lisa Murkowski Wins Alaska Senate Race

Figures of Note:





Opinions of Note:

Sebastian Mallaby on India's Model For Currency

Bjorn Lomborg on Adapting To Climate Change

My First Thought: The Same Debates

Right now, the senate is considering whether it wants to take up the START Treaty, which would reduce nuclear stockpiles for the U.S. and Russia.  The main opposition against this treaty is the same excuse we always hear: if the U.S. reduces nuclear weapons we will not have an adequate defense.  I am not much of a fan of this argument because it would just be easier to gradually remove weapons until very few are left on either side.  This argument has been made against every president who wants to sign a nuclear arms treaty.  Republican and Democrat administrations are plagued by this problem of the same debate between both parties.  My advice would be to just sign the damn treaty.  The world will not go to nuclear war and our defense capabilities will not diminish.  Empirically, they never do when we do sign a nuclear arms reduction treaty.

Photo Credit: Fox News

No Posts Today!

Since I have new obligations to the radio, I will not be posting on Wednesdays.  However, you can listen to my radio show at 1:30-3:00 pm EST on WRKE 100.3 FM.  You can also listen online at wrke.org.

Sudan: The Time Is Now

This will be my last post of the day because I have some work to do before I attend a lecture and movie about Sudan.  I have talked about Sudan's policy before, but I want to leave you with this op-ed authored by George Clooney and John Prendergast who have been advocates about helping the Sudanese get through this referendum in January.  Unless something is done, another civil war will ensue:

Well, we're in it now. What we do best. Diplomacy. The White House has dispatched Senator John Kerry to Sudan with a proposal for peace between the North and South. It’s a giant step toward avoiding the kind of bloodshed that killed more than two million people in Sudan’s previous 20-year North-South civil war, which ended only in 2005 – and is threatening to erupt once again.

In recent months, President Barack Obama has stepped up his own involvement and that of senior figures in his administration in support of a peace strategy for Sudan. On his behalf, Kerry has delivered a package of proposals designed to break the logjam that has brought the North and South to a dangerous crossroads.

We have written a memo that spells out some of the essential elements of what a grand bargain for peace in Sudan could look like. If you’re interested in the specifics of a possible peace deal – and in actions that you can take to support it – go to www.sudanactionnow.org.

There is little time to waste. On January 9, 2011, the people of Southern Sudan will vote for independence from the North, taking with them up to three-quarters of the country’s known oil reserves and placing millions of civilians in the direct path of war.

Continue Reading Here...

Livin' On A Prayer: The New START Treaty

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates wrote an op-ed yesterday giving their reasons for the senate to ratify the new START Treaty.  They say:

For decades, American inspectors have monitored Russian nuclear forces, putting into practice President Ronald Reagan's favorite maxim, "Trust, but verify." But since the old START Treaty expired last December, we have relied on trust alone. Until a new treaty comes into force, our inspectors will not have access to Russian missile silos and the world's two largest nuclear arsenals will lack the stability that comes with a rigorous inspection regime.

Before this session of Congress ends, we urge senators to approve an arms control treaty that would again allow U.S. inspectors access to Russian strategic sites and reduce the number of nuclear weapons held by both nations to a level not seen since the 1950s.

The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), signed by President Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in April, builds on foundations laid by American leaders from both political parties over the past four decades. It has broad bipartisan backing. Six former secretaries of state, five former secretaries of defense and three former national security advisers have endorsed ratification, along with seven former commanders of U.S. Strategic Command and the entire current U.S. military leadership. They understand that nuclear dangers did not disappear with the Soviet Union and that we have a responsibility -- to Americans and our allies -- to keep our eyes on the world's other major strategic nuclear arsenal.

Continue Reading Here...

Bob Woodward's Take On Foreign Policy and Society

Bob Woodward's Take On Foreign Policy and Society

A Little Political Humor Always Helps

Cartoon From Slate

Morning Memo: Tuesday, November 16

Good Morning!

"Intellectual growth should commence with birth and cease only at death" - Albert Einstein

Top Global Issues:

Debt Crisis Is Top Of the Docket For The Eurozone Conference

Israel Debates Accepting Military Jets For Settlement Freeze

Aung San Suu Kyi Wants Her Party Re-Instated

Guinea Election Results Announced

Voter Registration Begins In Sudan For Upcoming Independence Vote

NATO And Russia Agree To More Cooperation On Afghanistan

Singapore And China Increase Bilateral Relationship

Riots Occur In Haiti Due To Cholera Outrage

Figures of Note:





Opinions of Note:

Peter Orszag on Social Security

Christopher Hitchens on Israel

My First Thought: Policy Wonks Unite

I have made the claim before that in order to survive through the next century the policy wonks are going to need to prepare for action.  This means wading through tax legislation and business proposals to solve America's problems.  Now more than ever, Congress must start getting serious about finding the right people to do it.  It also means taking serious proposals, like the one the bipartisan debt commission proposed, into consideration.  These policies will get complicated, we need people who understand this stuff inside and out.  That means the American people need to elect the nerds to run the government.  Pick the people who love to read bills for fun and will pick the best policy option.  It might sound boring, but with complex world we live in we need smart people to understand it.

Photo Credit: The Telegraph

Reflection

To sum up my posts today:

1. My first thought was Obama is not weak as a president
2. Good conversation about Myanmar and Haiti
3. Much needed filibuster reform
4. Obama's Waterloo on foreign policy
5. The lucrative deal between the U.S. and Israel

The President' Power

As I said in the "Morning Memo," President Obama still has quite a bit of maneuvering room when it comes to policy options.  Paul Krugman illuminates this point:

Here’s the thing: Mr. Obama still has immense power, if he chooses to use it. At home, he has the veto pen, control of the Senate and the bully pulpit. He still has substantial executive authority to act on things like mortgage relief — there are billions of dollars not yet spent, not to mention the enormous leverage the government has via its ownership of Fannie and Freddie. Abroad, he still leads the world’s greatest economic power — and one area where he surely would get bipartisan support would be taking a tougher stand on China and other international bad actors.

But none of this will matter unless the president can find it within himself to use his power, to actually take a stand. And the signs aren’t good.

Israel and U.S. Deal: Is It That Bad?

The peace talks seem to be back on again between the Israelis and the Palestinians, barring that Israel's President Bibi Netanyahu convinces parliament to a 90 day settlement freeze.  This deal has sparked criticism from all sides.  The U.S. offered Israel 20 advanced warplanes for the settlement Freeze.  Also, the freeze does not include East Jerusalem, the site where the Palestinians want their new capital to be built.  Even if the deal is passed by Israel's parliament, it still looks shady and Israel may not continue negotiating after 90 days.  The settlements can only be frozen for so long.

Did President Obama's administration make a mistake in continuing these talks?  In my view no.  The administration was in a  catch-22 situation.  If they stopped the talks they would have been criticized by the right and the left for not offering up incentives.  If they did offer incentives, the incentives themselves would have been criticized.  Honestly, the warplane exchange is not that shocking.  Diplomacy is not a tidy event.  There is give and take on both sides.  20 warplanes in exchange for continuing peace talks is not that bad.

The downside to this plan is it just buys time until the next settlement freeze.  The game will continue until the other side is tired of playing and runs out of steam.  Eventually, Netanyahu will not be able to convince the conservative side of his party to continue with the talks and they will be called off.  Unless the Obama administration has some grand strategy to solve this problem, they are just delaying the inevitable of another set of failed peace talks.

Photo Credit: Fox News

Obama's Possibly Stymied Foreign Policy Agenda

There have been numerous agreements that could be struck between the two different parties on various foreign policy topics, but their are also vast disagreements on how to accomplish those goals.  Foreign Policy Magazine outlines 10 ways that Obama's foreign policy agenda could be derailed by the GOP:

AFGHANISTAN

Obama's December 2009 decision to put 30,000 additional troops into the Afghan war effort stood out as the one foreign-policy issue on which the GOP and White House saw eye to eye. In fact, Republicans in Congress provided valuable support to the White House during the rollout of the "Afghan surge" decision, and conservative think-tank experts such as Frederick and Kimberly Kagan have been working closely with Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Afghanistan. But leading GOP lawmakers on military issues, such as Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) have been calling on the administration to back away from its promise to start withdrawing troops from Afghanistan next July.

The new GOP-led House stands to provide a venue for those who oppose the troop withdrawal to air their views. Expect new House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) and new House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) to hold hearings with Petraeus -- who has already not-so-privately aired his concerns about the proposed troop drawdown. It is likely that they will look for any indication that he needs more time or more personnel to complete the mission, boxing Obama into tricky political territory. On the civilian side, new prospective State and Foreign Operations Subcommittee chairwoman Kay Granger (R-Texas) is poised to use her control over civilian aid to press the case for taking a tougher line on Afghan President Hamid Karzai, as her predecessor Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) did in 2010.

THE NEW START TREATY

GOP calls for delaying a vote on Obama's nuclear-arms reduction treaty with Russia are already in full song. Although the Senate did not change hands, the addition of a half-dozen new Republican senators next year would make reaching the 67-vote threshold for ratifying the treaty much more difficult for the administration and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), who is leading the charge for ratification. The administration is still hoping that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will schedule a vote in the lame-duck session, but GOP leaders, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), are signaling they won't go along. Even in the lame duck, finding enough GOP senators to vote for the treaty if their leadership doesn't change its mind will be a daunting task.

The administration has a two-track strategy for getting the treaty, dubbed New START, approved. The main plan is to offer a final package of incentives related to nuclear modernization and nuclear-stockpile maintenance to Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), who is seen as the key Republican in the debate. If Kyl agrees, the majority of the caucus will follow suit. Plan B is to try to peel off moderate senators such as Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), and Scott Brown (R-Mass.) to reach the 67-vote threshold.

But a delay until next year could mean a wait until next summer as Congress reorganizes itself. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee would also have to approve the treaty again if no full vote is taken this year. What remains unknown is how new senators, including Tea Party members who could object to the $80 billion the administration is throwing at Kyl to garner his support, would vote. If the GOP kills the treaty, "the message we may be sending is that we're not in the business of passing treaties anymore," said Heather Conley, director of the Europe program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Continue Reading Here...

Finally Filibuster Reform

Its the first day back for the U.S. congress as they start their lameduck session.  Part of that session is to be begin with possible filibuster reform.  Washington reform is one of the areas that I think the Democrats and Republicans can agree on, so this is a very good first step.  The Hill reports:

Three Democratic proponents of changing the Senate’s filibuster rules are vowing to press their case in the 112th Congress despite the GOP takeover of the House, with one senator pledging to force the issue on the very first day.

Sens. Tom Harkin (Iowa), Mark Udall (Colo.) and Tom Udall (N.M.) all told The Hill this week they are not backing down from their effort. The Senate’s rules — which are based on tradition, not the Constitution— have frustrated Democrats for the past several years as GOP leaders have required a 60-vote majority even for procedural motions.

Sen. Tom Udall said he will force a motion on the first day of the next Congress to have Vice President Joe Biden adopt new rules for the two-year session. Then, Udall said, he will seek consensus among senators from both parties to lower the 60-vote threshold for procedural motions. Only a simple majority of 51 votes would be necessary for such a move, and Udall said he expects support from some Republicans.

“The areas that look most fruitful for rules reform is the motion to proceed and shifting the burden to require those in opposition to a bill to come forward and present their case on the floor,” Tom Udall told The Hill. “Those are the two areas that seem to resonate with the senators I’ve talked to.”

Tom Udall said he does not have a specific proposal for what the voting threshold should be, saying he simply wants to build consensus and restrict senators’ ability to hold up legislation.

Continue Reading Here...

A Conversation On Myanmar and Haiti

A Little Political Humor Always Helps

Cartoon From Slate

Morning Memo: Monday, November 15

Good Morning!

"We do not covet anything from any nation except their respect" - Winston Churchill

Top Global Issues:

Israel and U.S. Agree To Push For A 90 Day Settlement Freeze

Palestinians Mad About U.S. Incentives For Israel To Continue Talks

APEC Agrees To Free Trade Zone

917 Haitians Have Cholera

President Obama Tells Russian President Medvedev That START Will Be A Top Priority

Aung San Suu Kyi Released By Myanmar Government

Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai Wants The U.S. To Reduce Troop Presence

Richard Holbrooke: U.S. Will Begin Withdrawing Troops From Afghanistan Next July

Figures of Note:





Opinions of Note:

Thomas Friedman on Stalled Agenda Items

Douglas E. Schoen and Patrick H. Caddell on Obama Not Seeking Re-Election

My First Thought: Obama Is Not Weak

It seems that the obituary to the Obama presidency is being written by some liberal commentators who see the president's agenda as dead in the water.  The only opportunity they see with the president is his ability to pass legislation through the lameduck session of congress.  With the Bush tax cuts, AMT, Medicare reform, extending unemployment benefits, START approval, and DADT, the lameduck session will be a busy session indeed.  Of course, the president can still negotiate with other members of GOP majority in the house.  There are multiple foreign policy options that President Obama and the GOP leaders can agree on.  Plus, Washington reform is always a possibility.  Also a memo to the new Republican house and senate members, changing Washington is very difficult.  It requires pragmatic skills and chest thumping on accomplishments.  If they want any of that, they will have to work with the president on something.  So no, President Obama still holds power and will for the next 2 years.

Photo Credit: Fox News 

Friday Foreign Policy Roundup: 11/12/10

Obama Travels To India

Critics Say It Has Little Substance

India Could Get A UNSC Seat

Congress and Foreign Policy 

"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" May Not Be Repealed Right Away

The GOP's Plan To Rollback Obama's Policies

The New Congressional Impact On Foreign Policy

America As A Model


Does The U.S. Have British Syndrome?

America: The Hub Nation

All About The G20

The Fed's Decision And The G20

No U.S. - South Korea FTA

It Got Worse 

My Final Thoughts On The G20

Other Gems

Currency War Rap Video
Meet The Independent Diplomat

Column: Growing Government - A Hobby Of Both Parties

Morning Memo Madness 

Monday, November 8
Tuesday, November 9
No MM Wednesday
Thursday, November 11
Friday, November 12

Photo Credit: Top News

Wish List Economics

Well, the G20 conference in Seoul has come to a very anti-climatic conclusion.  As usual, most of the countries just agreed to a wish list of economic wants and needs.  This includes: letting currencies appreciate naturally, fixing trade imbalances, reorganizing the IMF to give more say to developing nations, focus on job creation, find a comprehensive agreement on climate change, etc.  Basically, the communique released by the G20 just says what each country would like to in the next year.

I am not surprised by this.  Most people knew the currency imbalances and trade imbalances were not going to be solved in one day.  Although, it is a disappointment that China and the U.S. did not fight against each other, diplomatically speaking, to create a solid policy on currency and exports.  For Obama's accomplishments, he did not sign a FTA with South Korea, he did not solve the trade imbalance problem, but he did, to an extent, defend the Fed's policy of quantitative easing.  One out of three is not a bad score in international politics.

So, as international conference go on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the best, I would give this conference a 6.  They were able to agree that at least a problem does exist in the global markets, and that is much further than they got before, but without a substantial agreement I cannot give them a higher score.  They have made their wish list, we'll see if any of it comes true in the next few months.  

Photo Credit: New York Times

Best Currency War Rap Video Ever!

I think this currency manipulation genre of rap should become more mainstream.

Column (11/12/10): Growing Government: A Hobby of Both Parties

On Tuesday, the American public once again relived the glory days of the Bush years as Mr. WMD himself released his memoir Decision Points. Its impeccable timing was part of the “strategery” of his publishers to release it after the midterm elections for fear that the electorate might recover from its amnesia and decide to vote against the party of the wise elephant. In the book, the former president talks about his specific thinking behind the important decisions of his presidency.  In other words, his guide to “gut thinking” is finally revealed.

Beyond the immature jokes that I could make for pages about what theEconomist once described as the frat-boy presidency, there is a serious point to consider from this new memoir.  Its content represents the old neo-conservative ideological motif of action thinking. Meaning, a president who acts before consulting the American people, as Republicans claim is so important now. The Patriot Act, the Bush doctrine, two nation-building wars, the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, and an ever expanding executive branch are all symbols of an era where action was valued over deliberate thinking.

Notice another interesting trend in this period.  Never once did the Teabaggers protest this obvious expansion of government. Never once did conservatives complain about the loss of freedom in regards to the squandering of fourth Amendment rights. Never once did conservatives cry about the deficit.

Continue Reading Here...

Read More Headlines From This Edition Of The Brackety-Ack

A Little Political Humor Always Helps

Cartoon From Slate

Morning Memo: Friday, November 12

Good Morning!

Last day of the G20 Summit - Get Excited!!!

Top Global Issues: G20 Edition

Currency Talks Continue Between Nations

U.S. and China Work On A Currency Deal

No FTA With South Korea

Solving Trade Imbalances Have Low Odds

New Approach For Poverty Aid

India and U.S. Disagree On Trade Imbalance Agreements

Divisions From Protesters and Leaders

Email Attack's Start At G20

Figures of Note:





Opinions of Note:

Meles Zenawi and Jens Stoltenberg on the Green Economy

Jagdish Bhagwati on China's Yuan

My First Thought: Agree On The Framework

My initial impression of the G20 summit yesterday was that all the countries recognized that a problem existed with currency and trade imbalances, but no one had an actual solution to the problem.  China and the U.S. talked about a new currency policy, but nothing happened.  I want substance.  These summits usually produce a communique that will say "this is what we would like to do."  However, none of those measures will be put into place.  Agreeing that their is a problem and actually solving the problem are two very different things.  The reason for this nonsense is because the these inequalities allow for some economies, like developing nations, to prosper, and developed countries are stuck with an inability to get votes for their resolution.  Essentially, it is like a patient who knows they have a drug problem, but refuses to get help.

Photo Credit: The Hindu