Please join me in working with Avaaz.org which is right now the only effective organization smuggling medical supplies, food and journalists into Syria. They are also bringing out of that devastated nation images so the truth can be told about the brutal dictatorship. There is an urgent need for assistance. The highly respected international organization Avaaz has been working around the clock to help the people of Syria. This is one of those moments we all should send whatever we can afford and stand up and be counted. Just because the major powers won't act doesn't mean in the technological age we can't do everything possible to help.
For near 50 years the people of Syria have lived under brutal military rule. For 40 of those years, the al-Assad family has made the nation their personal fiefdom. The family has used their power to supress any dissent, torture political prisoners and crush brutally any attempt of the people to seek freedom.
In 1982, the dictatorship crushed a rebellion against its rule in the city Hama. They, without a thought, killed well over 15,000 of the city residents in order to regain control of the city. Today, at least 5,000 and most likely more, have died in the Arab Spring uprising in Syria. Right now a major battle is taking place in the city of Homs and hundreds have been killed by the bombing of the city and indiscriminate fire on civilians by the army.
Boston.com's Big Picture has been able to obtain some photographs from brave photojournalists in the war zone. Please see all two dozens photographs on the site and the all important photographer credits.
Over the years the biggest disasters in foreign policy have likely been the result of huge failures by the Intelligence community of the United States. Coming into the Presidency with the backing and excitement of a nation, young President John F. Kennedy almost saw that support evaporate with the disastrous Bay of Pigs operation. In 2002, the entire second Iraq War was based on misinformation and officials willing to use that failure for their political purposes.
In April 1961, a CIA-planned effort by Cuban exiles to overthrow Fidel Castro's regime and replace it with a non-communist, U.S.-friendly government went horribly awry when an aerial attack on Cuba's air force flopped and the 1,400-strong "Assault Brigade 2506" came under heavy fire from the Cuban military after landing off the country's southern coast. The botched invasion poisoned U.S.-Cuban relations.
CIA files later revealed that the agency, assuming President John F. Kennedy would commit American troops to the assault if all else failed, never showed the newly minted president an assessment expressing doubt about whether the brigade could succeed without open support from the U.S. military -- support Kennedy never intended to provide. (The historian Piero Gleijeses has compared the CIA and Kennedy to ships passing in the night.) The CIA didn't do itself any favors a year later by concluding that the Soviets were unlikely to establish offensive missiles in Cuba in a report issued a month before the Cuban Missile Crisis, though the agency redeemed itself a bit by later snapping U-2 photographs of the missile sites.
The Tet Offensive
On Jan. 31, 1968, during the Tet holiday in Vietnam, North Vietnam's communist forces stunned the United States by launching a massive, coordinated assault against South Vietnam. While the communist military gains proved fleeting, the Tet Offensive was arguably the most decisive battle of Vietnam. Americans grew disillusioned with the war, prompting U.S. policymakers to shift gears and focus on reducing America's footprint in Vietnam.
A government inquiry shortly after the Tet Offensive concluded that U.S. and South Vietnamese military officers and intelligence analysts had failed to fully anticipate the "intensity, coordination, and timing of the enemy attack" -- despite multiple warnings. Navy librarian Glenn E. Helm notes that disregard for intelligence collection, language barriers, and a misunderstanding of enemy strategy played particularly prominent roles in the intelligence debacle. Still, James J. Wirtz points out in The Tet Offensive: Intelligence Failure in War that the "Americans almost succeeded in anticipating their opponents' moves in time to avoid the military consequences of surprise."
The Indian Nuclear Test
In May 1998, the CIA didn't get wind of India's intention to set off several underground nuclear blasts, in what Richard Shelby, then chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, called a "colossal failure of our nation's intelligence gathering." The intelligence agency saved some face a couple weeks later when it warned that Pakistan was preparing to conduct its own nuclear tests, which it did on May 28, 1998.
At the time, the Washington Post reported that a U.S. spy satellite had picked up clear evidence of India's nuclear test preparations six hours before the blasts, but the U.S. intelligence analysts responsible for tracking India's nuclear program hadn't been on duty. Instead, they discovered the images when they arrived at work the next morning, after the tests had already taken place.
If the Scottish National Party (SNP) has its way there will be a vote on independence for Scotland. If such a referendum were successful, Scotland would cease to be a part of Great Britain and become an independent nation. There is little question at this stage that there will be a vote. The timing of such a vote is what is being debated hot and heavy.
The United Kingdom is taking the position that only Parliament and the Prime Minister have the right to call such a referendum. Prime Minister Cameron wants the vote as soon as possible. The reason is that polls currently show only about 40% of the Scots desire independence. The central government says that the Scottish government does not have the power or legality to call such a vote.
The First Minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond, disputes that analysis and insists that the vote should be no earlier than 2014. This would give the Scottish National Party ample time to seek that extra 10%. If the government in Westminster calls an early election there is a good chance that it would be boycotted by the SNP in favor of a vote of their own timing. This is the most serious independence movement by the Scots in years. Just the struggle over timing is an illustration of increasing tensions between Scotland and the United Kingdom.
While we rightfully celebrated the official end of the Iraq War this weekend, the brutality still continues in Afghanistan after ten years of warfare. President Obama has promised to start significantly pull down troops this year and given his 'promises kept' on Iraq he has good credibility. Nevertheless, this video from Patrol Base Georgetown in Kajaki Sofla, Afghanistan reminds us that it can't happen soon enough. The video shows an all day battle between insurgents and American troops that took place just one month ago.
(Rarely have you seen this in this column but you MUST READ the Presidential Fact Sheet at the end of this introduction. It is mind-boggling in its scope. )
In the last weeks, we have seen nations around the world debate proposals that would round up their LGBT citizens and put them in prison. In some cases, governments have proposed the death penalty for our brothers and sisters overseas. The rash of legislation has become epidemic and is being pushed hard by religious fanatics who are using their LGBT citizens as political pawns to obtain power.
In the community, besides numerous petitions and calls for reasonable minds to prevail, there has been a sense of powerlessness as we watch their draconian measures proceed in governmental legislatures around the world.
Because of the actions taken by President Barack Obama yesterday that is no longer the case. The United States of America government is standing tall by our side ready to leverage its power to protect LGBT citizens, provide asylum when needed to LGBT refugees and hold nations accountable at all levels of our foreign policy and aid establishments
It is not possible to over estimate the importance and historical significance of these actions by the Obama administration. They will be attacked viciously by the Republicans, the religious right and those who make their living by hating gays. For any of you who wants to know what is at stake in this election just read this fact sheet issued by the White House yesterday. Thank you, Mr. President.
Today, President Obama issued a presidential memorandum that directs all federal agencies engaged abroad to ensure that U.S. diplomacy and foreign assistance promote and protect the human rights of LGBT persons. Under the Obama Administration, agencies have already begun taking action to promote the fundamental human rights of LGBT persons everywhere. And now, following an interagency process coordinated by the National Security Staff, this memorandum directs the first-ever U.S. government strategy dedicated to combating human rights abuses against LGBT persons abroad. Today’s memorandum applies to the Departments of State, the Treasury, Defense, Justice, Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Export-Import Bank, the United States Trade Representative, and such other agencies as the President may designate.
The memorandum directs agencies to:
• Combat the criminalization of LGBT status or conduct abroad. • Protect vulnerable LGBT refugees and asylum seekers. • Leverage foreign assistance to protect human rights and advance nondiscrimination. • Ensure swift and meaningful U.S. responses to human rights abuses of LGBT persons abroad. • Engage International Organizations in the fight against LGBT discrimination. • Report on progress.
Even before today’s memo, U.S. agencies have been working to protect and promote the rights of LBGT persons around the world. Since January 2009, Secretary Clinton has directed the Department of State to champion a comprehensive human rights agenda—one that includes the protection of LGBT people.
Around the world, the State Department is:
• Engaging bilaterally and regionally in conjunction with U.S. embassies, civil society, and multilateral agencies to encourage countries to repeal or reform laws that criminalize LGBT conduct or status.
• Reinforcing the human rights of LGBT people in multilateral fora, such as the UN Human Rights Council. In June 2011, the United States joined South Africa and a cross-regional group of co-sponsors in passing the first-ever UN Human Rights Council resolution on the human rights of LGBT persons.
• Promoting human rights worldwide. U.S. embassies are declaring the United States’ support for the human rights of LGBT people through innovative public diplomacy. Ambassadors and embassies have hosted public discussions and private roundtables, published op-eds and supported Pride events.
• Supporting LGBT human rights defenders and civil society groups, with programmatic and financial assistance, including efforts to document human rights violations; build advocacy skills; provide advocates with legal representation; and, when necessary, relocation support.
• Reporting on the conditions of human rights of LGBT people in each of its annual, country-specific Human Rights Reports.
• Strengthening the Department’s personnel and consular policies. The Secretary extended the range of legally available benefits and allowances to same-sex domestic partners of foreign service staff serving abroad. The United States also incorporated gender identity into federal equal employment opportunity policies in 2010.
• Protecting LGBT refugees, asylum seekers, and migrantsthrough a protection strategy developed with other U.S. Government agencies, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and NGOs.
Each day the situation is getting worse for LGBT Africans. Just this past week we have seen gay men sent to prison in Cameron, Nigeria taking action to make consensual same sex a crime, Zimbabwe cracking down on its LGBT citizens and the surfacing again of Uganda's death legislation. All over the continent African LGBT citizens are being sent to prison and are in great jeopardy.
The extent of the epidemic of homophobia that is sweeping Africa is deeply disturbing and has reached the stage that the foreign policy machine of the United States must get involved. America must seriously consider doing the following:
1. Joining British Prime Minister David Cameron and threaten to block aid to nations persecuting members of the LGBT community.
2. Put the topic of oppression of LGBT citizens on the agenda for all future summits with African leaders held by both President Obama and Secretary Clinton.
3. Extend asylum to African LGBT citizens who face imprisonment or death.
4. Cut off any US Funds to any organization that is actively organizing to support any homophobic actions in Africa.
5. Add significant educational programing on Voice of America and other officially sponsored outlets to get the truth to the people of Africa
No matter if you are a drug lord, rebels terrorizing women in the Congo or terrorists seeking to do untold damage, there is just under a 1 in 3 chance you got your armaments from the United States. For years the impression has been that the collapse of the Soviet Empire flooded the market with dangerous weapons, and indeed Russia shows up in the #2 spot. But also the perception has been created that Israel was supplying massive amounts of arms to African insurgents. Well, they didn't even make the top ten.
Creating legislation that would cut back on American arms exports would be an important step in the right direction in stopping senseless violence in the world.
According to SIPRA Arms Transfers Database here are the top ten arm exporters from 2006 to 2010. The total percentage follows the countries names.
With some certainty, brutal Libyan dictator Gaddafi met an equally brutal death at the hands of his people. The death is only surprising in that he didn't flee with his family to a safe haven. He was either self-delusional about making a comeback or determined to die on Libyan soil. Thus ends another chapter of a dictator falling as part of the famous "Arab Spring."
In many ways, this revolution more than any other this year could impact long term American foreign policy. Unlike our previous and current military ventures in the Middle East, we strongly supported the uprising by the citizens of this nation. However, we did it without sending ground troops, allowing European powers to lead this effort and with relatively small cost. We provided air support, drones and back up support. As far as I am aware not a single American soldier was killed. Nor have we attempted to impose a ruler on the Libyan people from the top down.
The people of Libya carried the burden for their own change and we provided, with the leadership of others, support for this effort.
Could this be a model for our military involvement in the future?
What government will fall in place now in Libya is still very much open to question. In Egypt the military rulers appear to be deepening their control and not moving toward democracy. Iraq, where we have invested trillions and over 5,000 dead young Americans, the government has no problem crawling into bed with Iran after all of our efforts.
Will the Libyan people be grateful for the West's support and will it yield a building bloc for our role in the Middle East? Democracy as we know it is unlikely. The question now becomes has our national interest been served? The history of the conflict, our coalition with the rebels and their ultimate victory has opened up more questions than answers.
Robert Kaplan is one of the most profound writers of foreign policy. His book the "Coming Anarchy" was a masterpiece about the disintegration of nation states. More than any other book in recent years, he challenged me to look at American foreign policy in a different light. Far from being a 'liberal icon' he manages to disturb both sides of the spectrum with his cold analysis of what is in the American interest.
Writing for Foreign Policy he projects that "The South China Sea Is The Future Of Conflict." Provocative and challenging to read, he asserts that we are shifting from land wars to sea wars. There is the possible exception to that rule with the situation in Korea. This is a must read and here are some key excerpts.
Because of the way geography illuminates and sets priorities, these physical contours of East Asia augur a naval century -- naval being defined here in the broad sense to include both sea and air battle formations now that they have become increasingly inextricable. Why? China, which, especially now that its land borders are more secure than at any time since the height of the Qing dynasty at the end of the 18th century, is engaged in an undeniable naval expansion. It is through sea power that China will psychologically erase two centuries of foreign transgressions on its territory -- forcing every country around it to react.
Military engagements on land and at sea are vastly different, with major implications for the grand strategies needed to win -- or avoid -- them. Those on land enmesh civilian populations, in effect making human rights a signal element of war studies. Those at sea approach conflict as a clinical and technocratic affair, in effect reducing war to math, in marked contrast with the intellectual battles that helped define previous conflicts.
World War II was a moral struggle against fascism, the ideology responsible for the murder of tens of millions of noncombatants. The Cold War was a moral struggle against communism, an equally oppressive ideology by which the vast territories captured by the Red Army were ruled. The immediate post-Cold War period became a moral struggle against genocide in the Balkans and Central Africa, two places where ground warfare and crimes against humanity could not be separated. More recently, a moral struggle against radical Islam has drawn the United States deep into the mountainous confines of Afghanistan, where the humane treatment of millions of civilians is critical to the war's success. In all these efforts, war and foreign policy have become subjects not only for soldiers and diplomats, but for humanists and intellectuals. Indeed, counterinsurgency represents a culmination of sorts of the union between uniformed officers and human rights experts. This is the upshot of ground war evolving into total war in the modern age
Kaplan writes of the developing situation in the South China Sea:
East Asia can be divided into two general areas: Northeast Asia, dominated by the Korean Peninsula, and Southeast Asia, dominated by the South China Sea. Northeast Asia pivots on the destiny of North Korea, an isolated, totalitarian state with dim prospects in a world governed by capitalism and electronic communication. Were North Korea to implode, Chinese, U.S., and South Korean ground forces might meet up on the peninsula's northern half in the mother of all humanitarian interventions, even as they carve out spheres of influence for themselves. Naval issues would be secondary. But an eventual reunification of Korea would soon bring naval issues to the fore, with a Greater Korea, China, and Japan in delicate equipoise, separated by the Sea of Japan and the Yellow and Bohai seas. Yet because North Korea still exists, the Cold War phase of Northeast Asian history is not entirely over, and land power may well come to dominate the news there before sea power will.
Southeast Asia, by contrast, is already deep into the post-Cold War phase of history. Vietnam, which dominates the western shore of the South China Sea, is a capitalist juggernaut despite its political system, seeking closer military ties to the United States. China, consolidated as a dynastic state by Mao Zedong after decades of chaos and made into the world's most dynamic economy by the liberalizations of Deng Xiaoping, is pressing outward with its navy to what it calls the "first island chain" in the Western Pacific. The Muslim behemoth of Indonesia, having endured and finally ended decades of military rule, is poised to emerge as a second India: a vibrant and stable democracy with the potential to project power by way of its growing economy. Singapore and Malaysia are also surging forward economically, in devotion to the city-state-cum-trading-state model and through varying blends of democracy and authoritarianism. The composite picture is of a cluster of states, which, with problems of domestic legitimacy and state-building behind them, are ready to advance their perceived territorial rights beyond their own shores. This outward collective push is located in the demographic cockpit of the globe, for it is in Southeast Asia, with its 615 million people, where China's 1.3 billion people converge with the Indian subcontinent's 1.5 billion people. And the geographical meeting place of these states, and their militaries, is maritime: the South China Sea.
The South China Sea joins the Southeast Asian states with the Western Pacific, functioning as the throat of global sea routes. Here is the center of maritime Eurasia, punctuated by the straits of Malacca, Sunda, Lombok, and Makassar. More than half the world's annual merchant fleet tonnage passes through these choke points, and a third of all maritime traffic. The oil transported through the Strait of Malacca from the Indian Ocean, en route to East Asia through the South China Sea, is more than six times the amount that passes through the Suez Canal and 17 times the amount that transits the Panama Canal. Roughly two-thirds of South Korea's energy supplies, nearly 60 percent of Japan's and Taiwan's energy supplies, and about 80 percent of China's crude-oil imports come through the South China Sea. What's more, the South China Sea has proven oil reserves of 7 billion barrels and an estimated 900 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, a potentially huge bounty.
It is not only location and energy reserves that promise to give the South China Sea critical geostrategic importance, but also the coldblooded territorial disputes that have long surrounded these waters. Several disputes concern the Spratly Islands, a mini-archipelago in the South China Sea's southeastern part. Vietnam, Taiwan, and China each claim all or most of the South China Sea, as well as all of the Spratly and Paracel island groups. In particular, Beijing asserts a historical line: It lays claim to the heart of the South China Sea in a grand loop (widely known as the "cow's tongue") from China's Hainan Island at the South China Sea's northern end all the way south 1,200 miles to near Singapore and Malaysia.
The result is that all nine states that touch the South China Sea are more or less arrayed against China and therefore dependent on the United States for diplomatic and military support. These conflicting claims are likely to become even more acute as Asia's spiraling energy demands -- energy consumption is expected to double by 2030, with China accounting for half that growth -- make the South China Sea the ever more central guarantor of the region's economic strength. Already, the South China Sea has increasingly become an armed camp, as the claimants build up and modernize their navies, even as the scramble for islands and reefs in recent decades is mostly over. China has so far confiscated 12 geographical features, Taiwan one, Vietnam 25, the Philippines eight, and Malaysia five.
There is so much more in Kaplan's lengthy important article. Take fifteen minutes, read it and prepare yourself for the future.
Subscribe
