Featured Articles — May 21, 2009

May 21, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Featured Articles | Leave a Comment 

Interesting Takes From Home And Abroad:

Flip-Flops and Governance By Karl Rove, The Wall Street Journal
Barack Obama inherited a set of national-security policies that he rejected during the campaign but now embraces as president. This is a stunning and welcome about-face. For example, President Obama kept George W. Bush’s military tribunals for terror detainees after calling them an “enormous failure” and a “legal black hole.”

The Past’s Agenda By E.J. Dionne, The New Republic
President Obama’s lieutenants would love it if all the television networks ran a crawl line at the bottom of the screen during news broadcasts that would keep repeating the words: “The economy, health care, energy, education. The economy, health care …”

Is California Too Big to Fail? By Megan McCardle, The Atlantic
So what about California? A reader asks. Ummm, that’s a tough one. No, wait, it’s not: California is completely, totally, irreparably hosed. And not a little garden hose. More like this. Their outflow is bigger than their inflow.

How to Win the ‘Long, Hard Slog’ By Douglas Feith, The Wall Street Journal
Gen. David Petraeus, chief of Central Command, has said that Taliban extremists are threatening “the very existence of the Pakistani state.” And now that Pakistani, U.S. and coalition forces are fighting the Taliban in Pakistan as well as in Afghanistan, the military dimension of the challenge is front and center. But more than combat is required to prevent Islamist extremists from taking over those countries and acquiring Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal.

Obama Rides The Waves Of Change In Middle East By John Zogby, Forbes
The meeting this week between President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took place in a U.S. political environment that is clearly different than those of prior meetings between the two nations’ heads of state. It gives Obama an opportunity to act in ways that were not politically possible for his two Democratic predecessors, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.

Vaclav Klaus: The Man with the E.U.’s Fate in His Hands By Katerina Zachovalova, Time
The Czech Republic is one of four E.U. countries — out of 27 — that are yet to finish ratifying a treaty that would allow the enlarged bloc to reform its institutions.

Wabash Wonk Revitalizes Republicans

May 20, 2009 by Frank Gannon | Filed Under American Politics | Leave a Comment 

In today’s installment of his WaPo column “The Fix,” Chris Cillizza profiles Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels: “Republican Revolutionary.”

The good news is: the profile is interesting and instructive.  The bad news is: Daniels has foresworn any further political officeholding.

What lessons can the national GOP — still struggling to find its identity and leaders after two devastating elections cycles — take from what Daniels did?

First, that Republicans must regain the high ground as the party of new ideas. “We need to be conceiving ideas all the time, not just sit there and hold office,” said Daniels.

Second, that reflexive partisanship and name-calling rarely brings about those ideas and solutions. Daniels insisted that during his five years in the governor’s mansion he has not said the word “Democratic” more than three times and has never uttered the words “liberal” or “conservative.”

Third, and this goes to Daniels’s populist streak, “use your own words.” Daniels staked his political career on convincing voters that he was not a consultant-driven phenomenon — he wrote his own ads — nor was he angling for some other office.

“Is He The President?”

May 20, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under American Politics, Election 2012 | Leave a Comment 

The New Republic’s Zvika Krieger has a profile of Utah Governor — and newly nominated Ambassador To China — Jon Huntsman, and discussed this mans fortunate stall to higher office.

Obama’s Timetable Is Netanyahu’s Victory

May 20, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under International Affairs, Iran | Leave a Comment 

Geneive Abdo, an analyst at the Century Policy Foundation, writes at Foreign Policy that talks — now conditioned with a timetable — give Israel ample justification to launch a military strike against Iran when they end with limited effect:

The realists in Israel favor talks for a limited time — with a deadline of six months — in order to justify a military attack. They concede that a military attack probably wouldn’t destroy Iran’s nuclear program, because the facilities are located underground. But an attack could delay Iran’s development of a nuclear bomb and allow Israel to advance its own air missile defense system in the meantime. For Israelis, the talks’ only use would be in demonstrating Iran’s intransigence — proving once and for all that Iran has no intention of suspending nuclear enrichment; that it will not end its financial support for Hezbollah and Hamas; and that it believes the United States and Israel should be contained.

Diplomacy As Pop-Psychology

May 20, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under International Affairs, Iran | 2 Comments 

Noah Pollack at Commentary’s Contentions blog has a beef with those grand bargainers in Middle East policy. More specifically, Flynt Leverett a former member of the National Security Council who believes that any cooperation with Israel with hurt Iran’s sensibilities:

Of course, Leverett’s objection to the working group cannot be reconciled with the failure over the past eight years of the EU-3, the IAEA, the UN Security Council, and the P5+1 to get anywhere with Iran, and none of those negotiations were adulterated by sinister Zionist meddling. In Leverett’s world, the Iranians, practitioners of an ancient and sophisticated culture of negotiation and brinkmanship, are little more than emotionally unstable children whose sensibilities must be delicately appeased. This is diplomacy as pop-psychology, and it serves the vital task of fabricating a narrative in which our side is to blame for Iran’s belligerence. Now Leverett has his excuse.

It’s such a paradox — and naive for internationalists like Leverett to purvey such an opinion. Afterall — don’t others like like him believe that any effort at reconciliation has to include all parties?

Laughing Matters

May 20, 2009 by Frank Gannon | Filed Under American Politics | Leave a Comment 

Former Speaker Newt Gingrich was paid the signal respect of being accorded two segments on last night’s Daily Show.

Unfortunately the interview is pretty low octane Gingrich.  Perhaps  it’s because his friendly acquaintance with Jon Stewart took the edge off his typically acute analysis and energetic participation; or perhaps he’s embarrassed by his own audacity at writing a book about how to live your  life based on his example; or maybe he was just having an off day.  Either way, I won’t be placing this in the Pantheon of Great Gingrich Performances.

But here are both parts for your consideration.

Part Two:

Zal As Master Of Karzai

May 20, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Afghanistan, Afpak | Leave a Comment 

M K Bhadrakumar from the Asia Times reports that the Obama administration wants to put former Bush administration official (former U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq, and the United Nations) and Afghanistan native Zalmay Khalizad in Kabul’s power structure to bypass Hamid Karzai’s incompetency and get the ball rolling in the ‘graveyard’:

So, the “smart” thing, which is the hallmark of the Obama administration, is to let Karzai be in his presidential robe, to pamper his vanity while neatly sidestepping him, ignore him gradually and eventually transact all real business of state through Zal. Cooper reports, “A plan that puts Khalilzad near the top of a Karzai government would provide the Obama administration with a strong condSuit to push American interests in Afghanistan.”

Obama, Clinton and Holbrooke – they must be holding breath and waiting and watching “whether Karzai remains willing to bring Khalilzad aboard”. The problem is not only that Zal had a bumpy relationship with Karzai when he served in Kabul as the American viceroy. Times have changed.

The old Karzai is no more the current Karzai. Zal cannot ride roughshod over him and expect him to take it in his stride, as he used to. Today, Karzai truly believes he is the leader of the Afghan people. Therefore, Zal must undergo a veritable metamorphosis himself and evolve into an altogether new butterfly. Karzai would like to be certain that Zal doesn’t begin to dictate once he is ensconced in power in Kabul.

Obama, on his part, cannot hold out any assurance to Karzai in this regard, either. It has to be left to Karzai and Zal to work out between then, which they are reportedly doing at the moment in Kabul. Nor can Karzai depend on the Afghan constitution to ensure that Zal will scrupulously function under his supervision.

For, the real catch is that Zal will be an extra-constitutional authority, not accountable to the Afghan constitution or parliament or people or, arguably, even to Karzai himself. Karzai would apprehend that ultimately, Zal is Zal and from the time he hit the ground, he would be sprinting and it would be impossible to match his stamina for outpacing his peer group.

To be sure, Zal will report only to Washington. All the same, Clinton, too, needs to be watchful. To quote Cooper, “While he was working for the Bush administration, Khalilzad often brushed up against other officials, including secretary of state Condoleezza Rice.” Now, that’s formidable dexterity – to bypass Condi and deal directly with Bush.

Featured Articles — May 20, 2009

May 20, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Featured Articles | Leave a Comment 

Interesting Takes From Home And Abroad:

Obama at the Auto Buffet By Holman Jenkins, The Wall Street Journal
With his latest installment of ever-higher fuel mileage requirements for the auto industry, Barack Obama embraces a momentary, crisis-spawned expansion of the art of the possible, unleavened by any art of the rationally desirable.

Self-Inflicted Wounds: How Pelosi Got Into the CIA Mess By Jay Newton-Small, Time
When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi emerged from her offices with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for a photo op Tuesday – her first open media event since last Thursday’s disastrous press conference on what the CIA may or may not have briefed her about regarding its interrogation techniques — she was met by a wall of dozens of cameras. There’s always been a lot of media interest in the first female speaker, but Pelosi is learning the hard way that there’s a difference between attention for being a pioneer and attention for fouling up on the job.

The strategy corner: Pelosi’s action plan By Mark Penn, Politico
To Hon. Speaker Nancy Pelosi: The accusations that the CIA did not properly disclose its waterboarding activities to you in 2002 are making you a lightning rod for criticism from the right and causing a split within Democratic ranks at a time when party unity is essential for the big fights ahead on health care and energy reform.

Upping the Ante on Israel By David Ignatius, The Washington Post
Binyamin Netanyahu’s friends liken him to a good poker player. They explain, for example, that before the Israeli prime minister plays the card marked “Palestinian state,” he wants an American commitment that this state will be demilitarized.

Barack Obama’s biggest critic: Charles Krauthammer By Ben Smith, Politico
The dinner guest that night at George Will’s house in Chevy Chase was intellectually nimble, personally formidable and completely baffling, recalled columnist Charles Krauthammer – who was getting his first up-close look at President-elect Barack Obama.

Underestimating Iran’s Global Reach By Caroline Glick, Jerusalem Post
US President Barack Obama underestimates the threat Iran poses to global security. Were this not the case, he would not have sent CIA Director Leon Panetta to Israel ahead of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s visit to the White House.

Hitler’s European Holocaust Helpers By Staff, Der Spiegel
The Germans are responsible for the industrial-scale mass murder of 6 million Jews. But the collusion of other European countries in the Holocaust has received surprisingly little attention until recently. The trial of John Demjanjuk is set to throw a spotlight on Hitler’s foreign helpers.

Get Ready for Another North Korean Nuke Test By John Bolton, The Wall Street Journal
The curtain is about to rise again on the long-running nuclear tragicomedy, “North Korea Outwits the United States.” Despite Kim Jong Il’s explicit threats of another nuclear test, U.S. Special Envoy Stephen Bosworth said last week that the Obama administration is “relatively relaxed” and that “there is not a sense of crisis.” They’re certainly smiling in Pyongyang.

Precedents For The Huntsman Appointment

May 19, 2009 by Robert Nedelkoff | Filed Under American Politics, Barack Obama, China, Democratic Party, Election 2012, News media, Nixon Administration, Presidents, Republican Party, Richard Nixon, U.S. History, Vietnam | 2 Comments 

Yesterday Christopher Beam of Slate discussed some historical precedents for the action that President Obama took in recent days when he appointed Gov. Jon Huntsman of Utah, a prospective candidate for the GOP’s presidential spot in 2012, as Ambassador to China.

Beam refers in particular to the appointment made by President Kennedy on August 1, 1963, when he chose Henry Cabot Lodge Jr, the 1960 Republican vice-presidential candidate, to replace Frederick Nolting as American Ambassador to South Vietnam. At the time, Richard Nixon was still in the political wilderness after his defeat in California in 1962 and his subsequent “you won’t have Nixon to kick around” remarks, and Lodge was the favored figure among moderates who hoped to find a candidate for 1964 less polarizing than Gov. Nelson Rockefeller on the left or Sen. Barry Goldwater on the right.

Kennedy’s appointment of Lodge had a twofold advantage: it reminded the world of the Cold War maxim that “politics stops at the water’s edge” and it more or less confirmed Lodge in his disinclination to actively seek the Presidency in 1964.

Beam goes on to say that “after Kennedy’s assassination, Lodge came back and launched an unsuccessful run for the Republican nomination.” It sounds like the young reporter, three years out of Columbia, needs to sit down with a copy of Rick Perlstein’s Before The Storm. Lodge was never a declared candidate in 1964. After issuing nearly Shermanesque statements that he would not run or seek the nomination (though he did not prevent supporters from putting his name on primary ballots where his stated consent was not needed for that purpose) the ambassador won the New Hampshire primary in February 1964 as a write-in candidate, following a well-financed blitz by his Boston-based supporters. (Goldwater came in second in this contest and Rockefeller third, with Nixon, as an undeclared write-in candidate, finishing a fairly strong fourth.)

But even after similar victories in Massachusetts and New Jersey, Lodge remained in Saigon and made no concrete move to secure the nomination. He finally resigned his post at the end of June 1964 and returned to the United States, but by that time Goldwater had almost completely sewn up the nomination and desperate attempts by GOP moderates to deny it to him focused on Gov. William Scranton.

Beam also declares that “Nixon completed the process [of bipartisan support of the Vietnam War] by doubling down.” This is quite a mystifying statement. It was Lyndon Johnson, with the support of both parties in Congress, who escalated American involvement in Vietnam in early 1965. By contrast, Nixon was the President who completed, in phases, the process of de-escalating and concluding the conflict, in the face of resistance from a Democratic-controlled Congress which had many members who sought unilateral and immediate withdrawal from Vietnam. You have to wonder what the history books said in his classes up in Morningside Heights.

Harry Reid’s Day (Way) Off

May 19, 2009 by Robert Nedelkoff | Filed Under American Politics, Barack Obama, Congress, Democratic Party, News media, Senate | 1 Comment 

Last week, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the House Speaker, stumbled her way through a chaotic press conference in which she tried to explain why it was that her account of her briefings by the CIA six years ago differed so much from the accounts of others who were present.

Today, it was the turn of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to embarrass himself before the press. Speaking to assembled members of the Fourth Estate, he was asked about the absence from the Senate chamber of Sen. Ted Kennedy. Reid stated that the senator was continuing to undergo treatment for brain cancer. Asked if the cancer was in remission, the gentleman from Nevada replied in the affirmative. Reporters checking with Kennedy’s own office later were pointedly told that the office would not confirm that statement or make any other response, and even before the conference ended Jim Manley, Reid’s own spokesman (and a longtime Kennedy staffer in years past) was retracting the statement.

Reid was also asked about the status of ailing Sen. Robert Byrd. He told the reporters that the 91-year-old legislator was to be released from the hospital sometime this week – a statement promptly denied by Byrd’s own spokesman.

Speaking about President Obama’s plans to close Guantanamo’s prison and transfer its inmates to American facilities, Reid declared: “We will never allow terrorists to be released into the United States.” As Laurie Kellman observes in this AP account, no one at the White House had been advocating that terrorists run wild around this nation – another gaffe that Manley had to clarify.

All of this brings to mind the process by which Sen. Rod Burris finessed his way into his seat after Reid repeatedly declared he wouldn’t. Can the Democrats afford to keep Reid as Majority Leader until November of next year?

Obama Didn’t Simply Arrive At Notre Dame

May 19, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Faith | Leave a Comment 

Christoper Badeaux of The New Ledger, has this intriguing history of the progressive and ever-evolving nature of American Catholocism:

Any history of modern American Catholicism must begin with the suburbs. Ethnic Catholic factory workers and their children raced to the suburbs for more land, better schools (the dream of universal Catholic education was always a dream), less congestion, and, over time, white flight. It was the first, real break in the old, established parish system, wherein generations would go from Baptism to a funeral Mass in the same diocese, and usually the same parish. This had two direct effects: It upended the relationship between parish priests and bishops on the one hand, and the flock on the other; and severed the day-to-day traditions that were bound up with the practice of the Faith – everything from the mere act of walking to Mass to Knights of Columbus meetings to bingo at the parish hall – robbing Catholics of the muscle memory of a life that revolved around the parish.

Read the rest of the story here.

No Congruence On Iran/Palestine Tracks

May 19, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under International Affairs, Iran, Israel and Palestinians | Leave a Comment 

Emanuelle Ottolenghi of Commentary’s Contentions says that a peace deal with the Palestinians won’t do anything to deter — or create unification against — the Iranian threat:

Clearly, the answer is Iran. One cannot blame Netanyahu for failing to impress on President Obama that this linkage is silly. But the bottom line is that anyone who believes that Israel will gain regional support against Iran only once it concedes on the Palestinian issue is a fool. Gulf states are not going to line up behind Israel against Iran as a favor to the Jewish state once Palestinians have their own. Since when have Arab regimes been so altruistic? History points in a different direction. Both in 1991 and in 2003 Arab countries endorsed, actively participated in, or acquiesced to a U.S. war against an aggressive Arab neighbor. Both times, peace processors in the West and radicals in the East suggested a similar linkage — first solve Palestine, then we can all unite against the common enemy. And both times — niceties such as the Madrid conference and the Roadmap aside — those Arab governments who felt threatened enough let the war-dance begin without waiting for deliverance for the Palestinians.

Damned If She Did. Now Damned If She Didn’t.

May 19, 2009 by Frank Gannon | Filed Under American Politics, Bush Administration, Congress, Domestic issues, Intelligence, National Security, Obama administration, War on Terror | Leave a Comment 

James Kirchick’s provocative lede in his piece —“Is Nancy Pelosi a liar or a hypocrite?”— on today’s Politico pretty much tells the story that follows:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi accomplished two unusual feats last week: She got the head of the CIA to call her a liar, and she implicated herself in what her left-wing base must, by dint of its own contrived logic, consider a war crime.

And today in “The Swamp,” Mark Silva reports a new CNN Opinion Research Corp. Poll that can’t have gone down too well in the Speaker’s Office:

 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has taken a fall in public opinion, according to a new CNN Opinion Research Corp. poll showing that nearly half of all Americans surveyed do not approve of the way the California Democrat is handling her job as speaker of the House.

The newest results come from a survey taken after the speaker accused the CIA of misleading her about the interrogation tactics that were being used on suspected terrorists several years ago. The CIA maintains that it briefed Pelosi on water-boarding and other tactics in September 2002, but the speaker maintains she was not told waterboarding was being used then. House Republican Leader John Boehner, siding with the CIA on the credibility question, accuses Pelosi of changing stories.

In the May 14-17 survey, just 39 percent said they approve of the job that Pelosi is performing as speaker and 48 percent said they disapprove. Only 12 percent voiced no view. In January, 51 percent had said they approved of the speaker’s performance and just 22 percent voiced disapproval.

And in his column today, Rich Lowry examines the tortuous logic of the Speaker’s position (or at least of one of her several positions) on this subject:

For Pelosi’s account to be accurate, the CIA must have engaged in one of the most baroque and ineffectual conspiracies in the history of Washington. Remember: Pelosi claims that the CIA lied to her in a September 2002 classified briefing and told her that it hadn’t waterboarded high-level al Qaeda detainee Abu Zubaydah. To support her version, Pelosi needs to stack implausibility on top of implausibility in a precarious Jenga tower of self-justification.

The CIA must have convinced Porter Goss, the Republican congressman (and subsequent CIA director) who was present at the 2002 briefing, to lie and pronounce himself “slack-jawed” at Pelosi’s account. It must have forged the “contemporaneous records” CIA Director Leon Panetta has cited that show Pelosi was told of the waterboarding. It must have either pulled the wool over Panetta’s eyes or enlisted the active engagement of the Obama nominee in a monstrous machinery of deception.

Featured Articles — May 19, 2009

May 19, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Featured Articles | Leave a Comment 

Interesting Takes From Home And Abroad:

Gen. Petraeus On U.S. Strategy By Ralph Peters, The New York Post
WITH Afghanistan trou bled, Pakistan aflame and Washington impa tient, Gen. David Petraeus faces even greater challenges today than he did in his rescue of Iraq. Currently heading the US Central Command, Petraeus is the American soldier responsible for the greater Middle East. It may be the toughest job of our time.

A Strategy for Netanyahu By Bret Stephens, The Wall Street Journal
Both in public and in private, the young president (he’s a dozen years your junior, and worryingly free of normal human anxieties) assures you that, when it comes to Iran and the existential threat it poses Israel, he gets it. It’s an expression he uses too often, and too easily, to satisfy you that he actually does.

In Praise of Dullness By David Brooks, The New York Times
The question seems to answer itself. After all, C.E.O.’s work with people all day. Novel-reading should give them greater psychological insight, a feel for human relationships, a greater sensitivity toward their own emotional chords.

The Cheney Fallacy By Jack Goldsmith, The New Republic
Former Vice President Cheney says that President Obama’s reversal of Bush-era terrorism policies endangers American security. The Obama administration, he charges, has “moved to take down a lot of those policies we put in place that kept the nation safe for nearly eight years from a follow-on terrorist attack like 9/11.

The Nightmare Scenario By Steven R. David, Foreign Policy
Few who lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962 will forget the fear and apprehension they felt. The world stood on the brink of a nuclear holocaust as U.S. ships imposed a blockade to force Soviet missiles out of Cuba. Everyone heaved a sigh of relief as the Soviets agreed to remove their missiles in exchange for an American pledge not to invade Cuba, but all agreed a cataclysmic nuclear war had been only narrowly averted.

The Tigers are beaten but it isn’t over yet By Michael Clarke, The Times
The Sri Lankan Army is celebrating victory as its elite forces occupy the Tamil Tigers’ last refuge at the Mulathive Lagoon, thanks to Chinese military aid. Since 2007 China has equipped the Sri Lankan Government with all the weapons and support the rest of the world had denied it, in return for permission to build a strategic port at Hambantota in the south.

Democrats concede on Guantanamo Bay By David Rogers, Politico
In a setback for President Barack Obama, Senate Democrats said Tuesday they will strip out $80 million in new funding in a wartime spending bill to begin the process of closing the Guantanamo detention facility.

B.O. Defeating The Competition?

May 18, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Barack Obama, China, Election 2012 | Leave a Comment 

Jon Weaver, an aide to Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, who has been nominated to become U.S. Ambassador to The People’s Republic of China, said that if the G.O.P. goes the way of Palin, Limbaugh, or Cheney in 2012, they will be resoundingly defeated:

The Republican strategist who helped Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman prepare for a possible presidential run says the Republican party is in for a devastating defeat if its guiding lights are Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney. “If it’s 2012 and our party is defined by Palin and Limbaugh and Cheney, then we’re headed for a blowout,” says strategist John Weaver, who advised Huntsman and was for years a close adviser to Sen. John McCain. “That’s just the truth.”

Huntsman, a favorite of GOP moderates, left the Republican presidential race last week after accepting President Obama’s offer to become U.S. ambassador to China. Before that, Huntsman appeared to be working hard on preparations for 2012. “He had not made a decision to run for president, but he had made a decision to prepare to run,” says Weaver. “We were probably a month away from announcing the formation of a political action committee, so we were pretty far down the road.”

Weaver is hardly the person the Republican Party should heed advice from. Aside from advocating for the eventual lackluster G.O.P. nominee, he was forced to resign from his post as top adviser when Senator McCain wasn’t carrying any traction on the trail, with campaign coffers so dry that the 72 year old Vietnam hero had to carry his own bags through airports. In any case, this is not to overlook Governor Huntsman’s credentials (and wealth), a combination that would have made him a very, very formidable candidate in 2012:

As a business executive, he was chairman of Huntsman Corporation, a multi-national petrochemical corporation based in Salt Lake City, and served as the first president and CEO of the Huntsman Cancer Foundation at the University of Utah. His public service career includes serving as a White House staff assistant to President Ronald Reagan. Under President George H.W. Bush, he was deputy assistant of commerce for trade development, deputy assistant secretary of commerce for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, as well as U.S. ambassador to Singapore (the youngest U.S. ambassador in a century). He is fluent in Mandarin. He also served as a deputy U.S. trade representative and U.S. trade ambassador under President George W. Bush.

Smart move by President Obama. Aside from the most obvious political considerations — and most importantly — the choice of Huntsman takes account of the strategic gravity placed on Sino-American issues. But the choice of Huntsman also puts another level of prestige, experience and expertise below Obama’s primary political nemesis, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Remember that it was Clinton who was supposed to compete for the China portfolio with the other Asian “expert,” Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner? It appears that Dick Morris was right,  all that stands between Clinton and her legacy is a glut of foreign policy experts and diplomats with cabinet level status.

A Timely Gift

May 18, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under International Affairs, Israel and Palestinians | Leave a Comment 

It is reported that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave — as a gift to President Obama — Mark Twain’s “Pleasure Excursion to the Holy Land.” Jonathan Tobin, at Commentary’s Contentions blog explains its significance:

Twain’s recollections of his post Civil War tour of the Mediterranean are an apt subject of reflection for Obama as he attempts to force Netanyahu to accept a Palestinian state. The Palestine Twain visited was a backwater of the Ottoman Empire whose inhabitants had no sense of a separate national identity.  Though Palestinian nationalism is a reality that Israel must contend with today, it originated and gained traction solely as a reaction to the return of large numbers of Jews to the country. And this is the problem with making a peace deal with the Palestinians and the reason they have turned down every chance for peace so far. Since their national identity is wholly bound up with negating Zionism, the two-state solution everybody in Europe and Washington believes will bring peace doesn’t appeal that much to them.

What Are They Crazy?

May 18, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Afpak | Leave a Comment 

The Pakistani military — who are supposed to be using American aid to fight an assymetric Taliban insurgency just outside of Islamabad — are rapidly adding to their nuclear arsenal and making the spoils of war that much more worthwhile Thomas Shanker and David Sanger report at the New York Times:

Members of Congress have been told in confidential briefings that Pakistan is rapidly adding to its nuclear arsenal even while racked by insurgency, raising questions on Capitol Hill about whether billions of dollars in proposed military aid might be diverted to Pakistan’s nuclear program.

Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed the assessment of the expanded arsenal in a one-word answer to a question on Thursday in the midst of lengthy Senate testimony. Sitting beside Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, he was asked whether he had seen evidence of an increase in the size of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal.

“Yes,” he said quickly, adding nothing, clearly cognizant of Pakistan’s sensitivity to any discussion about the country’s nuclear strategy or security.

Inside the Obama administration, some officials say, Pakistan’s drive to spend heavily on new nuclear arms has been a source of growing concern, because the country is producing more nuclear material at a time when Washington is increasingly focused on trying to assure the security of an arsenal of 80 to 100 weapons so that they will never fall into the hands of Islamic insurgents.

The administration’s effort is complicated by the fact that Pakistan is producing an unknown amount of new bomb-grade uranium and, once a series of new reactors is completed, bomb-grade plutonium for a new generation of weapons. President Obama has called for passage of a treaty that would stop all nations from producing more fissile material — the hardest part of making a nuclear weapon — but so far has said nothing in public about Pakistan’s activities.

Bruce Riedel, the Brookings Institution scholar who served as the co-author of Mr. Obama’s review of Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy, reflected the administration’s concern in a recent interview, saying that Pakistan “has more terrorists per square mile than anyplace else on earth, and it has a nuclear weapons program that is growing faster than anyplace else on earth.”

Gates: Energetic, Committed, But Not Enjoying It

May 18, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Military | Leave a Comment 

On last night’s episode of CBS’s 6o Minutes, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates — who appropriately referred to himself as “Secretary of War” said that he didn’t enjoy his job:

“The truth of the matter is, being secretary of war in a time of war is a very painful thing,” Gates says in a “60 Minutes” interview. “How can you like a job when you go to Walter Reed and you know you sent those young men and women in harm’s way?”

It’s a very honest thing to say, especially for a cabinet position that can make and break careers and legacies. If Gates sounds depressed and uninspired, he certainly isn’t letting that show on the job. Greg Jaffe, at Washington Post, has an article of the Secretary that depicts Churchillian reflection and attention to detail:

On a rainy night in March, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates traveled to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware to witness the military’s ritual for welcoming home its war dead.

In a small building next to the tarmac, an officer briefed the defense secretary on the four deceased troops arriving that evening. They had been driving along a rutted road near Jalalabad, Afghanistan, when their Humvee hit a powerful roadside bomb.

Gates flashed with anger, according to people with him that day. He had spent most of his tenure in the Pentagon pushing to replace Humvees in Afghanistan and Iraq with Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles, built to withstand such blasts. “Find out why they hadn’t gotten their goddamn MRAPs yet,” he snapped at his staff.

Clad in the black suit he had worn to work that morning in the Pentagon, Gates climbed into the cargo hold of the white 747 bearing the remains. From the ground, troops could see the defense secretary as he knelt, alone, by the flag-draped transfer cases. Five minutes passed.

Then Gates, a small man with white hair neatly combed across his head, appeared in the plane’s door and summoned the chaplain and the honor guard to begin the 17-minute welcome-home ritual.

Read the whole article here.

Annals Of The Obama Administration

May 18, 2009 by Frank Gannon | Filed Under Annals of the Obama Administration | 1 Comment 

The Vice President’s garrulousness may have led to the verbal equivalent of Air Force One’s $300K+ New York flyover.  If, as Eleanor Clift reports reports in this week’s Newsweek, Mr. Biden has disclosed the whereabouts of the “undisclosed location,” a new multi-million dollar hidey hole will be required.

Vice President Joe Biden, well-known for his verbal gaffes, may have finally outdone himself, divulging potentially classified information meant to save the life of a sitting vice president.

According to a report, while recently attending the Gridiron Club dinner in Washington, an annual event where powerful politicians and media elite get a chance to cozy up to one another, Biden told his dinnermates about the existence of a secret bunker under the old U.S. Naval Observatory, which is now the home of the vice president.

The bunker is believed to be the secure, undisclosed location former Vice President Dick Cheney remained under protection in secret after the 9/11 attacks.

Eleanor Clift, Newsweek magazine’s Washington contributing editor, said Biden revealed the location while filling in for President Obama at the dinner, who, along with Grover Cleveland, is the only president to skip the gathering.

According to Clift’s report on the Newsweek blog, Biden “said a young naval officer giving him a tour of the residence showed him the hideaway, which is behind a massive steel door secured by an elaborate lock with a narrow connecting hallway lined with shelves filled with communications equipment.”

Clift continued: “The officer explained that when Cheney was in lock down, this was where his most trusted aides were stationed, an image that Biden conveyed in a way that suggested we shouldn’t be surprised that the policies that emerged were off the wall.

Featured Articles — May 18, 2009

May 18, 2009 by Jonathan Movroydis | Filed Under Featured Articles | Leave a Comment 

Interesting Takes From Home And Abroad:

The moment of truth is at hand By Yehuda Ben-Meir, Ha’aretz
The sad truth is that the State of Israel will face a confrontation with the Obama administration, irrespective of the public outcome of the meeting between the U.S. president and Israel’s prime minister. The soothing statements being made on the hour by government spokesmen cannot hide the bitter truth or cover up the new reality that is taking shape in Washington. The writing is on the wall – or as the late foreign minister Moshe Dayan said during a serious dispute with the Carter administration: “I may only have one eye, but I’m not blind.”

Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich By Stephen Moore & Art Laffer, The Wall Street Journal
With states facing nearly $100 billion in combined budget deficits this year, we’re seeing more governors than ever proposing the Barack Obama solution to balancing the budget: Soak the rich. Lawmakers in California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York and Oregon want to raise income tax rates on the top 1% or 2% or 5% of their citizens. New Illinois Gov. Patrick Quinn wants a 50% increase in the income tax rate on the wealthy because this is the “fair” way to close his state’s gaping deficit.

What Did Rahm Know? By WIlliam Kristol, The Washington Post
Commentators have been struck — though not perhaps as much as they should have been — by the extraordinary character of CIA Director Leon Panetta’s blunt and stark rebuke of Nancy Pelosi. Responding to political debates that “reached a new decibel level [Thursday] when the CIA was accused [by Pelosi] of misleading Congress,” Panetta wrote Friday that “our contemporaneous records from September 2002 indicate that CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah.”

Obama’s Court Jesters By Christopher Hitchens, Salon
As a gnarled and grizzled veteran of the annual White House Correspondents’ Dinner (it must be almost three decades since I first tuxed up and attended one), I see no reason to miss the chance to comment on the Wanda Sykes phenomenon. This is because I think it may actually tell us something about the American and international press and its over-ripe relationship to the new president of the United States.

Iran, not Palestine, tops Israel’s agenda By Alon Pinkas, The Times
Today’s US-Israeli summit is scripted to end happily. Any real differences will be exposed later.

Tensions Stoked Between Iraqi Kurds and Sunnis By Sam Dagher, The New York Times
Tensions between Sunni Arabs and Kurds are boiling over in Nineveh, the northern Iraqi province that includes Mosul, as Kurds fight the result of a provincial election in January that shifted power to Arabs.

Obama Must Stop Neglecting India By Tunku Varadarajan, Forbes
While it’s possible to be critical–scathing, even–of Barack Obama’s handling of the financial crisis, his stewardship of America’s foreign and security policy has been surprisingly deft. He’s played a cautious, humble hand on Iraq, taken bold steps on Afghanistan, striven manfully to help Pakistan put out the flames that are threatening to burn that place down, and, most recently, made a seemingly inspired choice in his ambassador to China. In all these theaters, he’s shown an ability to see the big picture while keeping a close eye on those pesky little pixels.

« Previous Page — Next Page »