Bloggings by boz: December 2004

President flip-flops on aid

Kudos to President Bush for flip-flopping from his original position and giving $350 million. Plus all the military support. And the private donations. I feel better knowing that a little public pressure can get the president to move in the right direction, even when he's on vacation.

ABC people of the year

I graciously accept my award as one of People of the Year from ABC News. It's a pretty weak article, however.

Intolerant bastards

This bothers me in a lot of ways. These people obviously worship a different god than I do...

USAID column

Andrew Natsios has an op-ed in the Washington Post defending the US's response to the earthquake and tsunami in Asia. Fortunately for him, I don't think anyone criticized USAID's response. The agency with its limited resources did an admirable job getting aid to the rescue effort. The problem is that the US leadership at the highest level didn't realize the extent of the damage or the immediate needs.

Argentine tragedy

Compared to the events in Asia, this fire isn't much. However, a fire in Buenos Aires that kills over 150 and wounds 400 is a tragedy and my heart goes out to the victims and their families.

Abandon the "War on Terror"?

Chris Bowers, once you skip past all the quotes he opens his article with, says the Democrats must abandon the words "War on Terror" because the Republicans benefit from that rhetoric. He makes a lot of very good arguments. I agree we need to reframe the foreign policy debate to include all multilateral issues from helping the victims of the tsunami to intervening in countries committing genocide. But he's wrong about the "War on Terror".

Here's the main reason why Democrats can't abandon the "War on Terror". We were attacked on 9/11 by people who can only be called "terrorists". We're not fighting the "War on Terror" because the Republicans decided that it would be an ideologically helpful term. The United States is fighting terrorists because terrorists attacked us. We should have been fighting them before 9/11; we have to fight them now.

Would it be better for Democrats if it were called "War on Al Qaeda" or "War on violent religious extremists" or "War to provide dignity to all people which will in turn make us stronger and safer"? Probably. The first is a winnable war with clear metrics for victory and the second two, while ridiculously named, are more along Democrats' terms. What would this be called if the first major attack on US soil had occurred on Clinton, Gore or Kerry's watch? The answer is it would either be called the "War on Terror" or "War on Al Qaeda". The first thing we would have done is attack Afghanistan and overthrow the Taliban.

I know frames are the big discussion in the Democratic community, but sometimes you live with the frames you're given. Sometimes reframing a debate would take too much capital. If you don't believe me, FoxNews has been trying to rename "suicide bombs" as "homicide bombs" because conservatives believed that the focus on the attackers willingness to commit suicide. After three years, FoxNews is still the only organization that uses the term homicide bomb. They can't even get all their anchors to do it all the time. Once a term sticks, it is unlikely to move.

The Democrats are stuck with the words "War on Terror", both because it has become part of our lexicon and because we are actually fighting terrorists. However, there are issues the Democrats can set to their own terms.

First, Republicans have remained strategically ambiguous about metrics for victory. Democrats can set realistic metrics for victory in the War on Terror and they would be first to do so. Second, Republicans have ruined their own doctrine of "preemption" through their mistakes in Iraq. This gives Democrats a chance to reframe the debate over when to commit troops to foreign intervention. Those are two key places where Democrats need to insert themselves into the "War on Terror" and begin reframing the internals of the debate that are up in the air. It will help the Democrats electoral chances and more importantly it will help our country fight a stronger, smarter and more effective war against those who really threaten us.

Three random stories

The second part of the Washington Post's series on terrorists acquiring WMD focuses on the difficulties of weaponizing bioweapons. Very well researched article with a paradox: if it's so hard to weaponize the bioweapons, why does every major researcher believe it will happen? It's a fascinating topic.

Reuters notes that most Iraqis who are going to vote have no idea who or what they are voting for. Apparently the Shiites are likely to vote for Sistani's approved list and the Kurds will vote for a few coalition parties. However, the Sunni's don't even know who to vote for if they decide to vote. That's a problem. It reminds me that in Poland's first general election the "Beer Drinker Party" won 4% of the vote because people walked in and saw their name and liked it. Democracy is a funny thing sometimes.

Today's NYT reports the Pentagon will cut $60 billion over the next six years including the Air Forces F-22 project. The $120 billion Future Combat System will also be delayed.

Iran policy

Two op-eds on Iran policy today. Susan Rice gives a pretty harsh critique of the Bush Iran policy (or lack thereof):

President Bush says the greatest threat to U.S. national security is a nuclear weapon in the hands of terrorists. A nuclear Iran, not Saddam Hussein's Iraq, is a truly dangerous manifestation of that threat.

So how has the Bush administration acted to protect us? Overstretched with 140,000 U.S. troops in Iraq and paralyzed by internal policy disputes, the administration's response has been to posture, threatening to take Iran to the U.N. Security Council, while effectively having no Iran policy at all.

In response to one of the most urgent threats to the United States, Bush has subcontracted American security to the Europeans. Last week the president confirmed this as his approach, arguing that the United States has no choice. "We've sanctioned ourselves out of influence," the president said, almost echoing Vice President Cheney, who as chief executive of Halliburton pressed for lifting U.S. sanctions against Iran.

However, what was most interesting was the question she started with: Has President Bush quietly concluded that the United States can live with a nuclear-armed Iran? She says that is preposterous, but I'm not so sure. Bush may have been convinced that it is not a bad idea.

The second column is Max Boot's regular column in the LA Times where he argues we should export the Ukrainian revolution and start with Iran. Like most neocons, he believes democracy in Iran is right around the corner. Of course, they also believed we'd be greeted as liberators in Iraq.

Amazon donations

The Amazon donations for flood victims have reached $2.5 million. If the US government gave $2.4 billion last year, then private donations from Amazon users just passed 1/10 of 1% of all of US foreign aid. Oddly, that's the same percentage that foreign aid is of our GDP.

WashPost on nukes

The Washington Post began a three part series on the fears of terrorists acquiring nuclear weapons. Part one today did a good job describing the difficulties terrorists will have in building or stealing the weapons or parts necessary. They also ran a sidebar note on dirty bombs. Both articles are worth reading for those who want to know more about what both Bush and Kerry described as the greatest threat to our country.

Floored

Every time I see a new number from the earthquake and tsunami, I'm stunned. But this number floored me. 80,000. Not total. Just for the Aceh region of Indonesia. If true, that would probably put the numbers for the whole disaster over 150,000.

Elsewhere, they are finding islands where 2/3 of the population was killed. They may yet find an island without survivors. These islands are small, but the numbers add up to thousands dead and missing.

Google has the links to aid organization on their front page.

Social Security

I'm not one who thinks Social Security is in crisis, but I don't believe it will be around when I retire. So I was fairly surprised by Kevin Drum's op-ed in the LA Times where he says Social Security will be around for every person alive today even if we change nothing. It's a gutsy opinion that I think would be good to spread around the internet. We can then debate private accounts on their merits, not under the fear of some pending crisis.

NYT story on Blogging the Tsunami

Give the New York Times credit, they didn't even wait a week before talking about the effect blogs are having on the coverage of the tsunami in Asia. That shows just how much the blogs are now ingrained in our media.

In the meantime, the death toll is closing in on 40,000 and will probably rise after that.

Ecuador's Democracy

Michael Shifter argues that Washington is ignoring signs of decreased democracy in Ecuador. He compares the court-packing scheme by Gutierrez to the one by Chavez in Venezuela. I probably wouldn't go that far, but yes, there are some similarities. He also compares Ecuador to Ukraine in terms of what the US should do. That would definitely not be correct.

The question is, what does Shifter want the US to do? He opens by discussing our pro-democracy support in Ukraine. NED and others have already worked in Ecuador. Ecuador has fully monitored elections. Nothing we did in Ukraine really helps us in Ecuador. Does he want an OAS resolution? Maybe, but it would be ridiculous to do one for Ecuador if we aren't putting equal or greater pressure on Chavez. Does he want people to take to the streets? Ecuador's last 5 presidents have lasted barely over a year. People there are tired of taking to the streets. Gutierrez has many, many problems, but he is providing a measure of stability for a country which has lacked it in the past decade.

Shifter is right that there is a problem in Ecuador and the US should be paying more attention to all the democracies in our hemisphere. I like the idea of putting more NED funds into Ecuador, especially at the local levels. The US should also point out anti-democratic moves by Ecuador (including the court packing and restrictions on media) and other countries in Latin America. But there also has to be respect for some of the political difficulties these leaders deal with. Ecuador faces a large number of democracy, development and indigenous rights issues. Gutierrez does not have it easy. He can't snap his fingers and suddenly see pure democracy break out in Ecuador as poverty fades away. The current government isn't perfect, but it's doing at least as well if not better than its seven or eight predecessors.

Unless Shifter believes that an opposition movement exists in Ecuador that can win elections and govern more democratically, he should agree that the US should back Ecuador's current government and try to support its stability. Right now stability is the key to Ecuador's development and democracy. This isn't like backing an undemocratic regime like Saudi. If Gutierrez can make it to the end of his term he will hold democratic elections and his successor will be elected, almost certainly not from his party. That election would be a huge step forward for Ecuadorian democracy and that is what the US should be working towards.

Flood Aid

The aid effort has begun for the flood. Kudos to the US for the immediate announcement of $15 million. It's going to take a lot more. This is one time it would be a good thing to see some leadership by the Chinese.

The ICRC has set up a donation page. Doctors Without Borders hasn't set up a specific tsunami page but is accepting donations on their main page. The Aid agencies are asking people to send money, not items.

UPDATE: Via Instapundit, here's a site set up by bloggers in the region that deals with aid issues for those affected by the tsunami. The blogs from this disaster will form an electronic history that may create an interesting dataset for scientists when it's all over.

Two other stories

Obviously, the disaster in Asia is the big story of the day. However, two other stories also deserve mention.

Ukraine's Transport Minister was found shot dead the day after the election. In other news, I don't believe Yanukovich has conceded the election yet.

Bin Laden has a new tape out saying he supports Zarqawi. It's an interesting alliance and signals that Bin Laden is looking for new middle management to run his operations. It also indicates that Zarqawi had little to do with UBL before this. It's also important to note that it's Bin Laden's third tape in two months. He obviously has access to time and equipment. We're not keeping this guy on the run...

Flood

There's over 21,000 dead and they're still searching. The next challenge is securing clean water for the survivors and preventing disease. Yesterday I was thinking 15,000 would be the total. I know think we'll be seeing 35,000 by the end of the week. There's also very few reports from Burma, which is a concern. They don't talk much with the outside world, so there could be 1,000 dead there and they may not ask for aid right away.

Democrats on foreign policy

I was glad to see this op-ed on sovereignty in the LA Times. I was even happier to see it is by John Podesta, a Democrat who runs the Center for American Progress.

I should note that Podesta's op-ed is very similar to this op-ed from Daalder and Lindsay that appeared in the Boston Globe earlier this month. But I guess Podesta makes a few points about Sudan that are significant while the Daalder and Lindsay op-ed focuses more on the Kosovo tragedies to argue that nations need to intervene when genocide is occurring, even if the UNSC does not approve.

Podesta ends with four specific policy recommendations.

First, the U.S. should again bring the crisis in Darfur before the Security Council and use the principle of the responsibility to protect as the basis for a resolution that strengthens the African Union mission, includes the credible threat of sanctions and dictates a timetable for holding accountable the perpetrators of the genocide.

Second, the Security Council should pass a resolution unambiguously recognizing each nation's responsibility to prevent genocide against its own citizens and affirming that when a country fails to do so, other governments have a responsibility to act.

Third, it is time to consider a new international agreement that builds on the 1948 Genocide Convention but gives more weight to preventing mass killings and other grave abuses against civilians.

Fourth, we need to recognize that regional organizations will increasingly have the greatest capacity and inclination to act. The AU, for example, already has proved its willingness in Sudan. But groups like the AU need additional training in keeping — and enforcing — the peace. The U.N. should create a fund, sustained through assessed contributions, that can be accessed on an urgent basis.

All good ideas, but I'd like to see Podesta's views on how the Democrats should push the Bush administration in Congress or in the media to act on these recommendations. Podesta's strength is politics and I think his pushing these views for the Democrats could be a good thing for strengthening the Dems on national security. They all seem like the sort of things that neo-cons and religious conservatives could get on board with, especially because they slightly weaken the power of the UN. We just need to see some leadership from the ruling and opposition parties.

And it's about time the Center for American Progress started making itself relevant.

UPDATE: I should also note that the transcript of Podesta's recent speech on Darfur is online. Apparently he has been pushing this issue for some time. Glad to see American Progress is pushing these issues.

Force protection vs. winning the war

In today's NYT, Anthony Cordesman is mostly right in saying that focusing too heavily on force protection can cause the US to lose some of its objectives in war.

The United States can win in Iraq only through offensive action. It cannot afford to make every American base a fortress, or to disperse scarce manpower and other military resources in force-protection missions. United States forces have to be mobile and able to redeploy where the threat is - even though such redeployments often mean moving forces to vulnerable areas. If the Pentagon concentrates on protecting troops in the short run, the war will last longer and total casualties will be greater. Worse, the United States will simply never win.

However, I disagree when he says that this includes too heavy of a focus on armor for the troops' vehicles. That's just a common sense solution that won't interfere with getting the troops out in the field for offensive actions and engaging the population. If anything, placing armor on the vehicles will help get us outside our "fortresses".

I thought Cordesman's comments about getting outside of bases for the political goals were better points than those about offensive military actions.

Demanding that American troops keep their distance from Iraqis, or imposing security restrictions that make it difficult or impossible for them to work with the military, is also problematic. The United States cannot possibly achieve its political goals in Iraq - or the goal of reducing its own military presence over time - unless Iraqis are treated as partners. Humanitarian aid, economic assistance, the creation of Iraqi military, security and political forces that can defeat the insurgents and give the new government credibility - all require the cooperation of Iraqis.

Exactly. You can't create a democracy if you're stuck on base and never allowed to engage the civilian population. Engaging the population is a calculated risk that will promote our objectives and increase our long term force security in the region.

Argentina's economic recovery

The New York Times front page yesterday covered Argentina's economic rally that is taking place in spite of economists. Argentina has absolutely spurned the advice of the IMF and most free market economists and is experiencing significant economic growth. Some of the economists in the article are saying the rally is ending, but the fact is Argentina will be performing better than most developing nations for the next few years.

In 2001, Argentina was in a rare position of default on its debt and survive. The IMF, which should have realized that some form of bankruptcy model needed to be implemented so that Argentina could default gracefully, was too interested in protecting its investors and protecting its own policies. Thus, Argentina defaulted very ungracefully, screwing the investors and leaving the IMF discredited among both developed nations' investors and developing nations' citizens. This also hurt Argentina's citizens, as the peso plummeted and the government forcibly changed people's dollars into pesos. This was an overly harsh measure, but without an easy way to save their currency, the Argentine government did what it believed was necessary, even if it may have been illegal.

The Argentine crash and subsequent recovery are really a threat to the IMF because they make the West’s policy prescriptions look wrong everywhere. The fact is, in the case of Argentina, the policies of the IMF were and are wrong. Argentina cannot pay back all the debt they owe without hurting the country's economy. The IMF may be correct in saying Argentina needs to pay back the debt for long term economic stability, but long term stability means nothing to a country that saw starvation for the first time in a century after their economic crash in 2001. By continuing to push policies in Argentina that are obvious losing policies, the IMF is not helping its image in the rest of the developing world.

Is Argentina's growth specifically occurring because of their policies or is it a temporary economic aberration? Can this be a model for other places?

Starting with the policies, Argentina is growing because it is creating an environment for investors in which the benefits outweigh the risks. Argentina is such a big opportunity for investors who understand strategic risks that they cannot afford to pass it up. Argentina may be defying IMF economic policies on some issues, but overall Argentina is doing a better job than ever at managing revenues and controlling state level budgets. The IMF is looking more and more wrong over the question of debt repayment and by refusing to compromise they are setting a bad model for future defaults or “international bankruptcies.” The IMF may not like it, but they need to realize that Argentina holds the cards at this second.

Most other countries, however, do not have the options Argentina does. Argentina is a classic example of "If you owe the bank $100, it's your problem. If you owe the bank $1 million, it's the bank’s problem." In this case, Argentina owed so much money that it was the international community that was (and is) stuck with the bill. Most of the smaller economies in Latin America, Asia and sub-Saharan Africa do not have this clout. If Honduras or Ghana decided to default, people would stop investing. This doesn't mean there aren't lessons these smaller nations cannot learn from Argentina. It does, however, mean that Argentina's current recovery is a fairly unique occurrence that works for them but would not be a good model for other nations.

Rx maker speaks out

The LA Times ran an op-ed from the VP of marketing of Pfizer where he says our healthcare system and particularly our system for marketing pharmaceuticals is broken. He argues his industry is hurting the poor of the US. He particularly pushes for the reimportation of drugs.

Kevin Drum asks how long will he remain VP? My guess is that no company will throw out someone who is good for their PR. It shows the Pfizer execs care. As long as all he is doing is writing op-eds, they'll encourage him to keep writing and keep being profitable. If he starts lobbying to change the rules in Congress, then maybe they'll stop him.

Yuschenko wins

56-43 according to exit polls.

Update on earthquake and flood

Reuters reports 6,300 dead. This may top 10,000 before the end of the day. I imagine President Bush will be announcing US assistance soon.

Ukraine election day

Although the voting is not yet over, the international media already believes that Yuschenko will win. This is definitely a good thing because it means that fraud will immediately be suspected if he loses. Foreign Notes, Le Sabot and Neeka's Backlog will probably have updates later this afternoon if you're looking for news from people on the ground. Neeka also has pictures up already of the voting in Kyiv. The world is watching this one and my guess is there will be a party or a protest in Ukraine tonight.

Uzbekistan is also voting today, and as you can tell from the Reuters article, "President" Islam Karimov is a bit worried about his election being compared to the original fraud in Ukraine. Fortunately for him, Uzbekistan has been a good ally of ours so I doubt we would speak up unless people actually took to the streets. And I doubt people will take to the streets because Karimov will have them shot.

Wall of Water

Never expect to know what the top international story will be the day before. It's not Ukraine today. An earthquake off the coast of Indonesia sent a wall of water across the Indian Ocean slamming into India and Sri Lanka. There are over 3,000 dead at this point and the governments are still counting. The final toll is almost certain to cross 5,000 if the current figures are accurate. There are no casualty reports in from Burma yet, but they also look like they got hit pretty hard.

Polls open in less than two hours.

Ukraine polls open at 8AM, which is midnight central time. Here's tomorrow morning's editorial from the Washington Post.

FOR THE THIRD time in less than two months Ukrainians will go to the polls today to vote for a new president. Once again, the choice is between the outgoing prime minister, Viktor Yanukovych, and one of his predecessors, Viktor Yushchenko. And again, the main issue is not the differences in the candidates' platforms or their foreign allies, though these are substantial, but whether Ukraine will shake off a corrupt and authoritarian political system and become a genuine democracy. Thanks to the popular "orange revolution" of the past month, democracy's chances are far greater than they were before the last two votes. But its victory is far from assured: More peaceful pressure from Ukrainian citizens and vigilance by Western governments will be needed in the coming days.

By the time I wake up, some of the first reports from the Ukraine blogs should be posted. Exit polls are expected just after noon tomorrow.

Kite Runner

I used my Christmas holiday to finish The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini. Great book both for its portrayal of Afghanistan and the Afghan population and for its incredibly basic plot. I mean basic plot in the nicest possible way. It is a book written to be analyzed in a high school English class, and that's part of its charm. Great relationships between characters, great use of symbolism and good use of foreshadowing and flashbacks.

Next on my reading list: Michael Crichton's State of Fear.

By the way...

...we might be hit by an asteroid in 2029. Nothing to be concerned about mind you. It's only a 1 in 60 chance. NASA wants to stress that it's not time to start the looting yet. They'll tell you when to start looting.

Global Blogging

I found a link to this post from London Calling from Instapundit this morning. London Calling asks how a specific story got missed on Instapundit and complains that there's no Global Blogger who covers everything.

I have a level of respect for Instapundit because he manages to serve as a gatekeeper for such a wide array of issues. His political leanings obviously lean to the right of mine, but it also gives me a good location to see some great writing from blogs I would normally not read.

No blog, not even the best gatekeeping blog, will catch everything. Blogging is an imperfect industry and not supposed to function as main stream media (which also misses stories, but is held to a higher standard by most). It's bloggings imperfections added to a free-market model that make it such an interesting medium.

Part of what makes the blogging phenomenon so impressive is that people with regular jobs take time out of their lives to write opinion pieces, link to things they've read or perform original research. These blogs then link to each other and many of those with the best (worst) or most original ideas being read. Because few people have the time to participate in every part of the media cycle, most bloggers take one or two parts of the cycle and rely on others to function as the other parts.

All of these blogs have a symbiotic relationship. There will be blogs that serve as researchers, blogs that serve as experts on micro-issues, blogs that serve as key websites for specific political factions, blogs that will find ideas and improve the writing or style in which it is presented and a few blogs that serve as gatekeepers where people can go for a wide set of issues. (Obviously, these categories can move from political to other types of blogs like science or personal or cooking. I just think in terms of politics). These blogs can serve without each other, but the phenomenon of the blogosphere as was seen this year wouldn't have occurred without the way blogs thrive off of each others' links.

I wish there were other blogs that served as global gatekeepers. One answer is become one. The thing is, that's not easy. Blogging takes a large amount of time and even just linking to other blogs and articles takes time.

I would love to work to become the gatekeeper for even one specific issue (probably Latin American politics or world elections), but that will require hours per week. And, judging by my sitemeter, it's not an easy field to start. I get probably 20 hits per day, mostly people I know. I enjoy writing this blog, but how many hours am I willing to put into something that so few people read currently. It's a chicken and egg problem, because more people won't start reading until I have some original content that will grab attention.

It's something for me to think about in the new year. Suggestions are always welcome in the comments or via e-mail.

Bethlehem on Christmas

Nearly all the media are covering this story out of Bethlehem. Everyone seems very hopeful for peace in the Middle East. Everyone is also covering the Pope's prayer for peace. Christmas is one of those odd days where you already know what stories the media will cover ahead of time, but you still read them.

Iraq on Christmas

I was tempted to post something about this article on the lack of post-war planning, but instead I'll just link to it. Most acknowledge there are problems and that the administration screwed up, but let's focus on the good for a day.

We've got 150,000 troops on the ground in Iraq, another 15,000 in Afghanistan and thousands more in over 80 countries around the world. There's also thousands of non-military government personnel including law enforcement officers, military contractors and State Department employees, many of whom are also away from their families. Their willingness to serve is part of what makes this country great.

With respect to the troops in combat areas, we train them to shoot, not build democracies. Yet, that's what they're trying to do in Iraq and Afghanistan. People in their 20's and 30's are going to local community leaders and attempting to teach them how to hold a democratic town council meeting, how to vote for elected officials, how to handle town budgets and how to form political parties. Most of our troops don't have degrees in political science (which may be a blessing) and many have not read a single line in a handbook about how to do this. But they're trying. In some places they will succeed, in others they will fail. But it's that local building of democratic civil society that will allow Iraq to succeed in the long run.

Iraq is currently a mess and Afghanistan is doing marginally better than that, but there will be a generation of Iraqis and Afghans who will grow up remembering American troops as liberators. They will remember American troops as the ones who came in and treated them well. Our troops are making due with what they have and they are fulfilling the mission as best they can.

Secretary Rumsfeld has asked for people to report good news from Iraq and this is what I have for him. In spite of the screw ups of the Bush administration, and in some ways because of them, we've got the next generation of Americans building democracy for the next generation of Iraqis. It wasn't the ideal way to fight the war on terror, but it's what we're stuck with now. People my age are on the ground in Iraq doing the best they can to deal with the ideology of Secretary Rumsfeld's generation. They're winning a battle in the war on terror in a country that originally had nothing to do with terrorists we were fighting. It's an odd thing to report as good news, but I'm grateful.

Ukraine Court overturns election law

I go to sleep feeling positive and when I wake up, the Ukrainian court has overturned the recent election law. This is bad news because the recent law was meant to help eliminate fraud at the polls. While I truly believe that mass fraud will not be tolerated by the international community, it would be much easier if Yuschenko won cleanly and without controversy.

Ukraine election on Boxing Day

The Ukraine presidential campaign ended (again) and it's looking very positive for Yuschenko. Looking forward to blogging some good news election results the day after Christmas.

Dean on abortion and the Dems

Yesterday's LA Times and today's NY Times both discuss that the Democrats may move their position on abortion and become more accepting of the pro-life movement. I have my own views on this, but what I found fascinating was how the two articles completely differed on how they dealt with Howard Dean. The LA Times portrayed Dean as unwavering on pro-choice issues and the candidate for DNC chair who wouldn't move the Democratic Party. The NY Times portrayed Dean as a leader who would be willing to accept pro-life people who want to be Democrats.

Which is it? I think Dean will be much more accepting of pro-life people while never moving from the position of defending Roe v. Wade. Dean is going to work hard not to give in on abortion but he will try to reframe the debate as part of economic, health and equality issues. Will the media work with Dean to reframe the debate? I don't know. I think the media is stuck on the view that Dean is still an ultra liberal and they will continue portraying Dean that way. It will hurt his ability to reframe the abortion debate.

Here's the other problem Dean faces. If and when Dean finally gets the media to accept him as a moderate, the Republicans will place the "flip-flop" label on him.

Neither of these points are reasons to disqualify Dean from the DNC chair. But I think that those people pushing Dean should recognize that Dean will come with some baggage in the media that may hurt the Democratic Party's image in the short-term. The question is whether his ability to reform the Democratic Party long term will offset the short term image problems.

Washington governor

The Democrats won in Washington State by 130 votes. They had won by 10 votes and then the ballots that were found in King County added another 120. Big victory for the Dems out West. Even more importantly, a big victory for those of us who believe all votes should be counted.

How Kerry lost Clinton-Gore voters

Good diary over at Kos on how this girl's parents voted for Bush in spite of voting for Clinton in 92 and 96 and Gore in '00. She argues the Democrats lost mainstream America due to three issues.

The Republicans beat the Democrats at the media game. They understand which issues will stick with the average American better.
The issue of gay marriage turned normally tolerant people into those who hated the extremists of the gay movement and linked them with the Democrats. People in this country are tolerant of gays, but they don't want the issue thrown in their face and they don't want to help a movement that demonizes all who oppose every item on the gay agenda. This then goes back to point one, because the media linked the gay extremists with the Democrats and the dems failed to counter it.
The War on Terrorism made people prefer "The Devil you know". People may not have liked W. Bush. They may have even hated or feared him. But as Republican friends have told me, in the event of a terrorist attack, you know W. will go bomb somebody. People worry the Democrats won't. Once again, it's the media portrayal that kills the Dems.

Very worth the read when you have time.

Leaving children behind

Our President is taking more decisive action on the deficit today. He has now decided to cut Pell Grants in order to save $300 million. Pell Grants are the federal government's main form of scholarship money for low income students. 1.3 million students will receive cuts to their grants and 89,000 will be cut completely from the program. This comes a day after he cut $100 million from international food aid programs.

See... we all complained about the deficit and now the President is acting on it.

UN in the Congo

The UN responds today to the recent Post editorial on Congo peacekeeping. It's an excellent response noting that the UN has done many things in Congo. The problem is the bigger picture. I'm sure every peacekeeping operation can point to positive details, but the real question is are the keeping or bringing peace. As people continue to die and be displaced in Congo, I doubt anyone can call the attempts for peace in that region a success.

First, I think the UN troops on the ground have done an excellent job with the resources and manpower they've been given. Scandal allegations aside (although right-wingers go nuts that those are ignored in the US media), the peacekeepers are only 12,000 strong and facing a daunting task of disarming thousands and dealing with a displaced population in the millions.

The problem is not with the peacekeepers on the ground; the problem is with the UN mandate and the will of the world community in New York and Geneva. Both Congo and Darfur need tens of thousands of troops to be done correctly. Until the world community decides that Congo is worth the time, manpower and economic resources, the UN peacekeepers on the ground will simply be a measure to slow the violence and at best keep all out civil war from beginning again.

Washington Governor

It looks like the Dems are leading in the Washington gubernatorial race. It also looks like they'll be counting all the votes in King County including the votes that were recently found. This is very good news, both for Democrats in Washington and for those of us who believe every vote deserves to be counted. This race sets an excellent precedent.

Criminal?

Kos says that Halliburton is guilty of criminal negligence for delays on constructing a new mess hall that would have saved lives in Mosul. Halliburton is guilty of many things, but I don't think we can jump to conclusions in this incident. The delays may have been the company's fault, but there are other plausible explanations that can cause legitimate delays. Let's wait for the facts before jumping on the easy target. And lets remember that the first and most important guilty party are the attackers. Don't forget to condemn them before criticizing the administration or Halliburton.

Jeez, I feel like a Republican saying that, but the Democratic Party doesn't need to sink to the Republicans' level to win. There are enough criticisms of Halliburton and the Bush administration to go around without making unsubstantiated attacks.

Feed the hungry

Bush will begin his deficit crackdown by cutting $100 million for food programs that go to the hungry in the poorest of countries. Maybe it's the Catholic in me, but I'm very bothered by this decision. Shouldn't we have started by cutting the presidential yacht?

Meanwhile, I don't think the president will burn in hell for his decision, but those who take the Bible literally probably should:
Matthew 25: 41-46

Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into the eternal fire which is prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was hungry, and ye did not give me to eat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me not in; naked, and ye clothed me not; sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer, saying, Lord, when saw we thee hungry, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not unto one of these least, ye did it not unto me. And these shall go away into eternal punishment: but the righteous into eternal life.

Think Jerry Falwell will mention it to the President? Probably not, he's too busy attacking our immoral society...

Congressional Reform

Christopher Shays and Carolyn Maloney argue that Congress should reorganize itself to add greater oversight on intelligence and homeland security issues. That includes appropriations for those two areas as well.

Not bad proposals overall, but adding three subcommittees will not automatically fix Congress. There are problems in Congress that run much deeper than a few more subcommittees can fix. Still, maybe these extra subcommittees can provide a check on purchasing $9.5 billion spy satellites that the American public doesn't know about.

Reflex reject

Kristof has a good column in today's NYT saying that Dems do not need to automatically reject everything that conservatives put forward. He uses several human rights cases including the genocide in Darfur as past examples of the Democrats being hesitant to take on an issue. I'll add another one, Democrats were slow on Ukraine. They seemed to sense a neo-con plot behind all the democracy rhetoric and were slow to make statements backing Yuschenko and the Orange Revolution.

Let's hope in the New Year the Democrats begin picking issues they believe in and not defining themselves based on opposing the conservatives. There are a set of basic American values out there and the right, left and center can agree on certain topics like promoting democracy and preventing genocide, even if they disagree on details.

Treason?

Tom Delay claims that those criticizing Rumsfeld are aiding and abetting the enemy. I would think that the Republican House leadership's failure at Congressional oversight to make sure our troops have enough armor are the ones aiding the enemy. Then again, I'm more concerned about our troops' lives. DeLay cares about poll numbers (and certain criminal investigations).

DeLay and others do a great disservice in linking political criticism with terrorism. They don't just demonize legitimate critics; they trivialize the real threat of terrorism.

Baseball in DC

DC may now have baseball. The deal was approved this afternoon 7-6 and it looks like MLB approves. Now we just need hockey back.

Attack in Mosul

We lost over 20 soldiers today from the attack in Mosul. I really don't have any commentary. I just feel it's worth mentioning...

The Plot to Promote Democracy

Good article in the Washington Post on how the US promotes democracy and more importantly, what it does not do. The author shoots down myths about US involvement in Ukraine's Orange Revolution. As for what we have done:

Does this kind of intervention violate international norms? Not anymore. There was a time when championing state sovereignty was a progressive idea, since the advance of statehood helped destroy empires. But today those who revere the sovereignty of the state above all else often do so to preserve autocracy, while those who champion the sovereignty of the people are the new progressives. In Ukraine, external actors who helped the people be heard were not violating the sovereignty of the Ukrainian people; they were defending it.

UPDATE: Jeff Morley over at the Washington Post online has a good roundup of the international arguments about the "US plot" in Ukraine along with the Kyiv Post defending the pro-democracy advocates. Lots of links in his article.

A few more random stories

Secretary Rumsfeld has an op-ed in the USA Today defending his term as SECDEF and the decisions he has made to reform the military.

A NYT editorial criticizes his plan to increase the DOD's role in intelligence gathering.

The 9/11 commission is lobbying for Congress to reform its oversight capability.

The Wall Street Journal discusses upcoming budget cuts if Bush is serious about the deficit and the opposition he will face.

Also, talks with Iran, protests in Cuba over our Christmas decorations and an update on the Mexican budget issue.

How not to red-team

The New York Times reports that Wakenhut held a security drill at a nuclear power plant. The problem was, they didn't tell the guards with loaded weapons that it was a drill. Thankfully, nobody was hurt.

Iranian blogs

Good article in today's Guardian about weblogs in Farsi. Blogs are going to affect pro-democracy movements worldwide and the US should work to increase access in countries such as Iran. It beats invading and occupying and it's probably more effective.

US poll on Iraq

The new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that 56% of Americans no longer feel that the War in Iraq as worth the costs. I felt that this number was the key:

Still, nearly six in 10 -- 58 percent -- said the United States should keep its military forces in Iraq rather than withdraw them, a proportion that has not changed in seven months.

That's the number that concerns me and that is the number that cannot drop too far. Democrats need to back John Kerry and Howard Dean in saying that the US must stay in Iraq to finish the job. It may or may not have been a mistake to go in (and let me be clear that the Bush administration definitely made mistakes in how it invaded and how it failed to plan for the post-invasion). However, leaving Iraq now will make us less safe.

It will be very tempting for the Democrats to take cheap shots and lower this number because it will also lower the president's approval ratings. Democratic leaders, especially those in Congress, need to resist this urge and fight on other issues, such as making sure our troops are properly equipped, our military transformation is done intelligently and our vets receive the benefits they've earned.

Google search broken, then fixed

News hit today that Google's desktop search had a security flaw. But by the time it appeared in the media, Google had solved the problem and automatically fixed it on my computer. I didn't know about it until after it was fixed, and neither did the hackers. I'm impressed. At this point I use the desktop search so often that I no longer archive my e-mail into different folders. It would be a major blow if they hadn't fixed it and I had to stop using it.

Now if they can just teach Blogger's spell check to recognize the word "blog", we'll be all set...

Not a plant?

Apparently that soldier's question about armor was not a plant from the reporter. Rather, the soldier says he came up with the question himself and mentioned it to the reporter before the event, at which point the reporter asked him to tone it down. The soldier also mentions that he hopes his 15 minutes of fame save a life and that he would feel bad if he did any damage to Secretary Rumsfeld.

This guy sounds like a regular guy who's serving his country and has been thrust in the limelight. I give him a lot of credit for standing his ground while being respectful to his leadership.

CIA process

The Washington Post reports that the intelligence community must now use three CIA practices that they have had in place for some time.

"Red-team." A group will work to present alternative analyses or find holes within data. The critique is that this can delay time sensitive briefs.
Quality control. An individual will monitor all briefs to ensure they contain the proper caveats and that the sources are described properly and credible. The critique is that this is a time consuming process to recheck every one of the thousands of analyses that make it through the CIA.
Ombudsman. Someone would be available to analysts to discuss real or perceived problems. The goal, as best as I can understand it, is to allow an outlet for analysts in case political pressure is coming from the top.

All of these sound like good recommendations in theory, although the details of implementation will be the key. One question, however.

If the CIA had these in place, where the hell were they for Iraq?

If there was a "red-team" brief that argued Iraq did not have WMD, didn't we have a right to see it? If there were questions or caveats to the analyses, why didn't they come through to the media? What the situation in Iraq shows is that even these three recommendations will not deter presidential leadership that is too stubborn to view "reality-based" data.

However, this also leads to one more interesting point. We now know that every analysis will have a brief containing the alternate view and a quality control officer who monitored the sources and edited the proper caveats. This means that the Congress and the media have two places to dig and demand facts. These are two tools that could become very important in the future if CIA analyses are used to sell policies to the American people. It's something every Congressman and journalist should keep in mind.

Oviedo interview

The LA Times has a front page story on the interesting politics of Paraguay (I'm not joking, they really are interesting). The reporters managed to interview former Gen. Lino Oviedo, Paraguay's former strongman who is allegedly behind the 1999 assassination of Paraguayan Vice President Argana. Although I feel that the reporters overestimate the popularity of Oviedo, it's not by much. The man does have a following and even some of his detractors believe he might be able to stop the current crime wave. The thought of his presidency frightens most outside observers including me, but when compared to most of Paraguay's past president's anybody is an improvement (although the current guy President Duarte Frutos isn't doing such a bad job). Of course, he's sitting in prison, but that doesn't stop people from running for president in some countries.

The best part of the article is the last two paragraphs where the LA Times reporters describe the CD that Oviedo gives them as a parting gift with the words "Thank you for visiting me in prison." If anyone wants to get me the Oviedo CD for Christmas, all you have to do is tour his prison in Asuncion :)

Cuba decorations

The students are protesting? Yup, we touched a nerve in Cuba with our Christmas decorations. There is no reason we should take those down now. The amount of media attention they've received has gone above and beyond what anyone could have hoped for. This is a textbook case of showing support for pro-democracy activists in a dictatorial regime.

Pro-DeLay blog

The DCCC notes that there is a new blog entry that is promoting the wonderful good that Tom DeLay brings this country. Go here to read it and be sure to check out the ads on the bottom.

Rumsfeld to sign KIA letters

Several weeks back it was reported that Secretary Rumsfeld does not sign the KIA letters himself and used a machine signature instead. In today's Washington Post, the Pentagon reports that Rumsfeld will now sign all of the letters personally. While I'm disappointed that he did not sign the letters until the machine signatures received media attention, I give him credit for changing his mind and signing them from this day forward. It shows Bush administration officials can admit mistakes and improve upon them.

What would make the situation even better would be if he took an hour of one day next week, went back, and signed the first thousand letters personally and resent them. I know the Secretary is a busy man, but these soldiers gave their lives for this country and its military. Signing the letters is the least Rumsfeld can do.

Second Pentagon article

The LA Times reports that the Pentagon will be cutting their budget next year in the face of rising deficits. The article says budgets will not be cut for Iraq or Afghanistan and focuses on weapons systems that might be cut.

However, it fails to mention that many commanders will look for non-weapon cuts first. This means that you may see cuts in body armor, training for reserves, public relations, intelligence and a large number of other areas that will not attract as much media attention as a submarine. How many commanders will quote Rumsfeld in saying armor will not stop an IED from blowing up a tank and then use that as an excuse to cut their body armor appropriations and use the money for weapons?

It's not enough for the White House to hand Rumsfeld a lower budget and tell him to make the cuts. We need leadership from the White House and Congress to tell the military that they must cut certain things or keep certain things. Otherwise, we will be regretting that our military keeps the pet projects of certain individuals and cuts items necessary for the safety of our troops or to win the long war on terror.

Boykin's still here

The NYT has an interesting piece on how the DOD is trying to restructure their intelligence gathering including the possibility of standardizing the use of operations to obtain intelligence not directly related to enemy forces. The article also mentions the idea "recommended by the 9/11 commission" (which the Pentagon cannot say enough) that paramilitary operations should be moved from the CIA to the DOD. There is talk of eliminating the DIA. Most of the ideas in the article should be debated and some have merit, but what distracted me is the person in charge.

One part of the overall proposal is being drafted by a team led by Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin, a deputy under secretary of defense.

Yes, that's the same Gen. Boykin who has said that God is on our side in the War on Terror and believes that Muslims worship a false God. I guess it's better that he's working on intel reform than US-Saudi relations, but I really hope there are good people who are reality-based and not faith-based who are double checking his reports.

Fidel's mini-me

The LA Times editorial page gets it just about right in describing Venezuelan President Chavez.

Since then, Chavez and his cronies have been busy converting Venezuela's nascent democracy into a dictatorship. While paying lip service to democratic values, they have gradually been stripping Venezuelans of their basic rights and freedoms. The protests of other governments and of human rights organizations, meanwhile, have fallen on deaf ears.

Before winning an August referendum on his rule, Chavez promised to mend his authoritarian ways. If anything, his triumph seems to have emboldened him. Exercising his control over the National Assembly, Chavez is systematically clamping down on democratic freedoms.

The whole editorial is worth reading if you have time.

Best equipped Army

Mark Shields has a great column in today's Washington Post arguing that our government has failed to equip the military with the necessary tools including armored Humvees and signal jammers. I especially like the comparison to what we produced in WWII to provide our troops for the war in Europe. It's an impressive list and shows what we can accomplish with the right leadership.

Call to action in Burma

The Washington Post calls for international action in Burma. What do they mean by international action, specifically by the UN? I'm not sure. Military action should always be the last resort, but it should also be on the table.

So as a hypothetical (and really this is just a thought exercise not to be taken seriously), could we put together a coalition of the willing to go into Burma and take out the military junta? That's a hard question. I bet that with the right leadership we could do something like that, but we would face several key problems.

Asian nations would oppose the West interfering in any Asian nations internal affairs, no matter how bad the situation in Burma is. This is similar to when the Caribbean nations opposed actions in Haiti. It's not that Asian nations like the Burma junta any more than Caribbean nations like Aristide. They simply believe an action against one of the governments in their region could legitimize action against any government in the region. It's a bit of screwed up logic, but then again, when you're dealing with an imperfect world system it doesn't hurt to be a bit paranoid from time to time either. So task one would be getting the major players in the region on board. This does not mean simply getting them to abstain from taking a position. We would need most of Burma's neighbors to willingly support the action. That's a bit of diplomacy we haven't seen in a while.

Second, if it were necessary, we would need to plan for the conflict. The fact is, however, conflict in Burma would be a difficult task for any group of countries. The terrain is not easy and in a correct invasion a majority of the troops entering the country would not be American military. This would mean that armies with less training and capabilities would be at the forefront. Burma has one of the highest rates of child soldier use in the world, so if we were to invade we would face images in the international media of soldiers shooting children. We would also want to make sure we respect the lives of the thousands of political prisoners. It's not worth invading to bring democracy if we realize that the military junta decided to kill all the pro-democracy activists as their last action.

Third, we would need to plan for the post invasion scenario. After we've taken over the country we'd be dealing with reconstructing an incredibly poor nation. This is actually where bringing the Asian allies on board early can help. The West probably cannot successfully reconstruct Burma without the help of Eastern nations. Another aspect of the post-invasion would be the demobilization of thousands of child soldiers. This is an extremely hard task, especially when there is little infrastructure in place.

Do all the challenges of international action in Burma add up to a resounding "no"? The answer actually lies back on step one, getting the Asian nations on board. If Burma's neighbors can get on board, then international action could be successful. Then again, negotiations would also be much more successful once Burma has received threats from the international community that are backed by its neighbors. If we cannot get Burma's neighbor's on board, the answer is unfortunately a no. Burma is an awful dictatorship, but there's lots of those around the world. The US and the UN need to promote democracy, but we are already spread thin and must be prepared for Iran, North Korea, Sudan and other major threats.

It all comes back to diplomacy and the ability of the world community to get the region's countries on board with the carrot and stick approach. If someone is willing to spend the time and capital on negotiating with Burma's neighbors this may go somewhere. Otherwise, Burma will just become another failure of the international system.

Milestone?

My site traffic passed 3,000 yesterday. Really no big deal when you think that some sites get more hits than that per hour and that nearly half my hits came when this post was linked on Atrios. But I'm still happy with it. Thanks to everyone who stops by and reads.

Cuba's retaliation

Cuba has retaliated by posting pictures of the Iraqi prisoner torture. Looks like we hit a nerve.

Really, their display lacks that subtle touch of the number 75 and just draws attention to the pro-democracy activists in Cuba. They'd have been better off posting the number of prisoners at GITMO or something.

And by no means should we take down those decorations. At this point it means something.

Ukraine Threat

Yanukovych says his followers will take to the streets if Yuschenko wins in the election. One problem: Yanukovych has few followers in Kiev. They can take to the streets all they want in Eastern Ukraine, but the major cities in the West will be having a big celebration party. At best the election will unite the country behind Yuschenko, at worst there will be a big East-West split. Nothing will stop Yuschenko from winning the presidency at this point, barring mass electoral fraud. Even then, however, the international community will side with the pro-democracy movement.

On a somewhat related note, there's an op-ed in the Washington Post arguing against the neo-containment of Russia. I haven't really heard many people calling for neo-containment, but it's a decent argument against it anyway.

Non-military methods to fight terror

James Baker and Warren Christopher have a fantastic op-ed in today's Washington Post discussing the tools within the international affairs budget to combat terrorism. They note that this years budget fell $1.5 million dollars short and then show what the international affairs budget covers including fighting poverty, securing WMD, promoting trade, increasing education and helping AIDS victims.

...Activities such as economic development and democratization abroad are not simply good things to do as members of the international community; they are strategic imperatives that address the link between a failed state and our own country's vulnerability to foreign threats.

This should be required reading for Congress and the White House.

Pro-democracy in Cuba

This guy doesn't seem like much of a diplomat (he calls the head of the Cuban national assembly "scorpion"), but if he came up with the xmas light idea in Cuba I give him a lot of credit.

BBC stories of the year

Check out BBC's stories of the year and consider how it differs from the US. I think it might be interesting to collect these roundups from different media outlets around the world to contrast them. If anyone sees timelines like these, e-mail the links on over.

Bin Laden tape comments

Just some random observations about today's Bin Laden tape.

Apparently Bin Laden has decided that economic attacks on targets in the Middle East will be an easy way to annoy us. Through that message and congratulating the recent attacks in Saudi Arabia, Bin Laden apparently is courting lone wolf terrorists. It's an interesting shift in strategy. We've seen the calls for his supporters to act before, but I don't feel we've seen it as the main focus of his message.

This could be a sign that his command and control structure has been weakened. It could also be that it has not been weakened but he has decided that adding lone wolves has helped increase his notoriety and therefore he should court it more actively. Also, courting a terrorist to attack an oil facility is probably not as difficult as finding someone to be part of a sleeper cell. It takes less training time and less resources.

I also found Bin Laden's comments about elections in the Arab world as interesting. Why even bring up the elections? Is it to mock the Saudi regime, or is he really afraid of the PR impact of elections, even if they are not free and fair? I think the need to discredit the elections indicates he worries about the elections being seen as credible. Bin Laden doesn't "hate freedom" for the sake of hating it, but maybe he does see the image and PR value of democratic governments as some sort of threat to his ideology. Then again, maybe it was just a cheap shot at the Saudi leadership.

Future Veterans

The New York Times reports on the next generation of veterans and the problems already showing up in our social services system. We've already seen some Iraq veterans homeless. Others are coming home with mental difficulties. Some are failing to get all the physical therapy necessary.
How expensive would it be to fix this?

Stood up

I appreciate this website. Although I won't be signing up, I'm sure some DC residents will be doing so. Also, I liked Michael Wilbon's column today.

See, it's not like Major League Baseball caught the District by surprise. It's not even like MLB has been stalking D.C. looking to put a team here.

People in the District have been asking for a team, its local politicians and residents and more than a few of its business leaders. When I came here to work as an intern in the summer of 1979, the first thing I noticed was the humidity and the second thing I noticed was the wailing for baseball. For more than 30 years, D.C. has been a beggar. The District tried to steal other folks' teams. The city and its representatives lobbied for expansion teams. Baseball team owners used the threat of moving to D.C. as leverage to get shiny new publicly funded stadiums and stay put.

...But if this becomes a matter of calling baseball's bluff, I don't think the folks who want the game here are going to like the results. For the longest time baseball wanted no part of D.C., then relented, then got kneecapped. It's akin to finally agreeing to a date with somebody who has stalked you for five years, then being stood up.

Arab development and reform

Tom Friedman notes that the US is holding up the new UNDP Arab Human Development Report because it criticizes the War in Iraq. That's absolutely ridiculous. The reason these reports have been so powerful in the international media is that they are written by Arab's without the clear fingerprints of the United States. If we hold this report up or make them change the language, however good our intentions, we will hurt the credibility of this report. If the Bush administration was really concerned about democracy and development in the Middle East, it would encourage a report that criticized the US and still promoted democratic reforms. It shows that even US opponents can hold the same basic values about democracy and freedom.

Japanese public opinion

It's interesting that in the stalled negotiations with North Korea, it may be the Japanese public and their outrage over the misidentification of the remains of a Japanese national that could start the talks rolling again. Most Americans would think that the main issue is North Korea's nuclear program. However, the issue of North Korea kidnapping Japanese civilians and their failure to return the remains has so enraged the Japanese people, that there are growing calls for economic sanctions. If Japan imposes economic sanctions, or even makes the credible threat, it could force North Korea to either retaliate or negotiate. While some have argued that all other issues should be ignored until the nuke issue has been dealt with, it could be that some of these other issues manage to break the deadlock that has currently stalled negotiations and allowed North Korea to continue with its programs.

Just because our main issue is nuclear weapons, it doesn't mean that North Korea's huge standing army, its conventional missiles, or its terrible human rights policies are not the main concerns of NK's more immediate neighbors. Of course if North Korea starts launching missiles, then it's probably not the way we wanted to break the deadlock.

Trade deficit

Economics for dummies from the Washington Post:

Bush's comments on the dollar came one day after the government reported that the U.S. trade deficit hit a monthly record of $55.5 billion in October.

Bush told reporters that the trade deficit was "easy to resolve. People can buy more United States products if they're worried about the trade deficit."

The swelling size of the trade deficit has raised concerns among economists that the dollar's decline, which has been gradual so far, could suddenly accelerate as foreigners grow worried about the ability of the United States to keep attracting enough foreign capital to finance trade deficits at such high levels.

If the dollar were to suddenly plummet in value, that could cause foreign investors in U.S. stocks and bonds to rush for the exits. Such a development would send stock prices plunging and interest rates soaring. Some analysts believe the shock would be enough to push the country into another recession.

Bush said that the administration's efforts to support the dollar by reducing government borrowing levels would address the unfunded liabilities in the government's huge entitlement programs, Social Security and Medicare.

"I told the prime minister that Social Security reform will be at the top of my agenda," Bush said, speaking as the White House kicked off a two-day economic conference designed to build support for Bush's second term agenda.

He takes a question about the dollar and trade deficits, makes an idiotic comment about the trade deficits, but then manages to bring it back to Social Security privitization. Still on message. It must be the box on his back.

I also like the Washington Post's attempt to insert actual economics in the middle of Bush's ramblings about the defict and social security. It adds some tragic humor to the whole thing.

Ohio voting problems

Good article in today's Washington Post on the voting problems in Ohio. The article doesn't portray the problems as a conspiracy. Rather, it looks like there were a lot of mechanical and software problems. In my opinion, this quote captures the main point of the article:

"I've always viewed this as a software problem, not a corruption problem," he [Berkeley sociologist Michael Hout] said. "We'd never tolerate this level of errors with an ATM. The problem is that we continue to do democracy on the cheap."

Rummy hit from the right

Bill Kristol has an op-ed in the Washington Post trashing Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld.

Yes, that's the same conservative who writes for the Weekly Standard and is a commentator on Fox News. Between this op-ed and David Brook's column on the economic echo-chamber being held by our President this week, Bush does not look like he's got a lot of capital to start his second term.

Missile Defense Farce 2

Less than a week ago, after they cancelled a missile defense test due to rain, I mentioned the quote from a former Pentagon weapons tester:

"The target launch time and location, the flight trajectory, the point of impact, what the target looks like, and the make-up of other objects in the target cluster have all been known in advance to plot the intercept," he said. "No enemy would cooperate by providing all that information in advance."

This morning the interceptor missile failed to take off from the launch pad. That's in spite of knowing the exact time and trajectory of the launch and having good weather. Had that been a real nuclear warhead coming in, goodbye Los Angeles.

Awesome US diplomats

The Cuban government has warned the US diplomatic mission in Havana to take down its holiday decorations. What's really at issue is a lighted sign with the number 75, which refers to the number of political dissidents imprisoned last year. I give the diplomatic mission there a lot of credit for having the guts to stand up for pro-democracy activists. Make the Cuban government follow through on their threat of unspecified actions. The worst that happens is a few diplomats get kicked out of the country for standing up for democracy. I think it would be a great symbolic gesture.

Disconnected

David Ignatius reviews "The Pentagon's New Map" by Tom Barnett. The basic thesis of the book is that the world is divided into connected and disconnected nations and that the key to winning the long term war of ideas is to connect the disconnected. I hear the guy gives a good speech too.

In a step towards 2008...

...John Edwards receives one electoral vote from Minnesota in 2004.

Democracy myths

Good essay in Foreign Policy Magazine on Middle East democracy. (via OxBlog) The essay lays out several myths and refutes them. It's good to see an essay like this coming from the left rather than the neo-cons.

Google library

I'm quite excited that Google will be adding the contents of major academic libraries to their search engine. There's a huge amount of information that everyone would be able to access. There will be some sort of restrictions, but it sounds like Google is going to try to keep those restrictions to a minimum and democratize information. This will help students who can't afford textbooks. This will make distance learning much easier. It would be a lot easier to attend an online course at Harvard or Oxford if the student had access to those libraries.

Having studied in Latin America, I also see huge benefits to students at universities in developing countries. Even the best libraries in South America have a minimal number of books compared to those in the US. And often those books are spread out over multiple buildings and not very well catalogued. If students were able to access the libraries in the US and UK, they would improve their ability to compete in the global information marketplace. Also, if we could convince some of those libraries to publish their books online, students in the US would have access to some more obscure books that contain different points of view and ideologies.

I think long term this will also help to prevent academic plagiarism. Imagine a professor being able to type a sentence into Google to see whether that sentence was directly copied from any academic book available at Harvard or Oxford.

And I won't be charged late fees, which is always a positive thing.

Bush fails on "the biggest threat"

From USA Today:

Disputes slow arms protection in Russia
By Peter Eisler, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — U.S. programs to help Russia protect and destroy its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons are far behind schedule, despite President Bush's warning this fall that terrorists getting such weapons is "the biggest threat facing this country."

...Some examples:
• The Energy Department is behind schedule in upgrading protections on 600 tons of nuclear material at 115 Russian sites. At its current rate, the project could miss its 2008 deadline by two years. Longsworth insists that access disputes will be settled, and the department will be able to meet its goal.

• The Pentagon has been refused access to several Russian labs targeted for security upgrades to protect biological warfare materials. In a statement, the Pentagon said it won't fund the work unless it can verify that U.S. aid "is being used for its intended purposes."

• Delays in building a U.S.-financed chemical weapons disposal plant in Schuchye, Russia, make it unlikely that the country will meet treaty deadlines for destroying the weapons. Russia failed to meet Pentagon demands this year for a plan for the plant's use.

Meanwhile, the LA Times editorializes about the importance of securing cargo ships:

A terrorist attack involving a dirty bomb hidden in a cargo container wouldn't have to match the human toll of Sept. 11, 2001, to be effective. Shutting down even a few of the largest ports would have a devastating economic effect, so it's puzzling that so little is being spent to avoid such a catastrophe.

Oceangoing freighters will offload more than 9 million cargo containers at U.S. ports this year. Until we can know with certainty what's inside them, the boxes will remain, as U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Robert C. Bonner has said, "the potential Trojan horse of the 21st century."

...Congress' miserly approach is at odds with the importance of ocean shipping in global trade. More than 90% of non-North American foreign trade arrives on ships. It would be relatively easy to disrupt that trade, to devastating effect. As part of a 2002 war game, a consulting firm estimated that the U.S. economy would suffer a $58-billion hit if a terrorist threat — not even an actual attack — forced all oceangoing ports to close for two weeks. Yet all but 10% of the Transportation Security Administration's funding goes toward making airports safe.

Waiting for containers to arrive and then inspecting them isn't the answer. Keeping U.S. ports safe will require accurately tracking millions of containers from the moment they're filled. A notice of 24 hours won't mean much if what's in the container doesn't match what's printed on the shipping bill.

A truly effective system is going to be expensive. Failing to build it could be many times more costly.

They tell us there's a crisis with social security. I'm not sure Bush understands what his priorities need to be...

Ukraine in NATO?

Richard Holbrooke argues that once [not if] Yuschenko becomes president, the US and Poland should invite Ukraine to join NATO. I absolutely agree. Europe may not completely appreciate it, but in terms of common security it would be better to have Ukraine in Europe's zone of influence than to have it in Russia's.

Cuban military exercises

Cuba has begun a huge military exercise to practice defending against a US invasion. Sometimes stories are so ridiculous I like to hope both the left and right can get a good laugh.

DNC Cattle Call

The new DNC cattle call is up on MyDD. I still don't have an opinion on this, but the inside politics are interesting to follow. Also, I didn't post anything at the time, but I was really depressed to read that the Dems kicked the bloggers out of the open Q+A. That really shows that a large portion of the Democratic Party still doesn't understand how the internet will change campaigning and politics.

Blog counter

There's a new site that gives page rankings across the internet. Go visit PubSub and their blog specific page.

Apparently I break the top million, but I've dropped 100,000 in the past month... Understandable in that I've barely promoted this site.

US funding in Ukraine

Of course the US funded pro-democracy groups in Ukraine. We funded some non-partisan ones as well as a few that backed Yuschenko. We fund pro-democracy groups worldwide, from Eastern Europe to the Middle East to Latin America. And we should be damn proud of it. It's one of the few things we do right and we should do more of.

PR, IO, and Disinformation

Today's New York Times has an article on the debate at the Pentagon over information operations and strategic deception. The article is very similar to an LA Times piece two weeks ago, but fails to cite the LA Times piece. I really think that is poor journalism. The NYT journalists obviously knew of the LA Times article and based this story off the information that the public first learned about there.

Failure in Congo

From today's Washington Post:

Yet if Congo once again becomes a regional battleground, the United Nations will have mainly itself to blame.

...In both these tasks [peacekeeping and disarmament] the U.N. peacekeeping mission, known by the acronym MONUC, has failed miserably. Though it is the largest such mission in the world, with more than 10,000 troops, it has failed to keep order or even to prevent massacres in some of the principal towns of the region. In Bukavu and Bunia, it has stood by while local militias have raped and murdered civilians within sight of its bases. Worse, its own troops have raped or sexually exploited women and girls; the practice "appears to be significant, widespread and ongoing," according to a confidential U.N. report described by The Post's Colum Lynch last month. With Rwandan troops massing, the U.N. force finally raided a couple of militia camps in the past few days. But its policy of relying on persuasion rather than force to disarm hard-core Hutu militants has, not surprisingly, achieved next to nothing.

The UN has performed awfully in Congo. Whatever happens in the next few weeks in regard to the immediate problems with Congo and Rwanda, this overall mission is more of a failure than oil-for-food, Iraq, Iran or Ivory Coast.

The main problem is nobody really cares. No country is going to lead a coalition of the willing into Congo or Rwanda to bring peace and democracy. This is the sort of situation where the UN secretary-general should step up and lead. This is also the sort of situation that UN reformers should discuss as UN inaction on the peace process has led Congo back to its current situation.

Divisions in Iran over nukes

An op-ed in tomorrow's NYT says the internal politics of Iran have shifted and that the US and Europe should exploit the divisions between the Revolutionary Guard and the hardline clerics. Like nearly every other article, the authors argue the US should do more negotiating and offer Iran some incentives while Europe needs to threaten some sort of sanctions. Basically, Europe and the US have to coordinate the negotiations.

If everyone is coming to the same solution set, why can't the US and Europe? Are the divisions really running that deep or are there specific individuals within the systems who are keeping it from happening? Someone in the media really needs to sit members of the Bush administration down and make them answer specific questions about Iran, starting with why we refuse to engage in any negotiations at all.

UPDATE: Tomorrow's Washington Post has a letter from Madeleine Albright and seven other former foreign ministers from Europe on the Iran crisis. Their solution? More cooperation between the US and Europe, more engagement by the US and a greater threat of sanctions by Europe.