Foreign Policy

Slouching Towards War

Leeds, England – April 20 2018: – An old blue French postage stamp of World War One soldiers in trenches in the Battle of Verdun
Source: Adobe Stock

The more you know about the past, the better prepared you are for the future.

Theodore Roosevelt

In her classic history of the causes of World War I “The Guns of August”, the great historian Barbara Tuchman chronicled how rigid alliances and overweening national pride sparked one of the deadliest European wars.  The Biden Administration’s approach to the Ukraine crisis risks making the same mistakes. If a Russian invasion occurs, it will happen partially because of Biden’s confusing rhetoric which fails to heed the lessons of history. 

The similarities to the drivers of World War I are eerie.  Like today, that conflict began in an Eastern European state that was not formally aligned with any of the major European powers. In the case of World War I, the conflict was sparked by the assassination of a prince of the Austro-Hungarian empire by a Serbian nationalist in Serbia.  Austria-Hungary openly talked about annexing Serbia into its empire. When Austria mobilized to invade Serbia in retaliation, Russia backed the Serbs out of pan-Slavic loyalty. This drew Austria’s ally Germany into the conflict and Russia’s ally France in response.  Britain tried to distance itself, but joined the war when Germany invaded Belgium, also a nonaligned nation. In the end, two great European alliances sleepwalked into a bloody conflict not because of any direct threat to their national security, but due to ethnic and national pride and outdated alliances.

Today, the Biden Administration is hyping a threat to a country unaligned with us and thus risking a wider conflict. Their stated reasons appeal to the worst instincts of unipolar liberal hegemonism.  Indeed, by constantly talking about the imminence of an invasion, we are goading the Russians to do it by poking at the inferiority complex they have had for centuries.

A foreign policy realist would see Ukraine as an opportunity, not a crisis. We start with the basic premise that we make our foreign policy, not Putin or any other nation. Our short-term goal should be to declare that while the US supports Ukrainian sovereignty, it is not in our national interest to defend it and so Ukraine is not a candidate for NATO membership.  The President’s disclaimer of intent to station missiles in Ukraine was helpful, but then contradicted by rhetoric threatening to impose “long-term consequences that will undermine Russia’s ability to compete economically and strategically”. See the President’s statement of February 15, 2022 here. Instead, any talk of economic and other sanctions should be measured and leave room for tougher action in future conflicts. Otherwise, we risk the mistake of driving Russia to consider a wider conflict against the Baltic states and other NATO members.

Moreover, we should not be dictating Ukraine’s foreign policy any more than Russia should. This means we should not be negotiating with Russia about Ukraine’s future if simply because it implies acceptance of a permanent Russian sphere of influence in Eastern Europe   In a G0 world of increasing equality of power, it should be our long-term policy to oppose this kind of domination. Biden betrays his stated commitment to “the right of countless countries to choose their own destiny, and the right of people to determine their own futures”, when he negotiates with Russia about Ukraine’s future and threatens Germany with a promise to stop the Nord Stream pipeline. A better response would be to use this opportunity to discuss a restructuring of NATO to tailor it to current and future European geopolitical realities; in particular, Europe’s economic strength and thus capability to defend itself from Russian aggression.

Theodore Roosevelt was not afraid of war, but also was an avid historian. He was also proud that no American soldier had bee killed during his time in office. He would have appreciated the lessons of the guns of August and the importance of tailoring our foreign policy to the particularities of the times (see this previous post).  The United States needs to cool the rhetoric about Ukraine and save our economic and military gunpowder for more serious threats to our national security in our own hemisphere and elsewhere.

Foreign Policy

9/11 – A Call to Courage

Courtesy of Quotes Galore

If you are looking for an explanation for the debacle in Afghanistan, the failure of our leaders to heed this advice from Theodore Roosevelt is the best place to start.  It clearly does not apply to any of the brave soldiers who served in Afghanistan, Iraq or anywhere else during the War on Terror.  They followed TR by leaving the comforts of home to join the armed services and assume the personal risks necessary to achieve victory.  However, our political leaders then betrayed this service by pursuing personal political advantage rather than a clear, defined victory.

It began with President George W Bush. Instead of calling the nation to a declaration of war and the domestic sacrifices necessary to achieve victory, he chose prosperity at any price, proclaiming that American people could best support the war effort by “going shopping”. He was more concerned about winning reelection then achieving a clear victory.  He then expanded the mission of the war to encompass a goal he campaigned against – nation-building in a country that had defied domination by two previous empires.

President Barack Obama continued this theme when he failed to declare victory after the death of Osama bin Laden and then chose peace at any price by failing to punish Pakistan for its hiding of bin Laden within sight of their own military academy.    

Donald Trump talked a good game about withdrawal but failed to implement it because of a fear of the political consequences of a failure. He chose safety first rather than duty.  Finally, President Biden’s decision to withdraw, while initially courageous, was tainted by the artificial political goal of completing it by the anniversary of 9/11 instead of waiting until the end of the fighting season in winter. This would have at least slowed the Taliban’s takeover and created more time to identify and rescue the Afghans who helped us.

So how can America rededicate itself to Roosevelt’s brand of courage? First, the reports of Taliban oppression and the attack by ISIS-K that killed 13 marines show Afghanistan remains a threat to the United States and the world.  The Taliban won the military battle, but they have yet to reckon with our economic power.  We have over $2 billion in gold and other reserves held for Afghanistan, which should not be released until they allow all American citizens and applicants previously approved under the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) to leave. To prevent future terrorists from infiltrating the United States, travel to Afghanistan should be illegal and anyone with a passport containing proof of entry there should be thoroughly vetted before entering the United States. This includes any who might be classified as refugees unless they were previously granted entry under the SIV program.  Trade by American companies should be banned as well and, if the Taliban continue to allow terrorist groups to operate in the country, foreign companies doing business there should be banned from American markets.

On Saturday, the names of those who died on 9/11 will be remembered in New York and Washington. We must resist the siren song of foreign and defense policy wonks in Washington who want us to forget those names and treat the Taliban like any other government.  We must also remember to demand of ourselves and our political leaders that America follow the advice of Roosevelt instead of the path of political expediency when we face similar challenges in the future.  Otherwise, we will choose the path to the destruction of our country.

Foreign Policy, New Nationalism News

New Nationalism News

August 24, 2021

This edition will focus on the Afghanistan withdrawal – both how we got here and the potential problem it creates for the clean energy industry.

The Sad History of the Afghan war over Four Presidencies

This story tells how a war with the clear objective of capturing or killing the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks morphed into a futile nation-building exercise and then a losing quagmire.

Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden: How four presidents created today’s Afghanistan mess – CNNPolitics

What the Taliban were telling us when we listened

A US Air Force intelligence officer assigned to monitor Taliban communications in support of our troops wrote both an inspiring and sobering account of what he learned about them and Afghanistan during his tours of duty. We are all lucky to have military members with the dedication, skill and courage this author showed during his service there.

What I Learned While Eavesdropping on the Taliban – The Atlantic

The Crisis for Clean Energy

The Taliban inherit mineral wealth worth trillions of dollars. In particular, Afghanistan has been called the Saudi Arabia of lithium, an essential element of batteries and other renewable energy sources. We may have to accept the Taliban and their radical Islam in order to meet the ambitious clean energy goals of the Biden Administration.  Otherwise, China and Russia will end up controlling the lithium reserves and require us to buy from them, endangering our broader national security. 

Under the Taliban, what will happen to Afghanistan’s minerals? — Quartz (qz.com)