G20 Scorecard – the agenda and the villains

So its official, the G2 – I meant the G20 – has now replaced the G7 (or was it the G8?) as the central body to coordinate global economic policy. This makes sense as the countries of the G8 make up about 80% of the world’s GDP. Quickly, these countries (and organizations) include Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, the UK, the US and the EU. (Why does the EU get a seat when its main member countries are already there? Because of the Euro? Either way, Europe cant have it both ways).

 The summit in Pittsubrgh is being hailed as a great success, with a surprising amount of agreement. From what I can see, the main topics discussed were as follows:

• Continuing the Economic Stimulus – everyone agreed to keeping the money taps going. No one really answered the question as to when we would return to some kind of normality. In the mean time, we continue to saddle the next generation with ever increasing amounts of debt. Chief villain: the United States which is already knee-high in debt but believes the economy will stall in the immediate term without never-ending spending (or Germany which is most cavalier about near term stability, depending on your point of view).

• Rebalancing the Global Economy – everyone agrees that a few countries cannot keep generating huge surpluses selling to the rest of the world (particularly the US) and then complaining that everyone else is a glutton. This is the biggest long term change the world needs to make. Everyone agrees, but no one is saying how it will be enforced except by “peer review”. This is remarkably lame. Chief Villains: Japan/China/Germany. Japan sounds like it means to take action and it probably does. China is making the right noises but probably has no intention of doing anything whatsoever. Germany isn’t even making the right noises

• Regulating the Banking System – this is not getting the attention it deserves. Most of the world’s banks have not recognized the huge liabilities on their books. We will not get to normality until this is done. They will not just “grow” their way out of the problem. Everyone to blame, though the US seems more realistic on this than the rest. Chief Villain: Europe

• Changing the voting power at the IMF – emerging countries rightfully deserve more say at the IMF. America is for it. Chief Villain Europe says it’s also for it, but actually is not. (Its claims that America should give up its effective veto are nonsensical. America is already underrepresented in voting power relative to its economic weight).

• Banker pay – everyone agrees that excessive risk taking has to be curbed. It cannot be rewarded. But Europe’s excessive zeal for this says more about continental Europe’s reflexive anti-financial attitude than it does about banker pay. Chief villains: France and Germany

• Climate Change – all countries are getting it that something needs to be done about climate change. Europe and now Japan seem most serious about cutting emissions. America is getting there, though the Senate may pose a problem in getting domestic legislation passed. The Chinese have begun to point to real emissions cuts – twenty years from now. India has made fighting this a case of national virility on the grounds that on a per capita basis it is still the West that are the polluters. True – but is this really a helpful approach? Chief villains: everyone

I do not doubt that the new global G20 conference is where the power has shifted. I also do not doubt that within that, it is the relationship between the G2 that will increasingly be what matters. As to how to enforce any of the agreements, which on the whole are good ones, I have no clue.

www.dailyexception.com
Follow us on Twitter

Published in:  on September 27, 2009 at 7:05 am Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Now its the UAE’s turn to seize a North Korean ship

What is it with North Korean ships and clandestine arms shipments? And why are we surprised each time we catch them? From the very first interdiction of a North Korean vessel years ago carrying weapons to Pakistan, there have been too many times North Korea has been caught illegally trying to export missile technolgy. The North Korean weapons program has over the years extended from Pakistan to Iran. Last month, the Indian Navy stopped a North Korean ship on its way to yet another country – Burma. This recent seziure by the UAE Navy should therefore be placed in context of a much bigger, but entirely predictable pattern. Doesn’t someone somewhere keep a manifest of all North Korean ships, particularly as the country exports pretty much nothing else? And if not, shouldnt they? Just knowing where these ships are heading would tell us a great deal about who the buyers are, even if we never get to actually board them.

Follow us on Twitter
www.dailyexception.com

Published in:  on August 28, 2009 at 10:48 pm Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Mapping the Global Recession – Moodys

Here is an interesting map from Moody’s showing just how far the ”Great Recession” has spread. Looks like Brazil and Russia (the “B” and the “R” of the BRICs) are also in a downturn, which maybe isnt so surprising as they are more commodity stories – well, atleast Russia is.

 

www.dailyexception.com

 dailyexception

Published in:  on July 29, 2009 at 2:26 pm Leave a Comment
Tags: ,

Barack Obama’s Excellent Adventure

In assessing President Obama’s 100 day performance on the world stage, we measure his progress in addressing America’s three critical geosecurity priorities: reducing the threat of jihadi terrorism, while also reducing further alienation of the world’s Muslim population; finding a workable relationship with China, which is increasingly both an economic partner and a strategic rival globally; and preventing a potential long term decline in the US economy caused by years of profligate economic policies and the “time bomb” of Medicare/Social Security expenditures which are nearly upon us.

So, how has President Obama done?

In terms of jihadi terrorism, the President has finally reversed George Bush’s terrible mistake in believing Iraq was the critical front in the War on Terror. He has correctly understood that it is Afghanistan and Pakistan (“AfPak”), as a single theater, that pose the greatest security risk. The President has now taken ownership of the Afghan war and is ramping up operations there – something we regard as a necessity to drain the swamp of Islamist extremism. On this, we give the President high marks, especially when taken in conjunction with his plans to overhaul the military to better take on counter insurgency operations. Pakistan, however, has deteriorated far faster than expected and puts the President’s plan to force it to stop the attacks in Afghanistan in jeopardy. Pakistan has in fact itself emerged as the bigger threat to US security as its own Taliban strengthen, posing an existential to this nuclear armed nation. Any terror attack on the West is likely to have been planned in Pakistan. We do not see a coherent plan from the Administration as to how to deal with Pakistan. So far, the President seems to be falling into the same trap as President Bush by sending over every increasing amounts of aid while not preventing the flow of arms and support to the Taliban. Unconditional aid produces limited results. President Obama had talked about “Islamabad not getting a blank check”. Yet that seems exactly what he feels compelled to give. Without a serious Pakistan policy, we doubt the President can succeed in Afghanistan. The US and the West also are at a heightened risk of additional attacks. So while we are somewhat encouraged by the “Af” side on the AfPak war, we are concerned with the “Pak” side.

In terms of broader outreach to the Muslim world, we are not far from where we had expected to be given the President’s undeniable appeal. President Obama told the Turkish parliament in no uncertain terms that the US is not at war with Islam. His plan for a sensible drawdown of troops in Iraq will also help a lot on the proverbial “Arab Street” (if not the broader Muslim world). We hope that the President can stay the course in Iraq, and not get sidetracked by the inevitable violence that will flare up. America’s strategic priorities do not call for drawing borders or deciding constitutional niceties between Sunnis and Shia. The bold new initiatives in Iran are welcome though progress will have to wait until after the Iranian elections. Nevertheless, it is a new start with an important Islamic country and further demonstrates that America is not at war with the Islamic World. The Administration’s plan to place heavy sanctions on Iran if it goes nuclear misses the point that it essentially already has gone nuclear by acquiring the capability to enrich uranium. Rather a containment strategy is to be called for. It is unclear, however, how an American outreach to Iran will affect America’s relationship with its traditional Sunni Arab allies.

Despite these new initiatives, it is unclear to us how the President’s outreach has played with Muslims given the high degree of cynicism when it comes to the United States. We expect Arabs in particular will want to see progress on the Palestinian question before giving a thumbs up. Still, the President gains simply by not being George Bush. The sight of a black President with the middle name Hussein is still something most regard as remarkable. Although few Muslims will admit that Barack Obama’s story would scarcely be possible in their own countries, his election has confounded many detractors of America and American society. The President has also quietly begun to challenge the Muslim World to look at its own problems rather than just blaming America, but we doubt he will be heard, particularly on women and minority rights. At the very least, though, the President has begun to reduce the volume of US-Muslim rancor, and for this he deserves credit.

Dealing with China and dealing with America’s long term economic future have essentially meant the same thing over the past 100 days. China’s stimulus is important to the world economy and a welcome sign that it understands what is required of it as a leading economic power. The President seems to understand that tough discussions are going to be necessary if China is going to be forced to generate economic growth which does not involve huge trade surpluses with the US. But The President also needs China to finance his huge social programs, and so he has punted on any of the serious discussions, both on the trade deficit and on the related issue of currency manipulation. China’s talk of replacing the dollar is, for the moment, just that – talk. There’s not much they can do. However, they are asking a reasonable question about the stability of US finances. We have the same concerns.

While economics is binding America and China together, military rivalry is threatening to pull them apart over the longer term. China’s military buildup concerns us. The review of the fleet this past week, its deployment of ships to Somalia, its support to countries such as Sudan all worry us that a long term strategic game is afoot. Even though the President has wisely reached out to Japan, the fact that Hillary Clinton’s visit to Asia did not include New Delhi sends the wrong message to the other rising power in Asia, particularly given the great advancements in US-India relations made by both Presidents Clinton and Bush. The President is offering nothing new in North Korea. In fact it is being goaded into the same tired responses to Pyongyang’s tactics as were the Bush and Clinton presidencies. North Korea is already nuclear. Now is the time for containment and roll back, not hysteria at each new antic. Now is also the time to make China step up and take responsibility for North Korea, especially as it had a major role in creating this rogue state and commands the greatest degree of influence.

In terms of maintaining America’s broader strategic strength in the face of a rising China and still turbulent Islamic world, the President needs to reach out to Europe, as the Western World’s other major power center. This has not yet happened from a substantive point of view. The President’s trip in Europe smoothed a lot of ruffled feathers, but did not engage at all on the complex issue of the usefulness of NATO and the form of a future Western military alliance. America needs Europe to stand up on security – time will tell if and when the President will start a serious dialog on this. The President also left the G20 summit in London with little to show in terms of European economic cooperation. This is not encouraging. On other fronts, we are heartened to see that the Administration has placed a “reset” on relations with Moscow. Expanding NATO has earned us Russian enmity, while gaining us nothing. No one believes that we are seriously going to risk war to defend the Georgian Republic. Engaging Russia on Iran is a good idea, but it remains to be seen if the Russians will agree to the Administration’s offer to halt work on missile defense in Europe in exchange for help in Iran.

The President is right to raise the profile of Latin America – but its unclear what the follow through there will be. Latin America is an area that deserves far greater attention, particularly as it grows economically and is becoming increasingly linked to the Chinese, both economically and strategically. Latin America has traditionally been seen as America’s back yard and hence was assumed to always be in America’s orbit. This is no longer the case. Brazil’s rise as an economic power will give it room for strategic independence. This is something that Washington should both welcome and harness the potential economic prospects. The same can be said of Mexico, which deserves particular attention not because of its drug violence, but because its long border with the US makes it critical to the future of the US. If the Mexican flu virus demonstrates anything, it demonstrates this. The President was also right to begin the long process of normalization of ties with Cuba, a country which is currently not critical enough to be taking up so much newspaper space.

What worries us most from a geosecurity perspective, however, is not foreign policy but rather the President’s economic policies. We agree that the times call for an economic stimulus. We also agree that investment in roads, schools and even green jobs is required. But given the expansion in the money supply, the plans for healthcare, and the still high defense budget, we wonder where the money will come from. Actually, we don’t wonder – we know. Its called T-bills. However, issuing excessive debt is the fastest way to producing inflation which in turn will lead to higher interest rates, choking long term economic recovery. It will also lead to staggering national debt numbers. On the most critical issue of all, social security and medicare, the President has not yet signaled a serious willingness to tackle this. If he does not, he will be ignoring the biggest long term threat to American geosecurity. An America that lives beyond its means is the fastest way to ensure long term economic and hence geostrategic decline. We are therefore greatly troubled by the Administration’s inability to put forth a realistic plan of how to cut the deficit and arrest the ballooning of the debt.

All in all President Obama has had an extremely active 100 days. We suspect that globally the President is more popular as a person than the US is as a country right now. He is wisely using that to reintroduce America to the world, and even if nothing else has been achieved, the atmospherics are far improved. Closing Guantanamo, coming clean on torture (no matter how painful), and using his own personal popularity (and that of the Clintons) have all helped to restore some of America’s moral authority and popularity. On substantive matters, there is a huge amount yet to be done: a viable strategy in Pakistan that stabilizes it, removing it as a threat to both us and to US operations in Afghanistan; discussing new security structures with the Europeans; tough talk with the Chinese on the trade deficit (and other issues such as North Korea); and articulating a plan to address the country’s long term finances. But if measured in terms of “repackaging” America to a skeptical world audience, which was always going to be the first task for any new American leader, the President and Michelle Obama can look back to a successful first 100 days.

www.dailyexception.com
Twitter: dailyexception

Published in:  on May 1, 2009 at 12:44 pm Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

America, Choose Your Crises Carefully

During the presidential campaign, Joe Biden predicted that the new president would be tested within six months of coming to office. Events have proven his words to be prophetic. With crises brewing in North Korea, the Caucuses, Iran, AfPak, and now piracy in Somalia, there are plenty of hotspots for the State Department and the Pentagon to get overwhelmed with.

We believe strongly, that America, as the world’s preeminent power, should play a global role and show leadership in all of these areas. However, the only way that it hold on to its preeminence is to marshall its resources effectively and not over-spread its resources too widely, focusing on those areas of most importance to America itself.

Right now, nothing can be more critical than getting peace in Afghanistan and Pakistan. A failed Afghanistan or Pakistan will further become breeding grounds for terrorist strikes against the West. Nothing can be more important than preventing this from happening. This is more important than the balance of power of Sunni vs Shia in Iraq, the antics of Kim Jong Il, or the actions of a couple of pirates off the coast of Somalia. It is even more important than the Administration’s outreach to the Iranians.

We do not mean to belittle the other problems facing the Administration. Each is of importance and will require sustained engagement by the Administration. But with limited resources, the US needs to prioritize. Here are the most prominent other issues at hand:

1. Iraq – America’s main goal here is to drawdown its forces in a responsible manner. There will be an upsurge in violence as groups jockey for position in a post-American Iraq, but that cannot prevent the US from focusing on areas of more importance. Eventually, the Iraqis will have to stand up for themselves. Continued US presence in out of the way bases, or in Kuwait, will allow US forces to strike to protect American interests if they are threatened

2. Iran – Iran’s nuclearization is a problem for the United States. It is also a done deal. America’s job is now to negotiate a roll back. It cannot prevent something that has already happened. Engagement is the best policy here. Military action is unthinkable at a time when US forces are so thinly stretched. Additionally, it is highly questionable if a military strike would even be successful given how dispersed Iran’s nuclear facilities are likely to be. Engagement may also benefit the US by strategic cooperation in Afghanistan

3. North Korea – As with Iran, a nuclear North Korea is unacceptable, but prevention is not the issue at hand. Roll back is. Continuation of UN sanctions is imperative. As is continued pressure on the Chinese. They have enabled North Korea for decades, and therefore need to be made to take the heat, and bear responsibility for leading the effort.

4. Somalia – The piracy problem off the coast of this troubled country is a byproduct of its failure as a state. This is a problem for the United States, but one that must be managed. It does not merit active US involvement. As to the bigger problem of control of the waters of the Indian Ocean, there needs to be the creation of an alliance structure on the lines of NATO in the North Atlantic. This is a long term issue.

5. Israel/Palestine – No American president relishes trying to achieve peace in the minefield of Israel and the West Bank. No US president can avoid trying either for a variety of domestic and international reasons. The US needs to push the new Israeli government into negotiations for a two state solution. It is in the best interest of Israel as well as the United States. It will remove the demographic time bomb that is Israel’s real long term danger and significantly reduce the temperature in the Muslim World. But progress on this is not measured in months. It will take time for the two sides to even agree to talk given Hamas’ official position. Furthermore, if Israel pursues a separate peace with Syria, its bandwidth to talk to the Palestinians will be limited.

All of the above issues are important, but are they critical threats to the United States itself demanding equal attention by the Administration? We argue that none are immediate threats, not even North Korea, which perhaps is the only one that is even remotely capable of impacting US territory in Guam or Hawaii.

Contrast this with the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The players in AfPak are most definitely looking to strike, and whenever they possibly can. We know that terrorists under a reconstituted Al Qaeda-Pakistan hybrid are actively plotting attacks in the US and its allies (note the recent terror plot this Easter in Britain). The United States cannot allow them safe territory for reorganizing, whether in Afghanistan, in the Pakistani borderlands, or in Pakistan’s more settled area (as is now happening in Swat).

Nothing is more important for the US or the world at large.
www.dailyexception.com
Twitter: dailyexception

Published in:  on April 15, 2009 at 8:23 am Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Somalia Highlights Vital Need For New Naval Allies

The recent standoff in the Indian Ocean demonstrates a disturbing trend regarding security of the world’s waterways – the lifeline of the global economy. There is much discussion of the unique Somali nature of this problem – and indeed Somalia is somewhat unique. It is a coastal failed state and hence provides safe havens to pirates. But Somalia is by no means alone as an area whose waters are infected by pirates.

Pirates are busy on the other side of the Indian Ocean also. More specifically, they have been extremely active in the South China Sea, between Singapore and the Philippines. The problem for the international community is that these two areas book end the Indian Ocean, which is the home to an enormous amount of the world’s shipping in oil and merchandise. There are vital strategic choke points in this ocean – Aden, Straits of Hormuz, Singapore and the Malacca Straights. The world cannot allow any of these to be closed for any period of time.

Behind the lesser worry about piracy is the greater worry about terrorists. The attack on the USS Cole demonstrates the ability of Al Qaeda to hit naval military targets. And the Mumbai attacks were so stunning in part because for the first time, terrorists were able to function as highly trained marines capable of travelling a large nautical distances from Pakistan. The disruption to the port of Mumbai could have been far worse.

The US Navy does an admirable job in patrolling these waters. But the US Navy cannot do this job alone. There are millions of square miles to cover, and only a limited number of ships. The US has one major naval base in the middle of the Indian Ocean – Diego Garcia, a UK colony that Britain has made available to the US Navy. But this base is days sailing distance from any of the hot spots.

Allied navies are also patrolling the region. European ships have recently been making a show in the region following other pirate attacks. Europe, however, is also operating far from home, and with even fewer ships. The biggest new entrant to the Indian Ocean is the Chinese Navy, which has recently dispatched its navy to the Somali coast as well. In fact, China is establishing a “string of pearls” – naval bases across the Indian Ocean as they seek to project their power into the Middle East. These Chinese naval bases are a direct challenge to US supremacy in the Indian Ocean.

The US needs to secure these waters as best it can. And in order to do that, working with NATO is insufficient. It needs to reach out to friendly nations on the Indian Ocean itself that share its agenda – such as Australia and possibly Indonesia and Singapore. Additionally, the US should work more closely with its allies in the Arab World, who have a key interest in seeing that the shipping lanes in the Gulf remain open.

The country that will make the most difference in the Indian Ocean, unsurprisingly is India. That country has an enormous coastline and a long history of seafaring. During British times, it was said that India’s “responsibilities” ran from Aden to Singapore – precisely the critical area that the US must ensure is open to world trade. The Indians are beefing up their own navy, opening a massive new naval base facing south towards the ocean’s vast expanse. They also have their own fears that the People’s Republic wants to turn the Indian Ocean into a Chinese lake. India also needs the sea lanes open for its own survival – and hence strong Indian naval action against Somali pirates early this year.

The United States and India already enjoy some degree of naval cooperation. Indian ships have provided protection for US vessels travelling through the Straits of Malacca. The two navies also regularly exercise together. Last year, the navies of the US, India, Japan and Australia exercised together in the Bay of Bengal as a democratic show of strength.

The United States needs to beef up this emerging naval security structure both for its own security, and for the world’s economic well being. If Somalia demonstrated anything, it demonstrated this.
www.dailyexception.com
Twitter: dailyexception

Published in:  on April 13, 2009 at 9:03 am Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Stop The Chest Thumping. It’s Time To Engage With Iran

It’s been twenty years since the Iranian Revolution, and in that time, no US President has come up with a coherent strategy of how to deal with the “Islamic Republic”. America has tried to end Iran’s export of its revolution, only to find Iran succeed in empowering Hezbollah and Hamas. America has tried every kind of sanction to end Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and yet Iran continues its inexiorable march towards nuclear “capability” (which means nuclear weapons for all intents and purposes). For his part President Ahmedinajad is deliberately provoking US sensibilities by questioning the holocaust and threatening Israel with annihilation. He’s even gone so far as to set up a “strategic alliance” with Venezuela, which seeks to become America’s new “Cuba”.

America needs to deal with reality as it finds it. The US removal of Saddam Hussein has fundamentally altered the regional balance of power in favor of Iran. It is Iran that is the biggest winner of George Bush’s war. Iran exercises huge influence in post-war Iraq, and the success of America’s surge in large part depends upon Iranian goodwill. Ironically, things could have been different had the Bush Administration been receptive to Iranian overtures following the Afghan and Iraq wars. At that time, a nervous Iran was willing to negotiate with a triumphant America that had troops on both of its borders. Today, it is willing to thumb its nose at an America bogged down in vicious insurgencies, particularly in Afghanistan. This is undoubtedly one of Bush’s biggest foreign policy blunders – and one not examined enough in the press.

Iran and the United States are not destined to be enemies. The two countries actually share at least some fundamental strategic interests. Most notably, neither country wants to see a return of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Nor do they want to see the continued radicalization of Pakistan into an intolerant Sunni military state. Given that AfPak is one of America’s highest foreign policy priorities, this is enough ground for the two countries to make common cause.

America has engaged in a long Cold War with Iran over these past twenty years. Now is the time to try a long “thaw”. Overcoming mistrust is not going to happen overnight. We believe that through engagement, Iran can be made to negotiate some kind of hold on its nuclear weapons program, even while it exercises its right to use nuclear energy for peaceful means. US hawks will shout that this is essentially acceding to Iran being a weapons state. We counter that this is already a done deal. No military action by the United States or Israel is going to stop it now. There are too many unknowns about the location of Iran’s nuclear assets, and that in any event, military action would only delay, not prevent, Iran’s nuclear ambitions. This does not mean that America has to accept an Iran that is forever armed with weapons of mass destruction. But denuclearizing Iran is now going to be a matter of roll back, and not prevention.

In return for some kind of Iranian flexibility on the nuclear question (accompanied by strong US deterrence against misuse of any weapons Iran may succeed in creating), America can offer Iran a return to the global economic system. Iran is suffering enormously economically, and the current price of oil has only worsened its problems. We therefore believe that there are enough incentives for Iran to consider playing ball with the United States. Of course, Iran’s highly objectionable language about Israel will have to end – Iran knows it cannot attack Israel, as that would essentially be signing its own death warrant. It needs to start behaving like a responsible nation. Treating it like such would be a good start.

President Obama is right to start engaging Iran. No matter how distasteful this may be for many Americans, we believe that this is the best of a set of tough foreign policy options the United States has right now. Over the longer term, it could even begin a strategic realignment – especially as Iran is actually on America’s side when it comes to Al Qaeda and its regional allies. No matter what George Bush says – Iran was never part of an “Axis of Evil”. There are other countries on that list!

It’s time to move on.
www.dailyexception.com
Twitter: dailyexception

Published in:  on April 10, 2009 at 9:56 am Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Obama And The Islamic World

So, President Obama has made good on his promise to deliver a major address in a major Muslim capital. Ankara, Turkey is a good choice for the President. Turkey represents the secular future for the Islamic world. In Turkey, Islam is the religion of the people, not the law of the land.

In an interview with Roger Cohen of the New York Times, Turkey’s Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan reiterated the point:

“Islam is a religion,” he said, “It is not an ideology. For a Muslim, there is no such thing as to be against modernity. Why should a Muslim not be a modern person? I, as a Muslim, fulfill all the requirements of my religion and I live in a democratic, social state. Can there be difficulties? Yes. But they will be resolved at the end of a maturity period so long as there is mutual trust.”

We applaud these sentiments. However, we also note that there is virtually no other Muslim country that either lives up to these ideals, or even publicly believes in them. This is the challenge that President Obama, or any other US leader, is going to have to deal with. The modern world requires a certain maturity, as Mr Erdogan puts it, when it comes to religion. Our world is now too small for an “I’m right, You’re wrong” attitude. That is not to say that individuals should not hold to their beliefs. But governments need to show tolerance towards the religions of all of its citizens, including minority ones.

In most of the world, there has been great progress towards this ideal over the last sixty years. Great mosques now dot the skylines of Europe, and even some cities in the United States. India is now the second largest Muslim country in the world, and its last President was a Muslim. Buddhist Thailand has pointedly reached out to its Muslim minority as has Catholic Philippines. Perhaps with the exception of China, most of the world is actively wooing its Muslim citizens.

The Muslim World, however, has trended in the opposite direction. There was a time that countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan and Bangladesh were firmly in the secular camp. Today the idea of Pakistan becoming a secular state is a distant dream – even though it remains our belief that unless this happens, the Pakistani state will eventually dissolve into an sea of intolerance towards any dissenting minority (Christian, Shia, Ahmediya).

There is going to need to be an awakening among the Muslim majority as to whether they wish to live in the modern world, as Turkey is doing, or whether they want to slide into some medieval past, as Pakistan is doing. Turkey and Pakistan represent the two book-ends – the polar opposites – of the Muslim World today. Islamic societies couldn’t have a clearer choice.

There is hope. The world’s largest Muslim country, Indonesia, seems to be taking an active stand against radical Islamist groups, as they attempt to establish themselves. Even countries like Saudi Arabia are coming down on clerics pushing the most extreme views. That is not to say that Saudi is anywhere near Turkey, but there is at least a realization that there must be a limit to the unchecked power of the mullah.

If President Obama wants to succeed in reestablishing America’s rapport with the Muslim World, he is going to need to demonstrate American sincerity directly to the Muslim people. In many cases, he is going to have to do this by speaking over the heads of local leaders. This is going to be particularly tough as many Muslims believe that America is at war with Islam, and that their own leaders only owe their power to American patronage.

The President is right to firmly declare that America is not at war with Islam. But he cannot shrink from confronting the Muslim World that it must offer the same type of secular society that minority Muslims demand in Western or other non-Islamic countries. Perhaps, there will never be an American president better positioned to carry this message than Barack Obama. And deliver this message he must.

Modernization and secularization are the only way Islam is going to be able to coexist, not just with the West, but with the world as a whole.

www.dailyexception.com
Twitter: dailyexception

Published in:  on April 6, 2009 at 2:10 pm Comments (1)
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Obama Must Talk Turkey to the Turks

Fresh off of making his appearance at the world’s economic high table, followed by his star role at the West’s highest security forum, President Obama is heading off to Turkey to make his much-promised speech in a major Muslim capital.

Given the success of the atmospherics he was able to pull off in London and Baden Baden, we hope that the President will be able to repeat his magic and raise the level of dialog between the United States and Turkey, and through them to the Muslim World at large. This is something that the President is admirably capable of. President Obama successfully improved America’s standing with the European public, even though he was unable to make progress on substantive policy issues.

Unlike with Europe, however, the United States and Turkey have few policy issues dividing them. With the exception of the Iraq War, the two countries have been close allies for decades. America is a strong supporter of Turkey’s accession into Europe. The two countries broadly agree on the routing of new oil pipelines out of Central Asia, something that will be critical to the Eurasian country’s future. America supports Turkish efforts to modernize its legal system, and appreciates its assistance in Afghanistan. Turkey has a role to play in Iraq, and has been a key interlocutor between the Israelis and Syrians. Turkey may yet help America in its effort to reach out to Iran. Importantly, the Obama visit represents the first time in history, where a US President is visiting Turkey without also visiting Turkey’s traditional nemesis, Greece.

Despite this closeness, President Obama will face a Turkish public that is much less receptive than those of Europe. The Turks today increasingly identify with the rest of the Muslim World, and the clearest manifestation of this is to dislike America. The President may find reaching out to the Turks a challenging task.

We believe that the real cause of this drift away from the West, however, may not actually be America’s fault. The Turks made a firm commitment to joining the West decades ago, only to be rebuffed by Europe, not the United States. Europe has consistently created barriers to Turkish entry into the EU even while it let in 10 more recent applicants from Eastern Europe, only wounding Turkish pride further.  

The Europeans do not owe the Turks entry into their club. And perhaps, there are good reasons against it. That is for Europe to decide. But they do owe the Turks a clear answer. By dangling membership, but never actually delivering upon it, the Europeans have succeeded in pushing this pivotal modern, secular, Muslim-majority republic away from its Western alignment and in search of a new neighborhood, whether that is defined as Central Asian or Middle Eastern. In doing so, they have alienated what should be our biggest champion to the Muslim World, just when we needed it the most.

It is ironic that it is America’s image that has suffered because of Europe’s dithering. Hating George Bush and the War on Iraq has been so much easier for the Turks than dealing with the painful rejection from Europe. But given this fact, President Obama’s priorities in Turkey are the opposite of those in Europe. In Turkey, restoring America’s prestige takes priority over any policy discussion. The President’s job to reach out and reestablish America’s standing with the Turkish people, and through them, with the Muslim World as a whole.

We wish him the same success in Turkey that he had in Europe.

Published in:  on April 5, 2009 at 8:10 am Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

There Is At Least One Place Where Iran and America Can Cooperate

Whether we like it or not, Iran is, always has been and always will be an important power in the Middle East. So while we can continue refusing to talk to it for as long as we like, we are, in reality, just wasting time. Its been 30 years since the American hostage crisis, and maybe it’s time to end that long shadow over our relations with Iran.  

Iran is a country that confounds the State Department. Its people come from a highly advanced culture, and cherish their differences from the surrounding Arabs. In many ways, it appears that the modernized youth of Iran (the vast majority) seem to have a positive opinion of the United States. At the same time, Iranian Prime Minister Mahmoud Ahmedinejad’s bizarre theories on the holocaust hit somewhere deep in the American psyche as fundamentally disturbing. And even if these are just the antics of a powerless Prime Minister, it is unsettling that the all-powerful Ayatollahs tolerate him, continue to support terrorist groups such as Hizbollah and Hamas against Israel, and (most importantly) insist on proceeding towards Iran’s nuclear enrichment aims.

Despite all the negatives, we still believe that we have to start talking to Iran if we want to bring regional stability – especially as there may be some common ground from which to start a dialog. There is one area where our core interests are aligned, and especially so since September 11, 2001.

And that is in Afghanistan.

The Shia Iranians have always been mortal enemies of the extreme Sunni Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Iran has intervened in many ways to protect the Shia Hazara minority within Afghanistan against the Taliban, and do not support any of Al Qaeda’s goals outside of Afghanistan. In fact, it was Iran, along with India and Russia, which provided critical support to the Northern Alliance – a group which prevented the Taliban and their Pakistani backers from taking over the whole of Afghanistan.  Without Northern Alliance-controlled territory, the US operation to liberate Afghanistan after 9/11 would have been infinitely more difficult.

The US lost a major opportunity to expand cooperation with Iran after the Afghan War. Unfortunately, we listened too much to out double dealing “ally”, Pakistan.  It was Pakistan that advised us not to let the Northern Alliance take control of Southern Afghanistan, lest it “destabilize the local Pashtun population”. In doing so, we ignored Iran in post-War planning – something that was a critical mistake. Pakistan has given us a lot of duplicitous advice over the years – this was perhaps the most damaging. Within a few short years, the Taliban had returned from their camps in Pakistan to reestablish their writ.

In Afghanistan, the Iranians have proven themselves to be far more trustworthy than the Pakistanis. And today, we have the same fundamental overlap of interests again. Iran cannot afford to see the return of a Pakistan-backed Sunni government in Kabul any more than we can. So perhaps it is in Afghanistan that we can begin a reengagement with Iran.

We have a specific immediate need in Afghanistan, and Iran can help us enormously. Our supply line to coalition troops on the ground is under heavy fire from Sunni extremists in Pakistan (probably with the connivance of the local intelligence agencies). The supply route runs from the volatile port city of Karachi up to the Kyber Pass in the ungovernable parts of North West Frontier. Alternate supply lines run either through Russia or through the ex-Soviet republics, which are increasingly sensitive to any US presence.

Iran can offer us an alternate, cheap and safe route to be able to work our way around this problem. Recently, the Indian military has been involved in building up the Iranian port of Chabahar, and road links from it into Afghanistan. This port in Chabahar provides a safe, quick and cost-effective means for NATO to move equipment and supplies from US ships into Afghanistan. It would solve critical infrastructure issues facing our military, and would significantly boost our fighting effort.

Successful cooperation on issues like military supply lines will not solve our other problems with Iran overnight, but it would allow us to build the beginning of some kind of trust (on both sides). It would also allow us to achieve aims that we both share in stabilizing the region. And in time, perhaps, it can lead to a bigger rapprochement on other matters of critical importance such as Israel, and Iran’s nuclear program.

Afghanistan is too important for us not to ask for Iranian help. Iran is too important for us not to try and establish a new relationship.

 

 

 

Published in:  on April 1, 2009 at 1:02 am Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
« Older Entries