Tag Archives: geopolitics

Netanyahu

Leave a reply

This is an article from 1996 in something called the Washington Report for Middle East Affairs. Here are some facts about Benjamin Netanyahu as reported by this article.

  1. He went to high school in suburban Philadelphia. (I looked up elsewhere, and it was Cheltenham high school. This is a public school district in a not particularly posh area.) Then MIT.
  2. He was a dual U.S.-Israeli citizen, at least at that point of graduating MIT.
  3. He has gone by at least four names. One of the three alternates is just a shortened version, but the other two are John Jay Sullivan and John Jay Sullivan Jr.
  4. His social security file is marked “classified”. According to this article, that suggests he may have been on the payroll of the CIA or FBI.
  5. To run for office, he had to give up his U.S. citizenship, which he did legally in Israel. But in the U.S., at least according to this article and in 1996, he was still legally considered a U.S. citizen. (This situation is not unusual though, as I know plenty of people in ambiguous dual citizen categories in their home countries for one reason of convenience or another. An innocent one is because someone lives in the U.S. but wants to visit family in their home country for an extended period without applying for a tourist visa.)

The article veers into some interesting territory from there, but I found these apparently fact-based nuggets interesting.

January 2024 in Review

1 Reply

Most frightening and/or depressing story: 2023 was “a year of war“, and so far 2024 is not looking better. Those diplomatic grand bargains you always hear about seem to be getting less grand. And the drumbeat for a U.S. attack on Iran got louder.

Most hopeful story: According to Bill Gates, some bright spots in the world today include gains in administering vaccines to children around the world, a shift toward greater public acceptance of nuclear power, and maybe getting a bit closer to the dream of fusion power. He pontificates about AI, and my personal sense is it is still too soon, but AI does hold some promise for speeding up scientific progress.

Most interesting story, that was not particularly frightening or hopeful, or perhaps was a mixture of both: The return of super-sonic commercial flight is inching closer.

the drum beat for a U.S. attack on Iran continues

1 Reply

The media always refers to “Iran-backed” and “Iran proxy” groups responsible for various events in the Middle East, but we never really see proof that Iran is participating in specific attacks. We often hear that Iran is providing aid, arms, or has military advisers on the ground. I’m not saying any of this is outright lies, as I wouldn’t know, but it raises my propaganda hackles. Just substitute “US-backed” or “US advisors” and see how many situations around the world you could write and article about suggesting the US is a nefarious force behind all sorts of events. And of course, this is exactly what happened.

This is not hypothetical. The US has military advisers in Jordan, for example, who were just attacked by an “Iran-backed” group (why do we have troops in Jordan, or Syria for that matter, and is this article is suggesting we have troops in Iraq?). And here are some quotes from the warmongers, courtesy of Axios:

  • “Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), said in a statement the attacks the U.S. has carried out on Iranian proxies outside Iran “will not deter Iranian aggression,” calling to “strike targets of significance inside Iran.”
  • “The only answer to these attacks must be devastating military retaliation against Iran’s terrorist forces, both in Iran and across the Middle East,” said Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.). “Anything less will confirm Joe Biden as a coward unworthy of being commander-in-chief.”
  • Sen. John Cornyn, in a post on the social media site X, said: “Target Tehran[.]”
  • “The head of the snake is Iran,” Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee and former Air Force brigadier general, told Axios.”

The other talking point we are hearing from Republicans is that we are “acting like it is September 10”. This is a rhetorical attempt to link migration at the Mexico-Border to the Hamas attacks on Israel. The U.S. should of course be alert for an attack by radical Islamist groups who would see it as justified self-defense for America’s support for what they see as human rights abuses and war crimes committed by Israel. I am not taking a position here, just pointing out that it is a vicious cycle of escalating violence and all sides are stoking the flames rather than trying to interrupt the cycle. No evidence has been provided of any plot that would involve crossing the US-Mexico border.

a new “grand bargain” for the Middle East

Leave a reply

When I first heard about a conceptual “grand bargain” under the Obama administration, the general idea was normalization of relations between the U.S., Iran, and Israel in exchange for Iran giving up its nuclear weapons program (maybe in exchange for a well monitored nuclear power program) and Israel allowing the creation of a Palestinian state. This obviously didn’t happen.

Before these ideas, there were smaller actual bargains including peace between Israel and most of its neighbors under Carter, and movement toward a Palestinian state under Clinton.

Before the October 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, the latest idea was a formal normalization of (already de facto?) diplomatic relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia, possibly in exchange for nuclear power for Saudi Arabia. Iran was left out of this, and in fact it seemed to be the solidification of an anti-Iran block. The Palestinians were also left out of this, as far as I know. So now it seems to me that Biden is proposing a return to this deal that was already essentially made, and trying to add some progress toward a Palestinian state in the mix. It doesn’t seem that likely to me, at least until a new generation of leadership takes over in Israel, and unless/until Biden gets re-elected or a new generation of leadership takes over in the U.S.

It seems to me that the “grand” bargain is getting smaller and more cynical all the time. Still, one thing we can count on is the passage of time, and new leadership eventually taking over in all countries involved. One can hope for a brighter picture 5-10 years down the line. Hoping for a brighter picture by November 2024 seems a bit wishful to me.

“if there’s one thing we don’t want here in South America it’s war”

Leave a reply

This seems like a sensible quote from President Lula of Brazil. But countries that threaten to or actually nationalize lucrative industries controlled by U.S. based companies (Cuba, Iran, and Iraq come to mind) have a tendency to get invaded by the U.S. I know next to nothing about the politics of South America, but I do know the U.S. establishment has been itching for a fight with Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro for quite a while, so this seems like it would be a huge self-inflicted wound for a country already going through a lot of turmoil. And the world clearly does not need another war on another continent right now. Hopefully cooler heads will prevail.

anti-immigrant riots in Ireland?

1 Reply

Ireland is not immune to the surge in anti-immigrant sentiment. Could there be shadowy anti-EU political actors fanning these flames? I recommend examining the photos carefully to see if Steve Bannon is lurking somewhere in the background, wearing an Emperor Palpatine hood with the ghost of Joseph Goebbels whispering in his ear.

November 2023 in Review

Leave a reply

Most frightening and/or depressing story: An economic model that underlies a lot of climate policy may be too conservative. I don’t think this matters much because the world is doing too little, too late even according to the conservative model. Meanwhile, the ice shelves holding back Greenland are in worse shape than previously thought.

Most hopeful story: Small modular nuclear reactors have been permitted for the first time in the United States, although it looks like the specific project that was permitted will not go through. Meanwhile construction of new nuclear weapons is accelerating (sorry, not hopeful, but I couldn’t help pointing out the contrast…)

Most interesting story, that was not particularly frightening or hopeful, or perhaps was a mixture of both: India somehow manages to maintain diplomatic relations with Palestine (which they recognize as a state along with 138 other UN members), Israel, and Iran at the same time.

migration

Leave a reply

In the U.S., it’s “secure the border”. In the UK, it’s “bring down net migration“. In the Netherlands, it’s the possible rise to power of an openly anti-Islam party. As I happen to be reading one of the Bernie Gunther novels by Philip Kerr (A Quiet Flame, 2008) set partially in 1930s Berlin with the Nazis on the cusp of power, I find all this thought-provoking and concerning. In most countries, we’ve come far enough that openly advocating discrimination against a group already in the country is not an acceptable mainstream position. But expressing open anti-immigrant nationalist views is the next best option.

There is some rational fear of job loss and wage suppression that all this feeds on. But inequality between richer and poorer countries is somewhat clearly the root driver of migration, and climate change driven disasters and droughts are adding fuel to the fire. Add in some old-fashioned geopolitical conflict and you have a very volatile mix. The irony is that the policies needed to counteract these forces – economic and technological aid from richer to poorer countries, education, trade, reasonable guest worker programs, arms control and peace negotiations, serious emissions reduction and climate change adaptation investments to name a few – are anathema to anti-immigrant nationalist politics. So you have a feedback loop where the migration pressure drives the anti-migration political rhetoric, and the political rhetoric drives politicians and policies that increase the migration pressure.

Rationally explaining all this to enough voters to elect politicians who would break these feedback loops does not seem to be a viable option. It’s a tough one, and if I come up with the answers that have eluded a lot of smarter people than me up until now, I will let you know.

India’s Foreign Relations

1 Reply

Here is a long Foreign Policy article on India’s foreign relations. Among interesting things, they manage to maintain formal diplomatic relations with the Palestine Liberation Organization, Israel, and Iran at the same time. Their spats with China and Pakistan seem to go on forever but at least in recent decades, have not turned violent.

One thing that occurs to me in thinking about the recent “U.S. offer of civilian nuclear power” to Saudi Arabia is that both India and the U.S. might have an interest in prying Saudi Arabia from close ties to Pakistan’s nuclear program. They may cynically have decided that the nuclear proliferation tumor is going to metastasize to Saudi Arabia no matter what, and they would prefer for it to happen on their terms. An alternative, in a sane world, could be to offer Saudi Arabia, Iran, and other responsible countries civilian nuclear power under strict UN/IAEA oversight, backed up by a Security Council with some credibility.