GAO: US Unprepared for Al-Qaeda Attack

From Democracy Arsenal:

"Here is the title of a report from the Government Accountability Office on combating terrorism released today: The United States Lacks a Comprehensive Plan to Destroy the Terrorist Threat and Close the Safe Haven in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas.

That is not some line buried in the report. That is the title. Wow.

This GAO report may be the most damning condemnation of the Bush administration's counter-terrorism efforts. The report goes on to say that the Bush administration has failed to develop any plan to address the Al Qaeda threat. Worse, the report finds that Al Qaeda is now able to attack the United States and represents the "most serious" threat to this country."

(Sigh.)

Satellite Security v. Human Security

A while back I blogged about the concept of "human security." But not expansively. My students sometimes get a little confused about this term, it meaning so many different things to different people. And Roland Paris up at University of Ottawa has argued famously that the concept represents more hot air than a genuine paradigm shift in strategic thinking.

So here's a story that both illustrates the concept of human security and lends credence to Paris' argument. It seems a US spy satellite is dropping out of orbit and will likely hit ground somewhere in North America in the next few weeks. Big issue for the US military, it seems.


A human security frame, which privileges protecting individuals from threats to their security, would probably encourage consideration of the populated areas that could be affected. Instead, according to the London Register, experts at the defense thinktank Global Security is primarily concerned with the risks to "the secrets of the satellite":

"One concern the intelligence community is going to have is that parts of this satellite will fall into the hands of the Russians or Chinese or somebody else," says Global Security director John Pike.

According to Pike, the satellite carries a new generation of spy equipment, able to provide round-the-clock intelligence.

"The hopes were that this was going to be a more capable, less expensive spy satellite or radar satellite that could see objects through clouds and in the dark."

Oh yes, that would have been just fine.

Not Sure That's What "Human Security" Means

In an article entitled “Japan’s Defense Minister Braces for Aliens,” Agence France-Press reports:

As Japan takes a more active role in military affairs, the defence minister has more on his mind than just threats here on Earth.

Shigeru Ishiba became the second member of the cabinet to profess a belief in UFOs and said he was looking at how Japan's military could respond to aliens under the pacifist constitution.

"There are no grounds for us to deny that there are unidentified flying objects (UFOs) and some life-form that controls them," Ishiba told reporters, saying it was his personal view and not that of the defence ministry.

Of course analysts will read this as a thinly disguised attempt to garner domestic support for altering Article 9 of the Japanese constitution, so that the country can deploy its armed forces for more wide-ranging tasks. Unless one assumes that Japan intends to embark on some offensive war against the putative little green men, it’s hard to see how simply acknowledging the possibility they may visit predetermines the need for any serious doctrinal change.

I think there’s a more logical explanation. For years political scientists have been debating the definition of “human security.” Invented by Boutrous-Boutrous Ghali as a way to shift the concept of security from the defense of territorial states to the defense of people, the idea was to get the Security Council to start taking seriously things like genocide, starvation and climate change. But no one can agree on exactly what the term means: is it freedom from fear of direct physical threats, or also freedom from want? Does it mean anything and everything and if so what good is it as an analytical concept?

Perhaps the Japanese government, long a champion of “human security” in multilateral forums, is simply contributing to this conversation anew by reframing the debate.

Ishiba could also just be nuts.

Administration debates declaring "open season" in Iraq...

Speaking on condition of anonymity, a senior Administration official admits that new measures must be taken to root out the approximately 2000 hardcore foreign Al Qaeda insurgents that stand between the Iraqi people and their realization of the American Dream.*

"Since shortly after the fall of Baghdad, we've been fighting these same 2000 insurgents," says our source. "The shock-and-awe tactics failed; the Army and Air Force couldn't beat them, so we brought in the Marines."

This escalation also failed to wipe out the handful of miscreants; "The Corps cleared Fallujah of all women, children, and old men, and yes, they did kill pretty much everyone who remained. But as you can see from headlines in 2005, those same core Al Qaeda operatives apparently eluded destruction."

Next, the Administration attempted to outsource the destruction of those 2000 insurgents, allowing foreign mercenaries a free reign. "I mean, you would think that if we let them kill just anyone, they would focus on the militants," our source said, rolling his eyes and shrugging. Instead, the death toll has included mainly doctors, lawyers, mechanics, and a lot of people who drive cars with bad brakes.

This week, responding to CIA reports obtained using the most robust of interrogation procedures, (codenamed "Nutcracker Suite") the US gave Turkey permission to bomb Iraq, in a last-ditch effort to eradicate the "New Immortals" as war-weary US troops have dubbed the last 2000 insurgents. (The old "Immortals" were crack Persian troops who were duly thrashed by Leonidas and his Spartans at Thermopylae in the days before Xerxes went all medieval on their asses, although at the time Xerxes considered himself pretty damned modern.)

These "New Immortals" were revealed in the CIA reports to be working hand-in-hand with the PKK, a Kurdish insurgent organization. But aren't the Kurds our friends? Not according to our source, who sarcastically replied "That was soooo last month." But why did the US give Turkey the go-ahead to attack Iraq, instead of scrambling their own jets? "We're out of bombs," shrugged the official, "at least until the House approves a new military spending bill."

However, battle damage assessments have shown the Turkish air strikes to be no more effective than the US air campaign of the last 4 years. But the Administration remains hopeful.

"We have at least 2 hole cards we can play," reports our source. The first is to actually free "Chemical Ali", still held by US forces despite a warrant for his execution by the Iraqi courts. "We figure we could trade a pardon and immunity, plus 600 lbs of nerve agent, and he could probably settle this PKK issue once and for all. He's done a bang-up job in the past, so we have high hopes that this could work."

And if it doesn't?

"Then it's time to get serious," he says, "and call on the Michigan Game and Fish Department."

Say what?

"That's right, the Michigan Game and Fish Department. If you haven't heard about them, it's because they're so damned good at what they do. In 2003, roughly the same time we began having our problem with the insurgents, Michigan had a problem with a deer herd that was skyrocketing out of control. Accidents on the freeway, crop destruction, territorial bucks attacking people - you name it. Game and Fish declared an open season, held a lottery, and a horde of camouflage-clad rednecks fixed the problem over the course of the winter."

Could this work where all else has failed? The Administration thinks it could. "Your average soldier knows the is a "long war" - they're here for 4 years, and getting paid whether they get anything done or not. A Michigan hunter? He's paid thousands of dollars for his equipment and his Al Qaeda license. He's got a wife and kids to get home to, not to mention a 4x4 up on blocks in the front yard. He's got a week off of work to track down and bag his militant; and unlike Blackwater, he's incentivized not to kill anyone else; I mean, can you imagine if all your buddies had fullgrown militant heads on their walls, bushy beards, long turbans, and you just had a runty kid or even a woman? Sure you could tell them she had a bomb under her abaya, but do you really think they'll believe you? Come on. Plus, Michigan laws are pretty harsh on people who kill does, fawns, or harvest more than their legal limit.

Could the Administration be on to something? Perhaps.

Only time will tell.

*The American dream where you make six figures, have a loving wife and a beautiful girlfriend, own 3 cars, 2 houses, and hire an illegal immigrant to do your cleaning - not to be confused with the American dream where you make six dollars an hour, beat your wife and got herpes from your girlfriend, owe money on 1 truck, 1 motorcycle, and 1 mobile home, and beat up illegal immigrants when you're drunk on a Friday night because they're taking all the "good" jobs away from hardworkin' 'merikins like you.

Say WHAT???

According to the Washington Post, "Evidence from Waterboarding Could be Used in Military Trials":

"The top legal adviser for the military trials of Guantanamo Bay detainees told Congress yesterday that he cannot rule out the use of evidence derived from the CIA's aggressive interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, a tactic that simulates drowning.

"Air Force Brig. Gen. Thomas W. Hartmann, who oversees the prosecutors who will try the detainees at military commissions, said that while "torture" is illegal, he cannot say whether waterboarding violates the law. Nor would he say that such evidence would be barred at trial."

It was bad enough when the USG practiced waterboarding, allegedly to gain "actionable intelligence" in extreme cases, in violation of international and domestic law. But out and out claiming it is defensible as a means of gathering evidence for military trials must constitute some kind of bizarre tipping point.

What is the deal with this guy? Is he actually representing the policy of the USG or has just committed a political and legal blunder that will cost him his career? Let's hope the latter: distancing itself quickly from this argument and seeking the Hartmann's resignation would seem to be a no-brainer for the Bush Administration.

Comments on this article from the Post blog suggest such a move would have widespread support:

"This filthy sonofabitch should be drummed out of the military on his totalitarian fascist derriere. Even Republican Lindsay Graham can't stand him."

"With your support of using "evidence" obtained by torture you have smeared America, our constitution and our honor with your feces."

"God help this country. Can someone help me out with what to tell my kid about this, about what this country stands for?"

In reponse to that last, tell your kid this country stands for speaking out when your leaders predictably become corrupted by power. We as a people are not defined by the barbarism of our government's practices, so long as we actively oppose it. Let's hope the Senate Judiciary Committee remembers this.

Kosovo Redux

More evidence that rumors of a new blood-bath in the Balkans, following Kosovo’s recent pledge to declare independence have been greatly exaggerated:

Al Jazeera reported today: “The Serbian government has threatened to go to the International Court of Justice to prevent Kosovo from being recognised as a state.”

This move, an appeal to an international body that has less power than the Pet Court, underscores Serbia’s unwillingness to prevent Kosovar secession by force.

Negotiators could not have openly agreed to independence, but nor will the central government revisit 1998-1999 through a military effort to prevent it. Too much is at stake with efforts to join the EU. The Kosovoar Albanians know this and had no incentive to compromise, which is why talks failed.

What we are likely to see here is a peaceful transition overseen by the international community. Nations that opposed the JNA’s suppression of the Kosovar Albanians’ uprising in the 1990s will recognize an independent Kosovo. Those that fear setting a precedent vis a vis their own secessionist movements will hem and haw in the General Assembly and fail to recognize Kosovo. And life will go on.

If the Gods be for us, who be for them?

Taking a brisk constitutional around the blogosphere, I came across this note from the Armchair Generalist; it seems that Hollywood has earmarked 100 Million dollars to produce an epic World of Warcraft movie. To put this in perspective, this is more than the GDP of the world's poorest country, Kiribati, but that's not what has me curious.

What perspective would the movie be shot from? Unlike traditional fantasy war epics, like Lord of the Rings, it's hard to put your finger on the "bad guy" in World of Warcraft. Whether a scowling crc hunter or a comely human sorceress is your best friend or your worst enemy depends, on, well, whether you're a member of the inhuman Horde (orcs and minotaurs and the undead, oh my!) or the more normal (looking) humans, elves, dwarves and gnomes that make up the Alliance.

The word on Wikipedia is that the movie will be shot from the Alliance perspective; potentially alienating the approximately 3.4 million active members of the Horde (for an interesting look at how in-game demographics map to the real world, check out The Daedelus Project).

This is an interesting parallel with the real-world media, which rarely shows both sides of the story; and to a real world still so hung up on national identities that we oft forget that, as Mark Twain wrote in "The War Prayer", when we call upon our God to guide and guard our soldiers in battle, we ask in the same breath that "O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead..."

And who do you suppose they are praying to, in their final hours?

Blizzard Entertainment, which created the game, has sometimes created threats to the game world that have required the Horde and Alliance to, if not work together, then at least to set aside their differences and fight a common foe.

Could this be an option for the producers as they begin the process of writing and refining this script? At this point, about all that can be said with certainty is that there'll be at least one ill-tempered dwarf grumbling in that traditional dwarven Scottish accent.

Welcome, For Better or Worse.

We are a junior political scientist and a soldier of misfortune who have been arguing since childhood about political ethics and global social order. The basic question that informs our discussions is how, whether and on what terms the gap might be closed between national and human security. Can global governance "as if people mattered" be achieved?

As you will see, this range of interests gives us plenty of room to maneuver. Besides military doctrine, international law, and global civil society do not be surprised if you find the topics on this blog to include, among others: 1) the care and feeding of young megalomaniacs; 2) the relationship of science fiction and video games to geopolitics 3) and the so-called universality of human rights (cannibalism: barbaric primitive practice, or the other, other white meat?).

Why blog at all, and why now? We have different reasons.

Diodotus: "Political science today prizes abstract theorizing and number crunching over practical wisdom for citizens and statespersons. But as Einstein said, 'Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts.' Theory may be my bread and butter, but one hungers to be of use to the real world. It has taken me a few years and some inspiration from other academic bloggers to recognize that six hours a week with students is not enough."

Cleitus the Black: "Why, I choose to blog so the radiance of my inspired eloquence may illuminate the the grey matter of the downtrodden masses, of course! People should actually thank me for doing their thinking for them; it's "outsourcing" at its very best!"

Our blog’s name reflects the influence of Orson Scott Card, who foresaw the political blogosphere back in the late ‘80s when writing his famous novel Ender's Game. In the story, two brilliant middle-schoolers manage to influence world events by writing polemical commentaries under the pseudonyms “Locke” and “Demosthenes.” Of course all possible variations of those derivative titles were snapped up by other Card fans long before we took to the blogosphere ourselves, so we drew on one of our favorite Card quotes instead.

As for our own psuedonyms, interpret them as you please. We hope you enjoy reading and participating in our virtual debates, and if you find the material useful or illuminating, please feel free to recommend this page to your friends and enemies alike.