by Alex Evans | Jan 19, 2008 | Conflict and security, UK
So now we’re in a breakout group on how democracies should fight terrorism. Quite a panel they’ve assembled: Shami Chakrabarti from Liberty, David Omand who used to be Security and Intelligence Co-ordinator at the Cabinet Office, author of The Islamist Ed Hussein, Sadiq Khan MP and Home Office minister Tony McNulty.
And there’s a fight! Shami Chakrabarti and Ed Hussein, whom we all assumed would make nice, are kicking the crap out of each other! Ed Hussein throws the first punch by saying that he feels Shami is patronising him – and that she’s a “liberal do-gooder”. Shami not happy about this. She starts by taking the moral high ground, talking about respect and open debate. But then she relents – and tells Ed that “it’ll be a long time before I start taking lessons in democracy from someone whose acquaintance with it is so recent”. And as one, we all go “oooOOOooo”…
by Alex Evans | Jan 19, 2008 | Influence and networks, UK
My take on Miliband’s speech: very nicely crafted, charmingly delivered, good structure to it, but raises more questions than answers. Effecting a synthesis between the statist and libertarian wings of the left, as Miliband calls for, would be quite a feat – but the speech doesn’t propose how that would be done. Similarly, we’re left none the wiser at the end as to what Miliband proposes to do on tough issues like nuclear proliferation or climate change, other than that we’ll need a range of multilateral institutions to deal with them and equity considerations will be important. Well, yes…
But this is where Miliband’s so engaging. Boffin that he is, you can just tell that he’s thinking all this stuff through from first principles, probably referring to Kant, Habermas, Thomas Aquinas and Thucyidides on the way; and that though he may not have figured the answers out yet, they just might be in the post.
Not sure I’m convinced by this ‘civilian surge’ malarkey, though. The underlying idea, yes. The strapline, hmm.
by Alex Evans | Jan 19, 2008 | Influence and networks, UK
So here we are at the Fabians’ foreign policy conference, and we’ve just heard from Foreign Secretary David Miliband. Here, brutally distilled, is the gist of his speech:
– Globalisation and growing interdependence imply shifts in the balance of power “from west to east, from national to international, and between governments and people”. On one hand there’s a ‘civilian surge’: empowered individuals who blog, who campaign, who protest stolen elections in Kenyan slums. But on the other hand, there’s the reality of growing insecurity at all levels from local to global.
– No political ideology has yet found the language or substance to address all this. The right is conflicted between its desires for order, and for economic freedom. The left has a different problem: it wants a just distribution of resources, effected by the state, but also favours a ‘radical liberalism, a pluralism that exists outside of the state. The trick the left must pull off is to synthesise the two.
– These questions are a big deal internationally. Suppression of individual rights by states is a big issue in the ‘civilian surge’. And we have to ask big questions about distribution of goods and entitlements: e.g. who gets access to nuke technology, how to build a fair global climate regime.
– And they raise profound questions of governance – where there are four themes. 1) ‘Faltering states’, where the international community has a responsibility to intervene – not only militarily, but also through soft power and influence. 2) States that are too strong – e.g. Burma, Pakistan, Kenya. Here too, the international community must defend universal values – which are real, and popular. 3) Regional institutions like the EU have a crucial role in projecting their values beyond their borders. 4) Global institutions, where we need a Fukuyama-esque ‘multi-multilateralism’.
– Britain’s role in all this: a ‘hub’ in the global network (rather than a ‘bridge’ between US and EU).
by Alex Evans | Jan 19, 2008 | North America, Off topic
Matt Yglesias finds Barack Obama charming voters in Nevada:
“Because I’m like, an ordinary person, I thought that they meant what’s your biggest weakness?” Mr. Obama said. “So I said, ‘Well, I don’t handle paper that well. You know, my desk is a mess. I need somebody to help me file and stuff all the time.’ So the other two they say uh, they say well my biggest weakness is ‘I’m just too passionate about helping poor people. I am just too impatient to bring about change in America.”
As the room erupts in laughter, he continues: “If I had gone last I would have known what the game was. I could have said, ‘Well you know, I like to help old ladies across the street. Sometimes they don’t want to be helped. It’s terrible.’”
It brings to mind the old favourite about a hapless British Ambassador to Washington many years ago:
The British Ambassador was in Washington some years back. About a fortnight before Christmas he was rung up by the local T.V. Station. “Ambassador,” said the caller, “What would you like for Christmas?” “I shouldn’t dream of accepting anything.” “Seriously, we would like to know and don’t be stuffy. You have after all been very kind to us during the year.” “Oh well, if you absolutely must, I would like a small box of crystallised fruits.”
He thought no more about it until Christmas Eve when he switched on the T.V. “We have had a little Christmas survey all of our own,” said the announcer. “We asked three visiting Ambassadors what they would like for Christmas. The French Ambassador said: ‘Peace on earth, a great interest in human literature and understanding, and an end to war and strife.’ Then we asked the German Ambassador and he said: ‘A great upsurge in international trade, ensuring growth and prosperity, particularly in the underdeveloped countries. That is what I wish for Christmas.’ And then we asked the British Ambassador and he said he would like a small box of crystallised fruits.”
by Alex Evans | Jan 18, 2008 | Climate and resource scarcity, Conflict and security
Krishna Kumar at Foreign Policy has the details:
On December 10, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff announced his top-secret plan for saving the planet from global warming. Debuting at Washington’s Dulles Airport, and then being rolled out to all ports of entry to the United States in 2008, all incoming aliens between 14 and 79 must now have all 10 of their fingerprints electronically scanned and recorded.
Now you might think that this was all about spotting false identities – but only if you’re an idiot, as Kumar explains:
When you look at what’s actually been accomplished by fingerprinting aliens, it’s clear that mistaken identity can’t be the real purpose. Since 2000, according to Secretary Chertoff, the U.S. government has stopped nearly 2,000 people from entering the country because their fingerprints didn’t match. But the United States has more than 400 million visitors a year, including returning Americans—or roughly 2.8 billion visitors since starting the program. That translates to a success rate of well over one in a million.
So what can be the real reason? Well, this is where Chertoff’s genius starts to shine through. Already, the scheme has notched up one major success:
It has gotten the Europeans in a hissy fit. With the recent decline in the dollar, Americans ought to be seeing hordes of Europeans flying west to take advantage of the bargains. But while the number of international visitors is starting to recover from its 2001 low point, travelers from Europe are not returning in the same numbers. Many whine about “Soviet-style” border-control officials and say they’re being treated like criminals.
And thank goodness for that:
Europeans are so cheap they have entire countries, such as Luxembourg and Andorra, that exist only to sell discounted products to their neighbors. Imagine what would happen if they realized that the world’s largest consumer economy is having a 50-percent-off sale. Imagine the chaos in malls across the United States as non-English speaking Europeans tried to navigate parking spaces and checkout lines and buy what should rightfully be Americans’ post-Christmas discounts. And imagine if German- and French-speaking entrepreneurs had more opportunities to invest in U.S. assets, pushing up stock prices for the rest of us. Without the fingerprints in place, the prospect of Europeans streaming across our borders, armed with cash, could be a lot more alarming.
But even this can’t be the whole reason, given that today’s global economy still hampers Homeland Security’s valiants efforts to “keep unwanted euros out of the US economy”. And that’s where climate change comes in.
If DHS can reduce demand on those flights by scaring away Europeans (and hey, why not include the Japanese in this, too?), the department can help drive struggling U.S. airlines into further financial distress by eliminating their most profitable routes. And fewer flights means fewer emissions. Zero trans-oceanic flights would be the ultimate goal.
What kind of effect might even partial success have on carbon emissions? Here’s a back-of-the napkin estimate. Since 2000, there’s been a dramatic decline in visitors from the 27 (mostly European) countries that participate in the Visa Waiver Program. Using 2000 as a baseline, there are more than 22 million missing visitors. By not taking trans-Atlantic flights (and flights from Australia and Japan), they have saved more than 60 million tons of carbon dioxide from being emitted by airplanes. By comparison, in 2006, we saved just 45 million tons of CO2 by installing windmills worldwide.
What’s even better is that this brilliant climate-change plan is being adopted globally. Japan has announced it is starting to fingerprint all visitors, and even the Europeans are getting into the act. If other countries begin to scare away the millions of Americans who travel abroad by fingerprinting them, too, a more carbon-free future surely awaits.
You know, a lot of people knocked the Department for Homeland Security when they started out. But you gotta hand it to them: they’ve become a veritable turbo engine for joined-up government…
