Interesting stories today:
thomaspmbarnett.com
First is "Pentagon Invites Allies for First Time to Secret Talks Aimed at Sharing Burdens," by Thom Shanker in the NYT, p. A18. Don't kid yourself, this has nothing to do with the Leviathan force, but with getting allies to help more on sharing the SysAdmin's many burdens. Interesting bit on the Quadrennial Defense Review: the word "transformation" largely excised, because it's so identified with high-tech programs—yet another sign of the transformation of transformation from high-tech to low-tech, from capital to labor, from Leviathan to SysAdmin. Also interesting: the Pentagon is finally abandoning the 2 major theater whatevers (wars, contingencies, responses, crises) as the force-sizing principle. Why? Once you really take terrorism seriously, such measures no longer capture the world. So if "win decisively" and "swiftly defeat" are gone as parameters, what's next? As one official says, DoD may have to "come up with a new lexicon and a new construct." Hmmm. Gotta like the sound of that.
Trio of articles on nukes this and that. First ("As Evidence Grows Of Iran's Program, U.S. Hits Quandary," by Carla Anne Robbins, WSJ, p. A1) makes it clear that the mullahs aren't giving up. Why? We have virtually no leverage, only threats we know we won't go through with. As I said on Tucker Carlson's show: There isn't any question but that Iran's getting the bomb. The only question that remains is: what do we get in return? Think hard about that question, because someday soon we'll need an answer. Second ("Brazil's Chance to Lead on Nuclear Containment," op-ed by Bernard Aronson, WSJ, p. A13) sees a former State official arguing that Brazil's unwillingness to stop its uranium enrichment program is a real problem for a Bush administration trying to close that loop in the Non-Proliferation Treaty, one that allows states to enrich uranium for power purposes. I can see that one working well, given the third article ("Uranium Becomes the New Hot Commodity," by Patrick Barta, WSJ, p. C1), which points out how nuclear power is coming back big-time the world over. I mean, the Core's gonna go wild on nukes in coming decades, but we're going to try and control uranium enrichment the planet over. Remember this: it's not which country has the bomb that's the issue, but what its leaders think about its potential usage. Plenty of countries have gotten the bomb in the last half-century, but we remain the only nation to have used one—twice. Ask yourself if this is the best way to win a war on terrorism, or is it a great way to weaken and possibly split the Core?
Third one is about Zimbabwe ("For Zimbabwe, Peaceful Vote, But Is It Fair?" by Michael Wines and Sharon LaFraniere, NYT, p. A1) and Mugabe's big efforts to pretend this upcoming election is going to be truly free. Good show of letting opposition leaders talk, but clear signs around the dial that the fix is in. Still, interesting that Mugabe feels the need to put on such a fake show. Does the Big Bang reach all the way down there?
Fourth one is about women reformists in American Muslim mosques ("Muslim Group Is Urging Women to Lead Prayers," by Andrea Elliott, NYT, p. A14): a risky demonstration today in Manhattan with a woman Islamic scholar leading a prayer service. This is the work of the "progressive Muslim" movement in the U.S. You think American Catholics are a pain to the pope? The mullahs the world over will find this about as unpalatable as it gets. And yet it is an inevitable and unstoppable force. The Islamic Reformation has begun, and it will be first and foremost a Core-led affair. As one female American scholar puts it: "A new generation of Muslims is coming into its own . . . The children of the immigrants are looking for new ways to create an American Islam, one in which they feel comfortable in an American context." Ouch! Islam in the context of everything else. Mullahs! Start your nightmares!
Posted by Thomas P.M. Barnett |
