By Dawn's Early Light

Bill Roggio Reports from the Front

Bill Roggio, reporting for his new ThreatsWatch site, took a ride with the "4th Mobile Assault Platoon, call sign Jackal 4, for a zero-dark-thirty patrol" in Husayabah, Iraq.

Also, don't miss his analysis from the day prior on the success the Marines are having near the Syrian border working alongside the Iraqi soldiers.  The Iraqi soldiers, besides adding more forces, are helping the Marines in another tactical way.  Read "Steel Curtain Unmasked" to see how.

The Chester China Challenge

I posted recently about China's moves into Latin America in this prior post.  "Chester" from the Adventures of Chester sums up the key argument and asks two important questions.

DEL's Key Argument on Chinese Motives in Latin America

"The Chinese, to grow their economy, require more natural resources than China has domestically. Securing metals and especially oil is vital to the long-term growth and modernization of the Chinese economy. China is seeking to obtain these supplies by increasing its good will with Latin American governments that have these resources, while minimizing Taiwan. Long-term Chinese goals will be to increase military contacts with these same nations to ultimately secure their economic interests."

Chester's Question 1:

"First, it seems that there is a danger in how one assigns agency and action to various state actors when considering moves like these. For example, if a US-based multi-national or international firm decides to move into a new market abroad, what role does the US government, the state itself, have in that move?...

Basically, I sometimes wonder about using the terms "China" and "the US" to describe actions taken by many different actors, some state-centered, some not, all varying in their roles, relationships to each other, and objectives. Don't get me wrong. I use the same constructs myself in describing international relations all the time. I have no doubt, as Bill states, that the Chinese state, and the US state, want to increase their influence in Latin America vis a vis each other. But I don't want the "transnational" or "subnational" or "intranational" aspects to be looked over. "

Chester's question brought back a politics class that I imagine both of us sat through in our political education in college.  I remember reading Kenneth Waltz's "Man, the State and War" [see DEL post on Kenneth Waltz for more].  What was captivating about the book was Waltz's breaking down of viewing international relations from three different paradigms as the principal actor:

1. The Individual. An individual controls the destiny of a nation or series of international events.  Think of Alexander the Great single-handedly influencing the known world of his day, uniting Greece and conquering ancient Persia.
2. The State. Regardless of the leader of the nation, the state is the highest rational actor in international relations.  Europe during the 19th century was composed of individual states that, regardless of their heads of state, would have conducted foreign policy in remarkably similar ways based on the national character and geography of their empires.  Another argument for this analysis is that regardless of who wins the US Presidency, American foreign policy is rather consistent.
3. The System. The larger order of international relations, not the state or individual, is the best paradigm for viewing how a group of nations inter-relate.  The Cold War system was largely predictable because of the competing ideologies and the different nations aligned in the struggle between capitalism and communism with the third world as the battleground for the proxy wars of the major powers.

Of course all three levels of analysis can be used to view international relations, including the motives of the Chinese moving in Latin America.  Using the system above, here are three explanations:

1. Hutchinson Port Holdings, a Hong Kong based firm, is interested in expanding its core line of business, shipping ports and cargo passage in an important region of the world, Panama.  The company has a history, going back to 1866, of being involved in ports and shipping.  While a Chinese company, it is acting as an independent actor on the world stage. (It is one of several Chinese companies bidding on the location in Panama.)
2. China, as a state actor, is interested in securing economic and diplomatic benefit in Latin America.  In order to do so, it has created a political climate that encourages its largely state-owned companies to expand internationally.  This is aided by China's massive trade surplus with the United States. 
3. Due to the dynamics of Asia politics and international relations in general, the capitalist system will promote Chinese involvement in Latin America.  Globalization also creates the dependency of Latin America on Chinese investment, especially as US investment atrophies in the region.

There are elements of truth to all three paradigms above.  However, I would differ with Chester in his view of the Chinese as being more prone to the Individual actor as opposed to the state actor as the principal force in the equation.  Unlike the United States, the vast majority of large Chinese companies (ie., CNOOC) are state-owned or military-run enterprises that are heavily subsidized by the state.  I find using the second paradigm, state actor, as more convincing for analyzing China than US foreign relations. 

Chester's Question 2 (actually a point):

" Second point: One way that I recently discovered of thinking about the competing influences of the US and China all over the world is through the game of Go (via wikipedia). Whereas the US-USSR relationship might have best been analogized as a game of strategic chess, the US-China relationship seems much more similar to Go. Each side is carefully setting up relationships in places all over the globe. For every Latin American nation that China influences, Bush or Rumsfeld visit a Mongolia or a Kyrghizstan. Each state, US or China, has a web of interacting speres of influence, characterized in particular by economic relationships, military relationships, diplomatic relationships, the flows of trade among citizens any third-party state (to use a transnational metric), cultural infuence (to use another) and each of these influences could be similar to a single piece on the Go board. Over time, the influences of one side combine locally in one place to overcome the influences of the other side. Over even longer periods of time, the influences of each side become concentrated in certain areas, or, if one side doesn't carefully guard its influences by interlocking them carefuly with complementary ones, it will find itself losing in an absolute sense. In this way, whereas chess is about head-to-head military competition, Go is much more subltle. I think it applies to US-China competiton. The only thing not accounted for by this analogy is the possibility of cooperation between the two states in common goals. Go does not allow for this in its traditional rules. Neverthelss, I find it useful."

Chester's second point really drills down to the question of: "Is US-Sino relations a zero-sum game?"  Most board games are zero-sum games, where there is always a winner and a loser.  The Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States from 1947-1991 is a quintessential example of foreign policy being played out with the view that if one nation is advancing its cause, the other is declining.  In economics, "Comparative Advantage" is a proven mathematical model that demonstrates how two nations can both be better off from exchanging goods together.  Many online community games work on similar principles.  Comparative advantage, while not game theory, does point to a way in which nations can interact that is not a zero-sum outcome.  As an example, the US Marshall Plan is an example where multiple nations were better off by the actions of one nation.  Much like comparative advantage, the nations that were a part of the Marshall Plan, including the US, were more prosperous and secure as a result.

Conclusion - Is US-Sino Relations a Zero-Sum Game?

If China emerges as a democratic country over the next 10 to 20 years, I believe US-Sino relations will be characterized as one similar to comparative advantage.  However, if China continues to use nationalism to keep its population backing its current authoritative regime by focusing abroad (to nations such as Japan and the United States), I think it is more likely that US-Sino relations will be reminiscent of US-Soviet relations during the Cold War: a zero-sum game.

A New Perspective on China in Latin America

Dawn's Early Light argued earlier in the post titled "China's Moves in Panama":

"The Chinese, to grow their economy, require more natural resources than China has domestically.  Securing metals and especially oil is vital to the long-term growth and modernization of the Chinese economy.  China is seeking to obtain these supplies by increasing its good will with Latin American governments that have these resources, while minimizing Taiwan.  Long-term Chinese goals will be to increase military contacts with these same nations to ultimately secure their economic interests."

Tom Collins of Quillnews, who supported the Chinese CNOOC bid for UNOCAL, believes that the Chinese are not a threat to US national security interests by their economic adventures abroad.  In this recent post he states:

"At the moment, I don’t see China’s development of relations in Lat Am as hostile to the US – at all... Rather than fear these overtures, the US should welcome the opportunity to get along with China here and to build the trusting positive relations in the Americas that can be leveraged to improve relations in East and South Asia – where we already have vital interests and where our cooperation with China is critical to peace and prosperity. (SD1, SD2, SD3, SD4)"

While I am not confident that Chinese long-term intentions in Latin America are as benign as Mr. Collins suggests, I think his next point is well worth considering.  While US-Sino foreign policy is important to follow, the ability for smaller nations in Latin America to play off that relationship is what is as noteworthy as the debate about China itself.

"Having said that, the fact that China will be developing strategic relations in Lat Am will be provocative – and be used by Chavez, Castro and other Lat Am hard cases to leverage their own hostility toward the US and its interests. (Summit, SD, Venezuela) Said another way: China will have to be very careful not to be used by the anti-US forces in Lat Am in their own political games.  This is going to be a big challenge to China’s diplomats because you can guarantee that Chavez and his ilk will try to use China against the US – whether China likes it or not.  The US is on track with China – trade development, lack of military hostility, cooperation on North Korea, emphasis on political and legal transparency and reform.  But China is the ball game.  This is 20% of humanity, and they have a 5,000 year old civilization and they are on the move in the wider world.  The strategy for free people:

• Plan A: be friends and get along
• Plan B: be prepared to win a fight with them. 

The challenge for the US will be to be ready for both the whole time and have no illusions about the nature of humanity."

I am less sanguine about China not using Latin American politics to further alienate the US from the region.  However, I expect the Latin American regimes that are most vocal about their opposition to the United States to embrace China with open arms as time unfolds.  That should be a true worry for the US State Department.

The Belmont Club Weighs In on Merkel

Wretchard of The Belmont Club poses this important question: "What foreign policy will the new Chancellor of Germany pursue?"  Along with citing DEL, he links to Hero von Essens' piece "Angela Merkel's Travels (And Her Limits)," which reasons:

"Under Merkel, Germany's foreign policy focus will free itself of Schroeder's shortsighted French fixation, and she will desist from the anti-American posturing which so disfigured Schroeder and Fischer's tenure. Germany assumes the EU Presidency in 2007, so these small signs of opening up to the outside world are mildly encouraging for proponents of such things as reform of the EU budget, including the ludicrous CAP system, a more Atlanticist foreign policy, and integration of the new, eastern EU countries."

Wretchard then asks in reflection of Ms. Angela Merkel's recent European tour:

"Dawn's Early Light in comparing Merkel to Bismarck made a suggestive comparison. Bismarck unified Germany: what might she do for Europe? Although the European Union draft constitution has fallen into a coma, its departure did not permanently answer the question of what Europe should be."

Therefore, taking liberty with his two questions, let me rephrase: "How will Ms. Merkel's foreign and domestic policy, even in her weakened grand-coalition position, affect European development and integration?" 

Wretchard gives an interesting take on Germany, given its historical position on European and American relations.

"Now it is doubtful whether the European Union will be around in the year 2100 at all. Significantly the Germans did not share the French illusion of thinking the Second World War and the Cold War that followed was won from the Elysee Palace and Brussels. Germany knew that the fourth leading nation in Europe was located across the Atlantic. Puschmann  noted, 'It may not be immediately obvious at present, but Germany does, at least potentially, share Britain’s positive outlook on the transatlantic alliance. Post-war Germany has historically been an Atlanticist nation, standing firmly by the side of the United States and the United Kingdom'. If Merkel sees Europe within the wider context of the West, rather than through the fantasy prism of the Euroleft, she will at least have Bismarck's breadth of vision, though not, perhaps, his opportunities."

Where Chancellor Merkel stands on domestic and foreign policy issues is important to the extent she can influence international relations.

Step 1: Ms. Merkel Needs to Increase her Political Capital

For Ms. Merkel to succeed in transforming Europe and retaining power, she must increase her political capital.  Voters were reluctant to outright support Ms. Merkel's harsher economic reforms of her Christian Democrat Party compared to the Social Democrat approach of supporting the status quo that had failed to reform Germany's 11% unemployment rate.  While America may be the 50/50 nation, German's unfortunately can't even get either party's plan to a 50% voter approval rate.  Given the state of affairs in Germany's current government, Ms. Merkel benefits from extremely low expectations.  Yet she and her chief political opponent share a good deal in common that may help with bringing modest economic change.  As The Economist notes:

"Both of the country's big parties are now led by eastern Germans: the Christian Democrats by Angela Merkel, the prospective chancellor, and the Social Democrats by Matthias Platzeck, premier of Brandenburg. Predictably, the tabloids say that Ossis are the new Bossis. More striking are the similarities between the two.

Both leaders grew up in Brandenburg; both are 51; both are Protestant; both come from a relatively bourgeois background (Ms Merkel's father was a priest, Mr Platzeck's a doctor); both became scientists; and both are divorced, although Ms Merkel has now remarried and Mr Platzeck has three adult daughters. The pair's political lives have also developed in parallel. Both entered politics after the fall of the Berlin Wall (Mr Platzeck as a Green minister in East Germany's last communist government, Ms Merkel as a spokesperson for the first democratic one). Both rose through the ranks and took the helm of their parties more or less by accident. Both are modernisers, but also pragmatists."

Ideologues do not make for good compromisers but pragmatists do.  Ms. Merkel has strong convictions but is shrewd enough to make incremental advances.  This may buy her time domestically to bring about economic change.  The negotiated "coalition contract" will raise the sales tax (VAT) from 16% to 19%, increasing the retirement age to 67 from 65 for workers born after 1970, cut spending by $41 billion in order to create a budget that does not increase debt beyond the 3% of GDP allowed by the EU (source The Economist). So while domestic policy may be limited for great short-term success, Ms. Merkel is unlikely to lead Germany along Schroeder's self-destructive path.

Step 2: Foreign Policy is Ms. Merkel's Key to Achieve Political Capital

Ms. Merkel's political capital for domestic reform and winning an election 4 years out will require a winning European foreign policy.  I see her opportunities as follows in Europe:

1. Tony Blair and Jacque Chirac have vastly different goals for the United Kindgom and France and are often bitter enemies politically.  France and Britain need an "honest broker" to help compromise on the British Rebate and Common Agriculture Policy (CAP).
2. Former Chancellor Schroeder's relations with President Bush were icy at best.  America, fighting it out in Iraq, needs allies in Europe.  Ms. Merkel, not caught up in the Blair/Chirac feud over the War in Iraq, can be an "honest broker" for America with Europe.
3. French President Jacque Chirac, weakened by the recent internationally devastating Paris Riots, can no longer claim French Socialism is the model for Europe.  Ms. Merkel can play an "honest broker" in a middle approach between Anglo-American capitalism and French socialism to pull together a weakened European Union.

Otto von Bismarck's brilliance was apparent in his ability to fashion alliances to strengthen Germany and keep a healthy balance in Europe, playing the French, British, Russians and Eastern Europeans at times against each other.  Ms. Merkel's ability to be an "honest broker" towards Europe and with Washington across the Atlantic may allow her the flexibility to again bring about radical reform to restructuring a broken Europe.  A more efficient Europe will enhance the German economic engine that has historically powered Europe.

This does not answer the important question of "what Europe will be," but it does hopefully address Ms. Merkel's ability to build the political capital necessary to push forward a Europe that would integrate East and West, with an economic model more towards capitalism than socialism and ultimately not at loggerheads with American foreign policy.

Germany's Angela Merkel the Next Bismarck?

November 26, 2005 - Welcome Instapundit and Belmont Club readers.  Make sure you click on the comments section to read some challenging ideas by Joe Katzman and M. Simon of Winds of Change along with UK's Peter Gentle of the up and coming Polish based blog Beatroot and systemic thinker Dan from tdaxp.  Also see DEL post "The Belmont Club Weighs In on Merkel" as a follow up to the Belmont Club piece (above).

Prussian Bismarck's Strategic Genius

Otto von Bismarck was the brilliant leader of Germany (1862-1890), responsible for unifying the country, building an empire and securing peace in Europe through a complex system of alliances that his successors could not maintain.

"His most significant policy objective was that of securing German unification; he took advantage of skillful diplomacy and a series of wars to achieve this goal...  In foreign affairs, opposed to his previous "Blood and Iron" policies before the unification, Bismarck pursued the goal of uniting Germany under Prussia's leadership, and as 'honest broker' securing the German Empire's position by maintaining peace in Europe with a complicated system of alliances."

Bismarck built a strong German military, sought to not compete with the British with its colonies or navy, contain the French by securing alliances with Austria, Italy and at times Russia.  He was the leading statesman of Europe, being responsible for such treaties as the "Three Emperors' League" (Germany, Austria-Hungary, Russia), "Triple Alliance" (Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy), "Reinsurance Treaty" (Germany, Russia).  What Bismarck created in Europe with him at the helm provided great stability for Europe (though not necessarily needed economic reform), but was too complicated a system for leaders of less than his caliber to grow, let alone maintain.  The result of the failure of European leaders to continue the balance of power in Europe led directly to the First World War [DEL strongly recommends Pulitzer Prize winning, Barbara W. Tuchman's Guns of August as an exceptional novel on WWI, Dr. Henry Kissinger's Diplomacy and noted Military Historian John Keegan's The First World War] and changed civilization forever.

Former German Chancellor Schroeder's French Folly

The balance of power in Europe changed radically after the collapse of the Soviet Union.  Germany became focused on integrating its two separate countries.  The United Kingdom continued its Atlantic focus while slowly moving towards European integration.  This left France coyly attempting to leverage German strength yoked to Franco-diplomacy, thereby creating a new center in Europe.   

Once Gerhard Schroeder defeated Helmut Kohl for leadership of the German state and her diplomacy, his goals where short term in nature.  Attempting to secure his position in power domestically appeared often his only long-term goal.  Chancellor Schroeder tacked every which way the wind blew to gain domestic support, including anti-American positions, such as colluding with the French to thwart US efforts in Iraq.  He succeeded in damaging the US-German relationship and threw his efforts behind Franco-Russian diplomatic enterprises, even creating a "special relationship" with Vladimir Putin, to the rightful frustration of Poland. 

While UK Prime Minister Tony Blair was often described as America's "Poodle" in the British media, Chancellor Schroeder proved himself far better as Chirac's "Poodle".  German foreign policy was marked by stagnation in the past decade without pushing forward major economic reforms other than European Union integration (with an anti-American bent) that moved along until the French "Non" vote and betrayal of the German position over the EU Constitution [See DEL posts "Why France's Self-Destruction Matters" and "France and the EU Constitution"].

Germany's economy, much like France's, was marked by chronic high unemployment and a growing welfare system, and was unable to support a future Germany that was robust in world affairs.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel's Brilliant Diplomacy - Another Bismarck?

Happy Thanksgiving!

Happy Thanksgiving to all Americans!  And a special thanks to those defending our freedoms abroad!

My prayer for this Thanksgiving Day is for the safety and security of all the men and women who serve the great cause of freedom throughout the world. 

On a personal note, I am a proud father this year and am excited to spend Thanksgiving with my wife, her family and my dear sweet Catherine.

Blessings to you all the world over!

Asia Summary

For Dawn's Early Light readers interested in Asia, here are some articles worthy of mention, though due to my cold I will not be able to provide the normal longer commentary.  However, they are well worth reading and mentioning in this space.

Japan Draft Constitutional Changes Strengthens Military

"Japan's Draft Charter Redefines Military", Washington Post, November 23, 2005

"The governing Liberal Democratic Party on Tuesday released a draft revision of Japan's pacifist constitution that for the first time since World War II would recognize the country's armed forces as a fully functioning military...

The constitutional draft would broaden the government's ability to send forces overseas; such an order now requires special legislation in parliament.

The revision also opens the door to a broader interpretation of the constitution, permitting what some call "collective self-defense" -- or coming to the military aid of other countries. The most likely beneficiary would be Japan's closest ally, the United States, which has urged Japan to adopt such measures. Changes in Japan's constitutional status would have major significance in the region, particularly in the event of a conflict between China and the United States over Taiwan."

DEL posted on this development in "What is Japan's Asia Strategy? (Part II)" on October 29, 2005.  After PM Koizumi's crushing September 11, 2005 electoral victory and his ability to purge his LPD party members that were unsupportive, he is in a good position to continue steps towards strengthening the US-Japanese alliance as well as contain China over issues such as Taiwan and check China's growing military strength.

India to unveil new thinking on foreign investment

The Financial Times (subscription required) writes an article on the above title that is important with respect to India's goals in catching up to China and put some extra horsepower into their economy.

"India’s Communist-backed government will on Thursday afternoon consider a sweeping liberalisation of foreign direct investment rules that would kick start a long-stalled programme of economic reforms.

Kamal Nath, India’s minister for commerce and industry, has proposed allowing 100 per cent foreign direct investment in a range of sectors, including airport construction, oil & gas infrastructure and cash & carry wholesale trading."

Indonesia to Again Receive US Military Support

The US wants Indonesia back in its sphere of influence and not that of the Russians or Chinese.  Goodwill created by the US in the wake of last year's devastating tsunami helped US standing in Indonesia.  This, coupled with its strategic importance as the largest Muslim nation, is the reason for the aggressive US diplomatic move.  The Asia Times Online reports:

"Citing 'national security interests' and noting that Indonesia plays a strategic role in Southeast Asia and is a 'voice of moderation in the Islamic world', the US State Department jumped the gun on Tuesday and lifted a Congress-approved arms embargo against Indonesia.

With East Timor now independent and Aceh no longer a theater of war, Indonesia's pressing need is to upgrade its armed forces to cope with internal security, fight terrorism, guard vital sea lanes, protect the country's numerous oil and gas platforms from terrorist strikes and enforce its maritime boundaries to prevent foreign trawlers from poaching its resources.

Smuggling, illegal fishing and maritime piracy are rife in Indonesian waters, and the addition of more sophisticated vessels will go a long way to curbing these threats...After discussions with President George W Bush, Yudhyono, an ex-general, told a news conference, "I am not pleading for a resumption. We deserve it because we have undergone a reform in our military, with an emphasis on respecting human rights and democracy."

The bulk of Indonesia's hardware is US-made and the TNI - as the army is called - suffers shortages as it can't get replacements and spares.

As a result, Jakarta has increasingly turned to Moscow. After Yudhyono's discussions with Russian President Vladimir Putin, it was announced that both leaders had agreed to start up intensive negotiations on setting up a joint production facility for certain sophisticated military equipment and to develop a national defense industry in cash-strapped Indonesia."

Read the whole article for the details on Indonesia's Type 209-class submarines, Ahmed Yani-class ships, Tribal-class frigates, Claude Jones-class frigates, F-5 fighter and A-4 attack planes, F-16As, Su-27SKs Su-30MK fighters and Hawk 209 light attack jets.

China's Awkward Relations with the EU

DEL has written before on the failure of Chinese foreign policy to lift the arms embargo from the European Union (thanks to a strong US diplomatic effort against French profit motives).  Another Asia Times Online piece discusses the EU-French-Sino relationship.

"The recent state visits by President Hu Jintao to the United Kingdom, Germany and Spain are the latest steps in a continuing effort by the Chinese government and its European counterparts to strengthen their ties, but they also demonstrate some of the contradictions China faces in dealing with Europe and its constituent member states.

Both the European Union and China have described their relationship as strategic, although sometimes this seems no more than a hyperbolic way of saying each considers the other important. It is perhaps true that the relationship is more strategic for China than the EU. The promotion of multipolarity is one of the key foreign policy aims of the Chinese government, and the EU is a crucial element in the policy." 

The piece discusses UK, German and French positions within the EU trade and military policy regarding China. 

Hope you enjoy the articles.

Potpourri Great Reads

I have been caught up with work today and am not at my sharpest due to a decent cold.  However, I did get the opportunity to read some great articles and commentary today that I would like to share with you.

GWoT - Fortitude and Caution

Marvin Hutchens at ThreatsWatch writes an exceptional commentary that puts the recent Beltway debate on the war in Iraq in the proper context.

"To those who believe our departure from Iraq on any terms other than the successful establishment of a stable and secure Iraq – capable of defending its people and interests against internal and external enemies – I would offer caution. Caution your words against their unexpected adoption by our enemies, caution your hearts against the forgetfulness of hours passed, and by all means caution your aspirations.

The fortitude required to check that which we are most assured of equals the fortitude to hold such positions at all."

Why Google Is Brilliant

This article is the best analysis I have read of Google's long term strategic planning and why it is closer to a "Wal-Mart" in success than a "Microsoft".

"The same follows for the rumor that Google, as a dark fiber buyer, will turn itself into some kind of super ISP. Won't happen. And WHY it won't happen is because ISPs are lousy businesses and building one as anything more than an experiment (as they are doing in San Francisco with wireless) would only hurt Google's earnings.

So why buy-up all that fiber, then?

The probable answer lies in one of Google's underground parking garages in Mountain View. There, in a secret area off-limits even to regular GoogleFolk, is a shipping container. But it isn't just any shipping container. This shipping container is a prototype data center. Google hired a pair of very bright industrial designers to figure out how to cram the greatest number of CPUs, the most storage, memory and power support into a 20- or 40-foot box. We're talking about 5000 Opteron processors and 3.5 petabytes of disk storage that can be dropped-off overnight by a tractor-trailer rig. The idea is to plant one of these puppies anywhere Google owns access to fiber, basically turning the entire Internet into a giant processing and storage grid."

Logical Thinking

tdaxp with its trademark graphs, charts and flow diagrams writes a well resourced post "Globalization is Water: The Magic Cloud"

China bids on former Howard Air Force Base in Panama

Cheat-Seeking Missiles calls the US State Department (which wasn't following the sale to the Chinese and gets a response).

"The State Department's Panama Desk and its embassy in Panama City are both watching Friday's sale of mothballed Howard Airforce Base with concern ... but not too much concern.

'We don't see an air strip as a possibility, and neither does our embassy. If it were, it would be a concern,' Greg Schiffer of State's Panama Desk told me today.

He acknowledged that redevelopment plans for the property could include its use for air transport purposes, but 'not as a military base.'"

Enjoy!

Fighting Future Terrorism in North Africa

The Washington Times reports on an important US initiative in the Sahel region of North Africa.  The United States is spending $100 million a year for five years ($500 million total program) by funding the Trans-Saharan Counter-Terrorism Initiative (TSCTI).  The Saleh region covers nine nations and has approximately 65 million people.

The Trans-Sharan Counter-Terrorism Initiative (TSCTI)

"Algeria, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, Morocco, Nigeria and Tunisia take part in the TSCTI.
    During the first phase of the program, dubbed Operation Flintlock, U.S. Special Forces led 3,000 ill-equipped Saharan troops in tactical exercises designed to better coordinate security along porous borders and beef up patrols in ungoverned territories.
    Maj. Silkman said Africa has become the most important concern of the U.S. European Command (Eucom) because of rampant corruption, drug and human trafficking, poverty and high unemployment, which create a significant 'potential for instability,' particularly in the Saharan region, where 50 percent of the population is younger than 15.
    The TSCTI is 'one of the franchises' to defeat ideological entrepreneurs trying to gain a foothold by reaching out to the 'disaffected, disenfranchised, or just misinformed and disillusioned,' she said."

Al-Qaeda may be looking to partner with other militant African groups like the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) that is believed responsible for the attack on European tourists in 2003 and may have as many as 300 terrorists in the network.  There is an additional concern because some estimates place 25% of Iraqi suicide bombers from North Africa.

There is some skepticism in some of the North African nations about the TSCTI plan.  Some Africans view the plan as a US move to gain more influence over African oil.  Others argue that repressive governments are using the US Global War on Terror to deny civil rights to their citizens. 

SourceWatch has an excellent summary of the initiative and its member components:

• "Department of Defense 'would continue to focus on military operations'
• U.S. Agency for International Development 'for example, would address educational initiatives'
• Department of State, airport security
• Department of the Treasury, 'efforts to tighten up money-handling controls in the region'"

This area falls within the Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa's (CJTF-HOA) [See DEL post here regarding] area of responsibility  [CORRECTED July 10, 2006, thanks to reader Mark S.  This area doesn't fall under the CJTF-HOA].  The US has already spent $112 million in food aid for the region (for a list of USAID projects see here).

According to Global Security, the TCSTI would:

"help strengthen regional counterterrorism capabilities, enhance and institutionalize cooperation among the region’s security forces, promote democratic governance, and ultimately benefit our bilateral relationships with each of these states. Key aspects of the TSCTI training would include basic marksmanship, planning, communications, land navigation, patrolling and medical care."

Flintlock 2005

The TCSTI follows up on and replaces the US State Department, November 2002 Pan Sahel Initiative (PSI). As part of the TCSTI, EUCOM (US European Command) conducted Flintlock 2005.  Global Security describest the special forces training operation:

"US military members arrived throughout North and West Africa to participate in exercise Flintlock 2005. Flintlock, which ran June 6-26, was a series of military exercises conducted with US theater security cooperation partners in Africa. European and the NATO partner nations also participated, either directly or in an advisory role.

The principal purpose of this training was to ensure all nations continue developing their partnerships; further enhance their capabilities to halt the flow of illicit weapons, goods and human trafficking in the region; and prevent terrorists from establishing sanctuary in remote areas.

The training took place in several countries: Algeria, Senegal, Mauritania, Mali, Niger and Chad. Participants practiced a wide variety of skills to include airborne operations, small-unit tactics, security operations, land navigation, marksmanship, medical skills, human rights training and land warfare."

Much like CJTF-HOA efforts in the Horn of Africa, the TSCTI seeks an approach to dealing with failing states on a multi-tier level.  Improving command and control, military training, food aid, education and other human assistance areas are the joint approach the US is taking with North African participants.

Conclusion

Securing a safe North Africa will be at a minimum a generational task.  However, it is a long term commitment the US cannot afford to neglect.  North Africa could become another Taliban led Afghanistan or haven for terrorism and a prime source of potential recruits.  TSCTI is a good further step along the road to changing and improving the North Africa region.

Additional Suggested Reading on TSCTI:

1. "IGC Report on the Sahel Region", Winds of Change, April 11, 2005. - This is an exhaustive analysis of the threats in the Sahel by Dan Darling.
2. "Diplomatic Murders and the Sahel", The Fourth Rail, July 28, 2005 - A great piece on the link between the Sahel region and Al-Qaeda in Iraq.
3. "WOT: Overlooked but Interesting..." Winds of Change, October 20, 2004 - Another good piece by Dan Darling on the Sahel region.
4. "Islamic Terrorism in the Sahel: Fact or Fiction?", International Crisis Group, March 31, 2005
5. "Rear Admiral Hamlin B. Tallent, USN (Director EUCOM) statement before the House International Relations Committee", US House of Representatives, March 10, 2005
6. "New Counterterrorism Initiative to Focus on Saharan Africa", American Forces Press Services, May 15, 2005.

Al-Zarqawi Killed?

Reader Larwynn sent me earlier today a link to several news stories about a possible shoot-out or explosion with US forces in Mosul that killed 8 terrorists.  There is some hope that one of those killed is Al Qaeda's Iraqi head, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Here are two MSM articles concerning that, one from ABC News and the other from the Guardian Unlimited. 

Bill Roggio, who is now in Kuwait, on his way to Iraq, reports on ThreatsWatch about the rumors and tracksback to a story he wrote on possible successors if he is indeed killed.

Keep following ThreatsWatch for the latest breaking news in Iraq and in the Global War on Terror.