By Dawn's Early Light

A Name to Watch in Germany

Angela Merkel is a name you may not have heard but you are likely to hear a good deal about in the near future.  Ms. Merkel was nominated to head the German Christian Democratic Alliance (CDU and CSU parties) for the September 18th election against current chancellor Gerhard Schroeder.  She is from East Germany, has a science background, is the daughter of a Protestant minister (which is in contrast to most of her party's Catholic members) and is known for being shrewd.

Mr. Schroeder, much like his counterpart Mr. Chirac in France, is unpopular.  With a growth rate of an anemic 1.1% and unemployment near 12% (source: Economist), German and French citizens have much in common to bemoan about their current leadership.

Ms. Merkel is important to the future of Europe and the future of US-European relations for many reasons if she wins election.  To win the support of Germans, she is focusing on jobs and fears about Turkey joining the EU.  As the San Diego Union Tribune points out:

"Merkel also called for 'a truly honest discussion of Turkish membership in the European Union.' Merkel, in contrast with Schroeder, says the largely Muslim country would overstretch the 25-nation EU and should instead be offered a vaguely defined 'privileged partnership.'"

Her election would move Germany closer to the British in European politics and away from France.  This would also alleviate many of the tensions between the US and Germany stemming from Mr. Shroeder's decision to use Iraq as an election issue and strain relations.  As the Economist explains, Ms. Merkel will lead from a conservative position:

"[W]itness her long list of planned reforms, which are quite radical in the German context: simplifying tax, overhauling pensions, reducing job protection and curbing the trade unions. In some ways, she resembles another single-minded lady, who rose from modest low-church origins and a scientific training to take her country by the horns and shift it in a rightward direction—Margaret Thatcher. Perhaps that explains why she also prefers the current British prime minister to Nicolas Sarkozy, who may well be her opposite number in Paris if he becomes president of France." 

Her election in Germany, which is likely, will further minimize France and be yet another democratic rejection of the unaffordable socialist policies of Western Europe.  Her election would also benefit Prime Minister Tony Blair as he begins his 6-month presidency of the EU in the fallout of the French and Dutch revolt on the proposed constitution. 

France could be further isolated not only internationally but also within Europe.  The policies Europe undertakes by the main powers and its attitude towards Turkish integration, which appears to be on a long-term holding pattern, will have a major impact on European foreign policy towards America and the Middle East.

The likely rejection of EU membership to Turkey will assist US-Turkish ties, which is likely why Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick explained today in in Washington:

"My hope is that as Turkey looks to its own future, the connections that it has with Europe, which are very important, need to be complemented by a global perspective, and that's why I think the partnership with the United States becomes particularly valuable.  The US is still a unique country in terms of its global reach."

Ms. Merkel's election would be a win for the Germans and a win for the US on multiple diplomatic fronts from US-German relations to US-EU relations and including US-Turkish relations.

Rumsfeld's Asian Perspective

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld gave an important speech in Singapore at the International Institute for Strategic Studies on June 4, 2005.  His message to the 19 other defense ministers from around the Pacific Rim and parts of Europe and North America is important from many perspectives.  Sec. Rumsfeld expanded on 1) democratic progress, 2) the the War on Terror, 3) future threats to the US from China and 4) the US effort to grow Pacific alliances.

Democratic Successes

"Much has changed in the world since we met here last year.    The past year has been a time of promise as the people of Afghanistan, Iraq, Ukraine,  Kyrgyzstan,  Lebanon,  and elsewhere have demanded at ballot boxes the freedom that they deserve.    Dictatorships around the world are losing sway, as more and more people recognize the greater opportunities a life of freedom affords  --  economic freedom and political freedom as well."

Mr. Rumsfeld affirms the core focus of US foreign policy in promoting democratic reforms.  The first two of the five countries he lists were the direct result of US military intervention, the other 3 are a byproduct and response to US efforts in Afganistan and Iraq.  The fruits of American military efforts have spread beyond just the countries with US forces deployed by encouraging a democratic movement through the Middle East and beyond.

War on Terror

Sec. Rumsfeld, while giving a speech on the US focus beyond the War on Terror, was quick to point out:

"But that might have suggested that the War on Terror  --  the struggle against extremism  --  is over.    It is not over.    Violent extremists continue to pose a danger to civilized nations,  and we need to work together to recognize that the threat is a serious one.

The United States is working with many of the nations represented here in this room in Iraq as well as in Afghanistan,  helping their people build countries that will no longer pose a threat to the international order."

The threat of WMD, unstable regimes such as North Korea, and terrorist organizations may have been reduced, but by no means eliminated.

"Perhaps the greatest impetus for modernization and cooperation is the specter of lethal threats confronting all free nations.    Among them is the toxic combination of dangerous weapons,  rogue regimes that seek to export those weapons,  and violent extremists determined to destabilize civilized societies and kill men, women, and children."

Winning the War on Terror is vital for US and our democratic allies' national security.  Losing focus on this war will only make America more vulnerable to future threats.

Freeing the Rising Dragon

China, as a non-democratic nation, is a potential threat to US security interests and the economic and strategic interests of its Asian neighbors.  Mr. Rumsfeld expands on the US desire for greater liberty and reform in Asia:

"A nation that expects its people to unleash their productive energies into the economy  --  but stifles free expression  --  will eventually have to choose between tyranny and progress.    A society that supports political reform  --  but fails to protect its citizens or provide security for them  --  encourages instability and civil strife.    And a secure state that permits neither political nor economic freedom is a system that, in the end, may fall to its understandably restive people."

The heart of his speech with respect to China tackles the double-digit growth in Chinese military spending.

"Although the Cold War is over, this region,  unfortunately,  is still burdened by some old rivalries;  and military budgets are escalating in some quarters.  These are matters that should be of concern.

China’s emergence is an important new reality in this era.   

Indeed, the world would welcome a China committed to peaceful solutions and whose industrious and well-educated people contribute to international peace and mutual prosperity. 

A candid discussion of China, however,  cannot neglect to mention areas of concern to the region.

The U.S. Congress requires that the U.S. Department of Defense report annually on China’s perceived military strategy and its military modernization.     The Department’s 2005 report is scheduled to be released soon. 

Among other things, the report concludes that China’s defense expenditures are much higher than Chinese officials have published.    It is estimated that China’s is the third largest military budget in the world, and clearly the largest in Asia.
 
China appears to be expanding its missile forces, allowing them to reach targets in many areas of the world, not just the Pacific region, while also expanding its missile capabilities within this region.  China also is improving its ability to project power,  and developing advanced systems of military technology.

Since no nation threatens China, one must wonder:

• Why this growing investment?
• Why these continuing large and expanding arms purchases?
• Why these continuing robust deployments?"

The three questions asked and the concerns raised by their potential answers are driving other Asian nations into the US sphere of influence to counter a more aggressive and assertive China.  From Japan's strengthening of military ties with the US to Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia's agreement to have the US patrol the oil rich Malacca Straits, to major US overtures towards India, China's emergence is not bringing stability to the region.  This is leading to the US having a golden opportunity to expand its alliances and partnerships in Asia.

Expanding Alliances

While tragic, the December 2004 tsunami afforded the US military an opportunity to work towards humanitarian goals with its Asian neighbors and build goodwill.  It is important to note the countries Mr. Rumsfeld points to in working to solve the crisis outside of the regular NGO and UN organizations:

• "India not only met the needs of its own people;  but,  to its credit,  it also sent troops to help to distribute aid in Sri Lanka;
• Thailand,  despite its own casualties and tragedy,  quickly consented to the use of its bases to serve as the combined support facilities for the relief efforts;
• Malaysia made its airfields available,  facilitating logistical support;  and
• Singapore was first on the scene with life-saving aid,  offering the use of its airfields and port facilities.

Years of bilateral and multilateral meetings and cooperative operations made possible this swift,  team response  --  as  America’s military joined quickly with Australia,  Singapore,  Thailand,  Indonesia,  and many others to provide assistance."

The countries in bold are important for they all are nations that the United States has advanced  diplomatic and military ties with in 2005 from Sec. of State Rice's and Deputy Secretary of State Zoellick's 12-nation tours, to US military vists as well.  These nations represent old and new allies not only in the War on Terror but in the US efforts to contain China.

"From time to time,  some question the priority America places on its Pacific partnerships.    Yet the atmosphere in the tsunami’s aftermath  --  as well as the recent earthquake in Nias  --  demonstrated again that whenever friends and allies in this region confront threats or hardship  --  whether caused by man or by nature  --  we stand at their side.   

These long relationships among nations -- the nations of the Pacific -- led many in this hemisphere to pledge support to the American people after the attacks of 9/11.    And we are deeply grateful.    I am confident that our long friendships will continue to unite us against the common threats ahead."

While it is easy to pass by this statement, it is important.  The US stands by its allies and Mr. Rumsfeld is making clear that the US will continue to work strategically to build a prosperous Asia by backing our allies from future threats.

This year will be a very important year in US foreign policy as we seek to consolidate our successes in the Middle East and promote democracy around the world.  The alliances the US strengthens this year, because of the example demonstrated by its steadfastness in supporting its allies, will be pivotal for securing a leadership role in the new century.

An Englishwoman Worthy

I am traveling on business to Tahoe and Reno for a housing conference Sunday through Tuesday.  Watching the water flow down the Truckee River was impressive on the drive up from Sacramento today.  I am staying in a nice cabin outside of Tahoe that has no Internet access or television.  However I did find a faint Wi-Fi signal out here from a neighbor's house that I am posting from.  It is a great world.

As some readers to this blog will recall, my wife and I are expecting our first child, Catherine, at the end of July.  My mom and a friend of hers threw a shower for my wife on Saturday with friends and family in attendance, including my 92 year old grandmother on my dad's side of the family, who is a special lady.

When I stopped to pick up my wife she showed me some of the thoughtful gifts that we had been given for our precious Catherine (who kicks up a storm in my petite wife's belly, to my delight).  My wife handed me a bag with a small baby blanket tucked inside, hand knitted in soft pink, blue and white.  She broke down in tears and so did I.  The gift was from my other grandmother, my mom's mother, who left us to be with her Maker over 5 years ago.  In the short time my wife knew her, they had developed a special relationship. 

Even though my grandmother could not be there in person, her presence and love was felt in the kind act of preparing for her great-grandchild even past her life here on earth.  I thought that I would share something of my grandmother, who was born in Manchester, England and came to America with her parents.  Her family was of humble means, but she was always proud of the fact that they came to America without having to go through Ellis Island in a "cattle processional."  I wish I would have asked her more what she meant.  She taught me the love of a nice cup of tea, of enduring cancer and pain with class and dignity.  She was a strong Englishwoman who would not complain to others about anything she would suffer through. 

Two stories I will share that speak to her character.  She and her husband were very involved with a large Los Angeles church and would often have missionaries come and visit.  One day a missionary couple was without a good deal of extra clothes and my grandfather decided to "give" my grandmother's wardrobe away to this family.  Rather than complain (this is her version), she sat down and knitted a whole new wardrobe for herself.  The British stiff upper lip at play.

The second story in her later years, when she could no longer get around, but was able to continue to knit.  My grandmother, for over 7 years, knitted baby caps and scarves and blankets, over 400 at least, for Marine families who gave birth in local hospitals around Camp Pendleton in the 1990s.  She never met the families, but she would dutifully knit each one for the tiny newborns.

Here is to you, Grandmother.  You are missed and your gift is adored.  With much love, your grandson Bill and great-granddaughter Catherine.  You are certainly an Englishwoman worthy!

US Center of Gravity Continues to Shift in Asia

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is on his way today to Singapore to meet with 19 other defense ministers to discuss regional Asian security concerns, including North Korea.  Sec. Rumsfeld has added China to the list of topics he will be discussing with American allies at the Shangri-la Dialogue 2005 Conference hosted by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies. 

Sec. Rumsfeld is to give a speech on "The US and Asia-Pacific Security Beyond the War on Terrorism" (conference schedule).  This will be an important address before a diverse body of regional players interested in the future of Asia.  Mr. Rumsfeld made some interesting comments regarding North Korea, China and India prior to leaving on Friday:

North Korea

• "Our policy is what it is, and it's well-known." [2]

China

• "With respect to China, it's not completely clear which way they're going because of the tension... between the nature of their political system and the nature of their economic system." [1]
• "With respect to the Peoples Republic of China, it is what it is. It's a big country, with a fairly rapid growth rate.... Its defense budget is growing apace with their economy, and they are a major weapons purchaser in the world, largely from Russia but from other countries as well, and have been deploying a great many ballistic missiles and ships and other military capabilities over a period of years now.... The tension will grow as they move through the years. To the extent that the Republic of China leans toward a freer political system, they will be a considerably more successful country and a more influential country in the world. To the extent they don't do that, there will be pressures against their economy, they will grow less fast, and they will be a less influential country in the world." [1]
• "As a matter of fact, a portion of our Quadrennial Defense Review has to look at the more conventional threats in the world, and we all know that China's economy's growing rapidly.  We know it's been investing in double digits in its military capabilities, that it's been buying a great deal of weaponry from Russia.  And it's a country that is going to reach a fork in the road.  It wants to grow its economy, and to do that it has to have a relatively free economic system, and it wants to maintain its strong control over the political side of its government, which is inconsistent with having a free economic system. So they're going to feel that tension, that stress in the years ahead." [3]

India

• "It's pretty clear where India's going, and one would anticipate the relationship with India will continue to strengthen as we go through the period ahead...."[1]
• "'We have what I would characterize as an excellent relationship with India. From a military-to-military standpoint it has improved in strength every year over the past four and a half years.' The military relationship, which has included joint exercises, 'has been very much leading the other aspects of the relationship, which is a good thing. We are finding many things to cooperate on,' he said. Calling India a 'major power,' the secretary highlighted its standing as the world's largest democracy, its 'relatively free economic system,' and its educated population."[1]

What is important to note in the reports above (the AP and AFP reports completely missed Sec. Rumsfeld's quotes on India) is that it demonstrates the US long-term policy of promoting democratic India over Communist China.  His comments are in line with Sec. of State Rice's comments and overtures towards India (See DEL here).  The title of Mr. Rumsfeld's speech also speaks to a forward-looking US position after the War on Terror.  The terrorism address for the conference is being given by defense ministers from Australia, Singapore and the Philippines.  It is also interesting to note that the only other US-given speech is from Admiral William Fallon, Commander, US Pacific Command, on "Enhancing Maritime Security", which includes the Malaysian defense minister.  Since the US and Malaysia just came to terms about the US patrolling the oil-important Malacca Straits (see here and here), their joint presentation can be seen as a signal to China as well.

The US is shifting forcefully its center of gravity in Asia to India with a firm commitment and alliance with Japan and Australia to contain China at worst and hopefully encourage greater democracy in China at best.  Mr. Rumsfeld's speech, given his comments, will be very telling indeed of US foreign policy goals "after the War on Terror".

Bonus Report on North Korea:  ABC News is reporting

"Rumsfeld would not discuss whether the Pentagon is planning for military options if North Korea goes ahead with a nuclear test. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other Bush administration officials have said they are worried such a test could set off a nuclear arms race in Asia.

North Korea has condemned a U.S. plan to send 15 F-117A Nighthawk stealth fighters to South Korea. The Pentagon said last week the move was part of a long-planned training exercise. Also last week, Washington suspended its program to search for Korean War dead in North Korea, saying the situation there was too dangerous for the American search teams.

Statements from the North's official Korea Central News Agency have been in conflict this week. North Korea first called Vice President Dick Cheney a 'bloodthirsty beast' in response to his telling CNN that North Korean leader Kim Jong Il was irresponsible and oppressive. Then North Korea offered rare praise of President Bush for referring to Kim as 'Mister' during a news conference."

The US is sending 15 F-117As to South Korea and suspending its Korean War dead operations in the North, and then North Korea praises "Mr." Bush.  Could the US be sending a more clear signal to North Korea to come back to the six-party talks?

Sources:

[1] Times of India
[2] ABC News
[3] DOD News (This was a part of a radio interview on June 1, 2005)

The French and Dutch Rejection (Part III)

The Dutch added insult to the French and pro-European injury today as they rejected by 62% the European Union proposed constitution. 

Where does Europe go now?  How do other nations respond?  Both of these questions are difficult to determine but are important to the future of international relations for all countries.  Many readers have commented about how the EU had little power to begin with and its power is even less today.  Much of that is true, but there was always held out by Euro-supporters the dream of a unified Europe.  The Franco-German relationship, headed by the two leaders Mr. Chirac and Mr. Schroeder, is severely weakened.  Both leaders are unpopular in their respective countries.  As reported in the Economist:

"Mr. Chirac has been humiliated, and Mr. Schröder is likely to lose the German election in September. One unkind member of Mr. Chirac’s own party was quoted in Le Figaro this week likening the Chirac-Schröder partnership to one between the 'blind and the crippled'."

The two most important leaders of the anti-American bloc in Europe opposed to the US role in Iraq and, more importantly, opposed to the US being the world's lone superpower are being rejected by their own people.  Additionally, they have plunged the EU into crisis and derailed the steam train of EU integration.  Already there is talk that Romania and Bulgaria may lose their opportunity to join the union, and the Dutch and French fears of the Turks make Turkey's desire to enter the EU unsellable in Europe.

While Tony Blair's task is tall as he gets ready to assume the helm of the EU presidency shortly, the UK is well positioned to find compromise on terms that are likely to be far more acceptable to the US.  Europe's ability to restructure its military or move forward on economic and immigration issues is all now in doubt on any type of large scale.

The dollar will retain its key position in the world economy for a good time to come as uncertainties with the euro will reduce its ability to persuade foreign government and bank investors to trade in dollar reserves. 

Some point to the existing EU structure as enough to keep the status quo on track.  This argument, though, fails to account for the massive "no confidence" vote that was displayed by two core members and anxiety over a competitive global economy filled with educated workers who are not arguing for 35-hour work weeks or fully funded pensions with retirement at 60 years of age. 

The foreign response I found most interesting was the Indian view, of which there are several.  The Times of India describes how the French fear the "Hindu" and cannot understand how a country as diverse as India can stay united and Europe, with much closer religious and ethnic ties, cannot. 

"The 300-page document [EU Constitution] is the world's second-longest constitution, after India's. It merely pulls together and formalises all the successive treaties and agreements that have accumulated over the years. It does not leave the EU – or the French – any more or any less exposed to the much-advertised, awesome might of 'the Hindu'. The Indians are already at Europe's gates. It may be time the EU realised it."

The Telegraph of Calcutta takes a similar view:

"If the new Old Europe is to become the much-needed counterpoint to American unilateralism in an increasingly unipolar world, then this entity has already proved itself far from unified in its range of attitudes to the Iraq war. This lack of unity is in the rejection of the constitution as well. Each naysayer within the EU has its own, local reasons for opposing it. The French No and the Dutch No would be very distinct, even antagonistic, responses. To India — somehow managing to remain unified in spite of its chaotic diversity of language, politics and culture — Europe would seem almost dully unreal in its homogeneity. But the French referendum exposes how deceptive this distant vision could be."

India is more united than the EU today because it has an identity and goal as a democratic nation that is worth striving for.  The framers of the EU constitution have given their citizens no grand ideal to move forward on.  With no grand vision of what the EU means to the common citizen, it is no wonder that Europe finds itself with an economic malaise and no goal in sight.