Trust but Verify

Trust in our institutions and each other is a hugely important factor in a society’s wellbeing. The lack of it can cost billions of dollars and inconveniences in airports and other security measures and in the extreme can lead to physical attacks on our government such as the January 6 attack on the U.S. Congress.

Russia has produced and helped disseminate fake news about U.S. government responses to recent hurricanes (“Russia amplified hurricane disinformation to drive Americans apart”,  “Covert war on American minds”) and destruction of mail-in ballets for next week’s elections (“Pennsylvania ballots video by Russia”). Donald Trump continues to deny that he lost the 2000 elections despite knowing otherwise according to his staff. “Indictment claims Trump knew he lost”  

Responding to government incentives, pharmaceutical companies developed COVID vaccines in amazingly quick time during Trump’s administration, which then lost public trust as a result of Anthony Fauci’s lie about the lack of need for face masks (“Noble lies-covid-Fauci-CDC-masks”) and mixed messages from the American public health establishment. While the government’s understanding of the COVID virus and how best to protect ourselves from it evolved as more information was analyzed, their communications with the public did not give confidence that they were sharing what they knew and what they didn’t. Temporary lock downs might have been justified as the government geared up to respond, but each of us should have been given more freedom thereafter to make our own risk assessments based on the best available information. School closings have done permanent harm to a generation of children.

America has flourished because we are free and relatively unrestrained to live and innovate as we please within public institutions we trust. These facts—President Reagan’s “Beacon on the Hill”—have attracted the admiration of much of the world. But our record is not pure and the more we depart from these principles the more the world will come to distrust us. The current example is America’s complicity with Israel’s genocidal wars in Gaza, West Bank, and Lebanon.  “Warnings of Israel’s UNRWA ban will collapse aid efforts in Gaza”   The UN has condemned Israel’s attacks and blocking of food and medical aid to Gaza, and bombing schools and hospitals. “List of United Nations resolutions concerning Israel and the annexation of Jerusalem”. U.S. law forbids providing aid to countries guilty of such acts, but we continue providing it none the less.  “Two governments linked by lies and bloodshed”

But our complicity with Israeli atrocities is not the first or only example of such behavior. Our ally, then enemy, Iraq used chemical weapons (nerve gas and mustard gas) during the Iran-Iraq War, starting in 1983 and continuing until the war ended in 1988. We closed our eyes and said nothing.

Even the Reagan administration, whose détente with the Soviet Union helped end the cold war, violated its principles and public trust with the Iran-Contra Affair. “Iran Contra Affair”

Such violations of our principles damage public trust at home and abroad. Beyond being despicable in their own right, they undermine trust in our institutions at home and abroad and threaten the life we have always expected to enjoy. This is not something Russia is doing to us, we are doing it to ourselves.

Be sure to vote next week and happily or graciously accept the outcome.

Should the US Still Police the World?

This was a debate between Bret Stephens and Jamie Kirchick for the affirmative and Matt Taibbi (without his baseball cap) and Lee Fang for the negative. You can and should watch it here: https://open.substack.com/pub/bariweiss/p/a-free-press-live-debate-on-foreign?r=1n8osb&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

The affirmative side (Jamie and Bret) only seemed to understand policing in military terms. The idea that there might be good and bad policing never seemed to cross their minds. Bearing in mind that I was a member of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq for its final two months and made 22 visits to Afghanistan from 2002-2013 (not to mention my years of work with the IMF in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Kosovo, Serbia, and South Sudan), my experience has been that when led by our military, which is quite good at fighting, our policing is generally inept (to understate it considerably). Warren Coats life and travels

Jamie and Bret’s blindness sadly reflects the single-minded understanding of neocons of what our leadership role in the world should look like (military involvement and wars).  This blindness is shockingly visible in the debate. America must and should be involve in the world we are part of. We should promote the values of peace and freedom that have America the envy of the world. That means actively working to be a good neighbor and to help fashion the rules and norms of cross border cooperation (for the cross-border movement of goods, people, digital messages and value, etc.). We potentially have a lot to offer in such a role in our own self-interest and for the betterment of the world.

But when we have led with our Army, our “leadership” has been rotten for the world and for us. We are bad colonial rulers as I have seen first hand. These points were made by Matt and Lee who mopped the floor with Bret and Jamie. By the vote of those listening, Matt and Lee won the debate but were still supported by a minority of those voting. God help us.

More recently, our unconscionable support of Israel’s vicious slaughter of its neighbors in Gaza and the West Bank and now its invasion of Lebanon, has destroyed any remaining respect we had as a world leader.  https://wcoats.blog/2024/10/05/score-card/

Propaganda

The arguments I present at the dinner table to convince you of my position/proposal, will succeed or fail depending on their merits and the skill with which I present and defend them. My freedom to make my case at home or your home or in the public square (Kiwanis Club, Facebook, X, etc.) and yours to challenge it and/or to make your own, is an essential feature of our free and flourishing society. It is a right guaranteed in the First Amendment to our Constitution. The give and take and challenges of such debate improve the prospect of adopting better policies and proposals and of their broad public support.

The Woke movement to prevent, shout down, or otherwise silence hate speech (at least in the eyes of some) violated our freedom of speech and the virtues of its protection. It was rightly opposed and seems in retreat, last year’s measures by Columbia and many other Universities to prevent pro-Palestinian demonstrations notwithstanding. Demonstrations that violate or threaten the rights and/or safety of others are not protected speech and should be banned.

The anti-free speech virus has spread to elements of the right wing as well. According to Jacob Mchangama in “Reflections on right-wing cancel culture”:

 “’The Left started it.’

“That was the common retort from right-wing X accounts like Libs of TikTok and their supporters, who attempted and often succeeded at getting people fired for making tasteless social media posts about the assassination attempt on Donald Trump back in July. 

“Most of their victims weren’t public figures but regular Americans like Home Depot employees, firefighters, chefs, and school counselors. This was fine and good, many argued, because it constituted sweet revenge for cancel culture excesses driven by the Left.” 

Constructive civil discourse is a valuable skill some have forgotten or never learned. Efforts to strengthen such skills by Braver Angles and other groups are encouraging.

On the other hand, measures by an increasing number of governments to ban speech they disapprove of seem to be growing. It is not all together surprising that the governments of Russia, China, Pakistan, Hungary, Brazil have banned unfriendly news sources and reporters. Measures in the U.S. to remove what our government considers false information for social media is shocking. Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta the owner of Facebook, recently expressed regret for the company’s past decisions regarding content moderation, particularly concerning COVID-19. In a letter to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, he revealed that senior officials from the Biden administration pressured Facebook to censor certain content, including humor and satire related to the pandemic. Zuckerberg stated, “I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it”

More shocking still, Scott Ritter, a former UN weapons inspector and US Marine Corps intelligence officer, had his home searched by the FBI, potentially due to allegations related to his failure to register as a foreign agent. It is more likely that the real reason is our governments anger at his attacks on its efforts to suppress “disinformation” in the press. He recently participated in a discussion titled “Free Speech & The DOJ attack on Independent Journalism,” highlighting concerns about governmental interference in free speech and press freedoms. Ritter has been vocal on social media, urging authorities to respect the Constitution and stop restricting free speech and press activities. This interview of Ritter is well worth watching: Scott Ritter interview

If that doesn’t shock freedom loving Americans, surely this will. Pavel Durov, the CEO and founder of the messaging app Telegram, was recently arrested in France. He was detained as part of an ongoing judicial investigation into alleged criminal activities facilitated by Telegram, including the spread of child pornography, cyberscams, and organized crime. Durov has criticized the charges as “surprising” and “misguided,” arguing that it is unreasonable to hold a platform or its CEO accountable for user-generated content. He emphasized that Telegram complies with European Union regulations and has robust content moderation practices. The arrest has sparked discussions about the balance between free speech and the responsibility of social media platforms in moderating harmful content.

And then there are evil people who deliberately lie and deceive for the purpose of doing harm? Russia, for example, might judge it in its interest to weaken the United States by undermining America’s public trust in our institutions thus diminishing our effectiveness as a nation. “The Russian government’s covert efforts to sway the 2024 presidential election are more advanced than in recent years, and the most active foreign threat this political season, U.S. intelligence officials said Friday.” “Russia-election-covert-disinformation” But which way would Russia’s interests be best served. Ritter argues that Russia’s interest in the outcome of the American Presidential election is for a President whose policies will be predictable. That hardly describes Donald Trump.

A more challenging question is what to do about those unknowingly spreading false information believing it’s true (e.g. Antivaxxers).  In which of these boxes should we put someone like Tucker Carlson—deliberately deceiving –unknowingly deceiving—or sometimes right? These are not easy questions. I urge you to read Damon Linker’s exploration of Tucker Carlson’s diabolical motives: “The anti-liberal right builds a usable past”

So, what should we do? Defending our freedom to speak should be a top priority. “Do we really need free speech?”  Where should we look for the facts and to expose fake information? Social media and fake news”. What role should government play?

At the end of the day, it is what each of us believes that matters. It is in our own interest to evaluate the reliability of various sources of information. The government can help by being such a source, but it must earn our trust for the objectivity of its research and disclosure. It must never censor the information provided by others.  Government can require and promote the transparency of the information provided by others (e.g, who has paid for it).  This role for government will minimize the incentive for private parties to exert pressure on the government to support one version of the truth and suppress others. We must decide for ourselves, but our institutions can and should contribute to our filtering fact from fiction and help expose liars.  Freedom isn’t free.

From the River to the Sea

The subtitle of my memoire is “From the River to the Sea, All should be Free.” I deliberately chose this potentially provocative statement to warn readers to expect to encounter my political views and to refuse to allow the English language to be twisted by the political views of others. In the same spirit, I always stated that “All Lives Matter” rather than the more restrictive “Black Lives Matter.”  I have always defended the rights of All people to peace, justice and equal rights.

I asked my AI search engine the following:

What different groups chant “From the River to the Sea “ and what does each group mean by that?

The reply was:

The phrase “From the River to the Sea” is used by various groups with differing interpretations:

  1. Pro-Palestinian Activists: For many, it symbolizes the aspiration for Palestinian liberation and equality across the region from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, often seen as a call for peace and justice.
  2. Jewish and Pro-Israel Groups: Many perceive it as a threat to Israel’s existence, viewing it as a call for the elimination of the Jewish state, especially when used by groups like Hamas.

“When someone says from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free, I question, ‘Where do you see the Jews going?'” said Yair Szlak, president and CEO of Montreal-based Federation CJA. ‘That is hate speech, right, because it is into the sea that they seek to send the Jews.’”

Take a close look at this amazing statement. Mr. Sziak implies that the only way Palestinians can be free is by getting rid of the Jews!!  Aside from being a absurd statement, it is sadly revealing of the thinking of some Israelis.

“Yousef Munayyer, head of the Palestine-Israel program at the Arab Center Washington D.C., has written extensively about the meaning of the slogan before and since Hamas’s attacks on Oct. 7, which led to Israel’s current bombardment of the Gaza Strip. 

“Munayyer says today, the phrase is used to reference the lack of freedoms Palestinians have in the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, which includes the state of Israel as well as the Gaza Strip and the occupied territories of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. 

“’That’s what has to change. That doesn’t mean that there should be any violence against Israelis,’ Munayyer said.” https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/from-the-river-to-the-sea-palestine-1.7033881

Where have all the flowers gone?

My mornings these days are spent reading email and news reports sitting in a swing on our master bedroom balcony, from which I can view Reagan National Airport and further south the skyline of Alexandria Va. Ito serves my coffee and a cut orange to me there. Life is wonderful (age adjusted). Thankfully I am no longer faced with life defining choices—forks in the road.  Luckily most of my choices worked out well. But I am happy to no longer face them.

While reading the Post, WSJ, etc. on my iPad, I listen alternatively to Opera areas and my favorite folk singers of my youth.  This morning while listening to Peter, Paul and Mary sign “Where have all the Flowers Gone,” I broking into tears and thought I would share with you why. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgXNVA9ngx8

I believe that the hearts of most young people seek to “do good”– to prosper by or while making the world a better place, which is the essence of capitalism. There are, of course, a few bad apples, but most of us are born with good hearts and a desire to prove themselves worthy. Over too much of history young men too often proved their worthiness by going to war to defend their country, or, at the instigation of those bad apples, to expand their empire. So, the impulse to reach out and help others has often been subverted in our youth to standing up to kill them instead, dying themselves in large numbers. World War II, alone killed 70-85 million people and injured multiples of that. Where have all the flowers gone.

My tears flowed from the sadness that we have failed and still fail to nurture those good hearts into an even better world to the extent we could. The enterprise of our fellow man once liberated to pursue their dreams has lifted the wellbeing of the average person to unbelievable heights. But every young person knows that a good life consists of more than material wealth. We are again (or still?) in a period when far too many people can only think of dealing with our fellow man by beating them down in war.  What a sad misuse of our potential. Where will all the flowers go?

The alternative to war

As Israel continues to slaughter women and children in Gaze, Hezbollah continues to flatten norther Israel, Russia continues roll back Ukrainian troops in Ukraine, I have tried to follow the pronouncements from all sides. The solution proposed by each is to win the war.

But can winning the war bring peace and security to Israel, to West Bank and Gaza, or to Ukraine? Israel wants to eliminate the Palestinians, but Germany’s genocide of six million Jews did not eliminate Jews. Israel’s genocide of Palestinians will not illuminate them either and even its systematic assassinations of Hamas rulers (most recently Ismail Haniyeh in Iran) will not eliminate Hamas. Peace will not come to Israel, the WBGS, Lebanon, or Syria by winning THE WAR.

 “While Israel has not yet issued an official statement, with the attack [on Haniyeh], it has reinforced the message that it speaks with the language of force above all else…. Assassinating Haniyeh, perhaps the most important member of Hamas’s negotiating team, fits within Israel’s narrative that the only way to achieve an end to the Gaza war is to force Hamas to surrender militarily. To most of the rest of the world, the assassination of a lead negotiator for a potential peace deal is certainly viewed as a bloody sabotage of multinational efforts to end the genocidal war.” “Assassination of Hamas leader Haniyeh”  “From Paris to Beirut-Israels long record of assassinating Palestinians”

As long as the focus remains on winning wars, none of the Middle Eastern countries will be safe and at peace. The countries of the Middle East (or anywhere else) must determine and accept the terms for mutual treatment appropriate for good neighbor relationships. “Israel Hamas Iran Gaza Middle East”   Arriving at such agreements will not be easy, and will not be possible without large majorities of the populations of these countries truly wanting peace and security and being willing to treat each other fairly. “Best way to end Israels war with Gaza” “Why Palestinian unity matters”  But the search for such genuine peace must start with giving up the idea of winning the war and ending the current fighting.

Russia

Russia has become a pain in the ass. Why and what should we do about it? First we must realize and accept that Russia will always be here. Just as Nazi Germany’s Holocaust did not eliminate Jews and Israel’s effort to eliminate Palestinians (sufficiently to have a democratic Jewish Israel from the River to the Sea as stated in Zionist documents) will not succeed, it is not possible, nor would the world accept the morality of eliminating Russia.

So the goal must be to carrot and stick Russia into a neighbor we can live with—even productively and happily live with.  Our approach to Ukraine provides many lessons for what not to do. With the collapse of the USSR, Russia and the other former Soviet Republics passionately wanted to become part of Western “normal” world. It was great fun working with them toward that goal in the early 1990s.

Russia’s great cultural offerings were more open to us. Russia was added to the G7, which became the G8. Russians are a proud people, who had just been humiliated, and wanted respect. But our embraces were more stumbling than they should have been. After reassuring Russia that NATO would not expand one inch East in exchange for the reunification of Germany as a NATO. We lied. NATOs membership doubled from 16 to 32.

Russia swallowed hard and offered conditions for Ukrainian neutrality that were larging acceptable to Ukraine and in any event negotiable. But we didn’t support/encourage Ukraine to negotiate so Russia invaded it. Even two months later when Russia and Ukraine had virtually agreed on the terms for ending the war, we discouraged it. Two and a half years later 100,000 have been confirmed dead. About 60% of the total were Russian. Twice that many are estimated to have died. And damage to Ukrainian cities and country side will take trillions of dollars to repair. https://wcoats.blog/2022/05/15/ukraines-and-russias-war%ef%bf%bc/

A May 24 report from Reuters, stated that Putin himself “is ready to halt the war in Ukraine with a negotiated ceasefire that recognizes the current battlefield lines.” We seem to prefer that “they” continue fighting to the last Ukrainian. After all we have been able to test our military equipment in the field without the loss of American lives. But we must remember the lessons of the Holocaust and Gaza. We can’t wipe Russia off the map. They will be here five, ten, twenty years from now. What do we want our relationship with Russia to be then? What carrots and sticks will get us there?

From the River to the Sea–One State

Under Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right coalition government, Israel is committing suicide. These are my thoughts on how it might be saved.

Israel’s response to Hamas’s brutal attack on Israel on Oct 7 has been the most inhuman effort to wipe out a people since the Holocaust. Netanyahu called for revenge “implementing a ‘full siege’ of the densely populated Gaza Strip — ‘no electricity, no food, no fuel,’ said Defense Minister Yoav Gallant — as part of a campaign that is aimed at destroying Hamas’s military capabilities” Wash Post “Israel-Gaza war Hamas”  As of May 14th “Palestinian health authorities say Israel’s ground and air campaign in Gaza has killed more than 35,000 people, mostly civilians, and driven most of the enclave’s 2.3 million people from their homes.” https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gaza-death-toll-how-many-palestinians-has-israels-campaign-killed-2024-05-14/

Virtually every country in the world except the US has condemned Israels genocide as have many Jews. The Washington Post has an excellent account of a mother and son coping with opposite views on these events: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/05/19/israel-gaza-university-protests-arrests/

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has applied for warrants for the arrest of Hamas leader Yehiya Sinwar, Izzedine al-Qassam Brigades leader Mohammed Diab Ibrahim al-Masri and Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh, as well as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in their conduct in these attacks. US congressional and administration officials have attacked the ICC’s initiative (though it is supported by every legal authority I respect) and threatened retaliation in a display of the hypocrisy increasingly undermining US status in the world.

Patrick Leahy, author of the Leahy Law, which “prohibits U.S. aid to any unit of a foreign security force if the secretary of state has “credible information” the unit has committed a gross violation of human rights: murder, rape, torture, forced disappearance or other flagrant denials of the right to life, liberty and personal security.” states that Israel is guilty of such violations and the law should prevent Biden from sending weapons to Israel. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/05/20/israel-leahy-human-rights-aid/

The recent attack and counterattack were continuations of 70 years of unresolved relations between the areas Palestinian and Jewish residents. Netanyahu remains adamantly against revising the Two State Solution (Oslo Accord) future and Saudi Arabia is equally insistent on it. Ireland, Norway, and Spain will officially recognize Palestine as a state from next week and other countries are expected to follow. 

The so far unsurmounted challenge was not a result of the gathering of Jews in what is now Israel, but the determination to make it a democratic Jewish State. Religious states, such as Iran, are always problematic. Israel can only be a democratic Jewish state by eliminating one way or another most Palestinians. American’s founding fathers had the wisdom to prohibit that by putting the separation of church and state in our constitution.

If Israel gave up being a Jewish state it could remain democratic and absorb the entire area from the River to the Sea. And every resident would receive the same protection of the law and equal rights. It should consider a federal structure in which smaller districts with local administrations might well be predominately Muslim or Jewish. https://wcoats.blog/2024/01/19/one-state-solution-for-palestine-israel/

Playing by the rules

This morning’s NYTimes proclaimed that:“The Biden administration, responding to the death of Aleksei A. Navalny, unveiled its largest sanctions package to date as the war in Ukraine enters its third year.”

On November 30, 2023, Phillip Dean Hancock was executed in Oklahoma. As the death penalty has been eliminated in most countries and such killing is considered immoral by millions of people around the world, what sanctions would be appropriate for them to impose on the U.S.?

A quite different case arises from killing an enemy in someone else’s country (aside from in war, where anything seems to be “allowed.”)  On February 13 of this year, Maxim Kuzminov, a former Russian military pilot who defected to Ukraine, was found dead with multiple bullet wounds in Villajoyosa, a city on Spain’s Mediterranean coast. The murder is suspected to have been organized by Moscow. What measures should Spain take against Russia in response (hopefully the U.S. will keep its nose out of other people’s business—fat chance)?

On January 3, 2020, the U.S. assassinated Qasem Soleimani, an Iranian major general and the commander of the Iranian Quds Force, in Baghdad. More recently, on February 7, 2024, Abu Baqir al-Saadi, a senior commander in Kataib Hezbollah, an Iran-backed Iraqi militia, was killed in a U.S. drone strike in Baghdad. What measures should Iraq (and Iran) take against the U.S.?

The rule of law is a fundamental aspect of our freedoms and the prosperity it has made possible. The international rules based order is an extension of those principals internationally and has served, though imperfectly, the same purposes globally. The U.S. has become an Imperial power who doesn’t obey the rules it tries to impose on others. Thus, American influence in the world is declining rapidly. We will all suffer as a result.

Trump’s second go

JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon recently stated that:  “I don’t think people are voting for Trump because of his family values. If you just take a step back and are honest, he’s kind of right about NATO, kind of right on immigration, he grew the economy quite well, tax reform worked. He was right about some of China….  I don’t like how Trump said things, but he wasn’t wrong about those critical issues. That’s why they’re voting for him. People should be more respectful of our fellow citizens. When you guys have people up here [on a CNBC panel] you always ask them why — not like it’s a binary thing that you’re supporting Trump or you’re not supporting him– but why are you supporting him.” “Jamie Dimon on Trump

In addition, during Trump’s administration many excessive regulations were revoked or reduced. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos promoted school choice and restore due process to college rape cases. Andrew Wheeler, Trump’s administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reduced greenhouse gas emissions, improved water quality, and cleaned up contaminated sites while strengthening cost benefit assessments of environmental regulations. And much more.

His administration did many bad things as well.  His advisors Stephen Miller and Peter Navarro implemented protectionist, buy American trade policies that hurt our economy. His crazy withdrawal from the Trans Pacific Partnership was an ill advised gift to China. He Imposed a travel ban on citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries, rescinded the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Program, separated families at the US-Mexico border and withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement and the Iran Deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), which was designed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Trump’s promise to leave Afghanistan was not kept (and was later very badly executed by President Biden). His initial love affairs with North Korea’s President Kim Jong Un and China’s Xi Jinping exploded into hostility. If reelected Trump promises revenge against his enemies. He promises to strip tens of thousands of career employees of their civil service protections in order to dismantle the “deep state.” He promises to impose tariffs on all imported good and to revoke the visas of students studying in the U.S. who are critical of the U.S. None of these is keeping with the traditions and policies that have helped make America great.

On the other hand, I hope that he would keep his promise not to send American soldiers to Taiwan should China attack it militarily, which would be insane. Whether we would get the better or worse policies under another Trump administration would also depend on the team that he would bring with him.

Trump’s small-minded pettiness, dishonesty, vindictiveness, and egotism are on daily display. He is not someone I would invite into my home. But we are right to look at the policies he pledges and is likely to pursue if elected President again in 2024. As with his previous administration, his next one, if reelected, will depend on those who join and run his administration.

My expectation is that Trump will be more careful next time to choose loyalists rather than the most capable. It is also likely that the most capable people would refuse to be part of another Trump administration. I expect the worst.