Defending Palestine

“Thousands of protesters forced the closure of Grand Central station in New York on Friday night in a large sit-in against Israel’s bombardment of Gaza. The demonstration, [where] made up mostly of Jewish New Yorkers,” “Protest-New York Grand Central-Israel Gaza Palestine”   Bless them.

Palestinians killed by the Israeli military passed 8,000 on Oct 29. Over half were women and children. Hamas’s vicious attack on Israel Oct 7 killed 1,400 Israelis. All of those deaths should be condemned. When President Biden questioned the accuracy of the Gaza Health Ministry’s tally, many Muslims and Arab Americans were shocked and angered having previously been shocked at Biden’s blank check to Netanyahu to do whatever it takes to wipe out Hamas. “Biden Israel Palestine Muslim Americans war”   

“The United States vetoed a draft resolution at the UN Security Council which called for a humanitarian pause in besieged Gaza. The draft resolution, proposed by Brazil, condemned the October 7 terror attacks in Israel by Palestinian militant group Hamas, which killed over 1,400 people, and urged the release of hostages taken. It also called on all parties to comply with international law and protect civilian lives in Hamas-controlled Gaza amid a ferocious retaliation by Israeli warplanes. The international community should engineer “humanitarian pauses” in the fighting to allow for aid delivery, it said. Twelve of the council’s 15 members approved the draft on Wednesday, with the UK and Russia abstaining, and a US veto.” US vetoes Security Council call for ‘humanitarian pause’ in Israel-Hamas war | CNN

More recently the Biden White House has held meetings with its Muslim and Arab staff as well as Arab community leaders to gain a better understanding of the issues from their perspective. Biden now calls for a humanitarian pause and has cautioned Israel to minimize civilian casualties. “Biden Israel Palestine Muslim Americans’ war”

The claims of some that most Palestinians in Gaza support Hamas are simply false “What Palestinians really think about Hamas”  

The viciousness of the attacks by Hamas and Israel has sadly aroused some to challenge America’s cherished free speech tradition with the all too typical cry of antisemitism against those defending Palestinian rights. ”An Israeli American professor at Columbia University’s business school slammed his employer in a fiery speech on campus Wednesday night — ripping the university for apparently not publicly denouncing pro-Palestinian student organizations that he claimed are ‘pro-terror.’”  “Columbia professor rips university’s president over Israel Hamas war response”

But our freedom to speak is too important to our free society to be easily snuff out. Dozens of Columbia University and Bernard College faculty issued an open letter defending not only the right of its students to defend Palestinians but the substance of their letter as well.

The letter stated in part that “In our view, the student statement aims to recontextualize the events of October 7, 2023, pointing out that military operations and state violence did not begin that day, but rather it represented a military response by a people who had endured crushing and unrelenting state violence from an occupying power over many years…. It is worth noting that not all of us agree with every one of the claims made in the students’ statement, but we do agree that making such claims cannot and should not be considered anti-Semitic….

“We ask Columbia University’s leadership, our faculty colleagues, Columbia alumni, potential employers of Columbia students, and all who share a commitment to the notion of a just society to join us in condemning, in the strongest of terms, the vicious targeting of our students with doxing, public shaming, surveillance by members of our community, including other students, and reprisals from employers.” “Open letter from Columbia and Barnard faculties” Amen

We all need this discussion in order to hear and understand everyone’s point of view. Peace will not come to Israel and to the West Bank and Gaza Strip until the Jews and Palestinians living there reconcile their grievance’s and adhere to just treatment of all.

Defending Israel

“’Hamas is ISIS,’ declared Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu…. ‘Just as the forces of civilization united to defeat ISIS, the forces of civilization must support Israel in defeating Hamas,’ Netanyahu said…. Hamas, which Israeli Foreign Minister Eli Cohen said on Tuesday ‘must be erased off the face of the planet.’… Israeli officials have vowed a merciless campaign of retribution against ‘human animals.’” “Washington Post: Hamas ISIS Islamic State Israel terrorism analogy”

That requires some unpacking. For starters: “ISIS literally views Hamas as apostates” Washington Post. But more importantly, even if Israel wanted to treat Hamas like it would treat ISIS, it would not be legally or morally justified in what it is now doing to Gaza and its largely Palestinian residents. Israel is starving and bombing them to death (no food, water, power) and as of noon Oct 25 4,385 have been killed by Israeli bombs, 62% of which are women and children and probably none are Hamas officials.

Efforts to defeat ISIS around the world were focused on the members of ISIS and not the people of the country they were operating in.  “Israel-Hamas-war-Gaza-Palestine-ground invasion strategy”  “UN chief Antonio Guterres on Tuesday asserted that no party to an armed conflict is above international humanitarian law as he expressed deep alarm over the “relentless bombardment” of the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip by Israeli forces and appealed to all to “pull back from the brink” before the violence escalates even further.” ‘No one above law UN chief on Gaza bombing”

On Oct 23, former President Obama issued a statement that included: “But even as we support Israel, we should also be clear that how Israel prosecutes this fight against Hamas matters. In particular, it matters — as President Biden has repeatedly emphasized — that Israel’s military strategy abides by international law, including those laws that seek to avoid, to every extent possible, the death or suffering of civilian populations….  Palestinians have also lived in disputed territories for generations; that many of them were not only displaced when Israel was formed but continue to be forcibly displaced by a settler movement that too often has received tacit or explicit support from the Israeli government; that Palestinian leaders who’ve been willing to make concessions for a two-state solution have too often had little to show for their efforts; and that it is possible for people of good will to champion Palestinian rights and oppose certain Israeli government policies in the West Bank and Gaza without being anti-semitic.” Barack Obama: My statement on Israel and Gaza”

In the following English language press conference on October 13, Hamas claims that its attack on Oct 7 was in reaction to 70 years of abusive Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands and was defensive and aimed only at military targets. Their attack was not undertaken in a vacuum, and as excessive as I think it was, it would be wise to understand their claims. Strangely today is the first I heard about this press conference: Hamas press conference

If Israel displaces Hamas as the government of Gaza, what are its plans for future governance of the area (assuming that there is anyone left to govern)? Post columnist David Ignatius discusses this issue. “Israel Gazans Hamas war rebuilding”  In the meantime we should demand that Israel end its slaughter of innocent Palestinians.

Golda

 The natural, instinctive reaction to abuse is revenge. Civilization requires taming many instincts useful for survival by hunters/gatherers, including the urge for revenge. Aggressive war is one of the worst and ugliest forms of revenge, but in “modern” society most of us are far removed from war’s realities when the war is “over there.”

Many movies do the best job possible in confronting us with the individual, personal tragedies of war for those of you who only experience it on TV news. I have no doubt that if more people understood the nature and consequences of war, they would advocate it far less often.

One of those movies you should watch is Golda. Golda Meir was the Prime Minister of Israel during the Yom Kippur War of 1973. It very well depicts the pain, confusion, and tragedy of war (in this case an attack on Israel by Egypt, which Israel obviously could not avoid). We watched it last night and cried yet again.

Joan Baez

“Joan Baez: I am a noise” is at the top of my list of movies to see. I fell in love with her music listening to her free Friday concerts on the steps of Sproul Hall at the U of California, Berkeley in 1964 during the Free Speech Movement protests. I became, and remain, a big fan of Joan Baez, Simon and Garfunkel, Peter, Paul and Mary and many other folk as well as Irish and Andean folk music singers.

As I am writing this I am listening, as I often do sitting here in my easy chair, to Kate Wolf, which will be following automatically by Joan, etc. Tears often form as I listen, and I don’t really understand why. I think my life has been amazingly wonderful and exciting, full of happy and sad events. Why would the music that I have always loved so much tear me up? They are neither sad nor happy tears as my mind glides over time to the past. They really are a mystery. Perhaps they are tears of gratitude for taking my mind off the world outside us today. Joan sang of love and peace.

The World on Fire

We just watched the first season of Masterpiece Theater’s production of “The World on Fire”. Masterpiece Theater remains the best of the best. The list of outstanding shows is long but at the top of my list is “The Jewel in the Crown.” I have watched its 18 hours of the very best of drama three times, once in an all day party. My love of Masterpiece Theater started in 1981 with “Brideshead Revisited.”  The only American show that tops them is “The Wire.”

Part of what I like about “The World on Fire” is that the horror and tragedy of war is shown as it impacts individual people and families. While I know that the little old ladies on the street thanking solders for their service have their hearts in the right place, their good wishes to the young men and women to go off and die for our country sickens me. Aside from Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 and al-Qaeda’s attack on New York and the Pentagon on 9/11, we have fought our many more recent wars (of choice) in far off places most of you have never been to.

I was never in the military nor fought in any war, but I have worked in many post conflict countries (Bosnia, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Kosovo) and lost colleagues to assassinations while there. We need to understand what war is really like, and the thousands upon thousands of individuals and their families who suffer losses of limbs or lives and property and ways of life for what very often could have and should have been avoided. Why do we encourage Ukraine to fight to the last Ukrainian rather than agree to terms with Russia that could have prevented the invasion in the first place? There are those who profit from these far off wars but many more who suffer greatly. Unfortunately, the former buy more influence than the latter. Movies like “The World on Fire,” can help us better understand the ugly horror of generally unnecessary wars.  https://wcoats.blog/2014/06/19/war-bosnia-kosovo-afghanistan-iraq-libya/    https://wcoats.blog/2021/07/05/the-iraq-war/  https://wcoats.blog/2009/09/03/iraq-kidnapping-update/ 

More on constructive competition

In contrasting our treatment of others as competitors or enemies in my blog on “What to do About China”  I am reminded of the 120 days I spent in Baghdad as an advisor to the Central Bank of Iraq paid for by the USAID and supervised by the US Treasury. Our occupation of Iraq included staff from the US Treasury, USAID, Commerce Dept, State Department, and, of course, the Dept. of Defense. Competition by each of them to do a better job than the others would clearly be win-win making our overall occupation more successful. But too often one agency treated the others as enemies diminishing and undermining their efforts rather than supporting them. My biggest fear with my dual association with USAID and Treasury was that each would see me as on the other side, which would have undermined my effectiveness. Luckily the each saw me as on their own side.  “Iraq-An American Tragedy-My Travels to Baghdad”

Goodbye Unipolar World, and Good Riddance

“Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Lord Acton. The United States has accomplished a lot—a lot of it good—as the world’s indispensable nation.  But as Lord Acton said, power tends to corrupt and as the time of American dominance has gone on its diplomatic skills have eroded. It behaves more and more like a bully that expects to get its way. It is in our interest to recognize and adjust to our diminished relative power and to rebuild our diplomatic, soft power skills of persuasion. It will help us better adhere to the values and rules we preach to others but increasingly ignore ourselves.

In the July, 2023 issue of Foreign Affairs, Justin Winokur offers an excellent review of the adjustments we need to make in The Cold War Trap How the Memory of America’s Era of Dominance Stunts U.S. Foreign Policy “Cold war trap-America foreign policy”

These days our most important international challenge is our relationship with China. While each sovereign nation is entitled to its own approach to its internal governance, its interactions with the rest of the world require mutual understandings and/or agreements. Following World War II, the rules for such cross border interactions have generally been developed by international organizations to which all or most countries are members, such as the UN and its many agencies, the World Bank and regional development banks, and the IMF. To take but one example, the skies full of telecommunications satellites would not be able to serve anyone properly without the rules and spectrum allocations via the International Telecommunications Union.

It is in America’s interest, as well as the interest of most countries, to draw China more fully into the international organizations established after World War II—the Bretton Woods and UN Institutions. “Chinese competition-Asia stability-institutional balancing”  But China is increasingly going its own way and creating its own international organizations. BRICS, China’s Belt and Road Initiative, Asian Development Bank, The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Why?

Why have we failed to convince China that its interests are also serviced by joining and cooperating with the liberal international order? When China was admitted to the World Trade Organization on December 11, 2001, and requested help from the IMF with how best to satisfy the WTO’s rules, the IMF sent me. The officials I met with in China told me over and over that there was no differences of opinion in China over where it wanted to go (in joining the liberal international order). The debate was only over how fast to get there. In recent years this has changed. It has changed, in my view, in part because the U.S. has abused its dominance in the world and failed to yield (balance) appropriate power to China.

As I have spent most of my professional life with the International Monetary Fund, let me illustrate these points with the determination of IMF quota’s which is meant to reflect its members voting strength and financial contribution to world trade. A member country’s quota reflects its size and position in the world economy. The basic formula, which provided the base line for quota decisions is:  Quota = (0.50*GDP + 0.30*Openness+ 0.15*Variability  +0.05*Reserves)^K.

But when the IMF was created, the US wanted to ensure that it would dominate it. It insured that some important decisions could only be taken with super majorities. A few even required an 85% majority, such as to adjust quotas, or amend the IMF’s Article of Agreement.  The U.S. was initially given a quota well above that 15% that gave it veto power over these limited policies. As the rest of the world has grown, the size of the US economy relative to the whole world’s output has fallen from 40% in 1960 to 24% in 2019. “US share of global economy over time”  China’s GDP relative to world GDP, on the other hand, rose from 4.5% in 1960 to 16.3% in 2020. Thus, a strict adherence to the IMF’s quota formula should have significantly increased China’s quota and reduced the US quota.

Quoting from Wikipedia: “China has been trying to expand its political and decision-making power within the IMF. The IMF’s voting system weights each country’s vote based on the amount of that country’s monetary contribution to the Fund. China has been trying to raise its quota. In May 1980, the Chinese government appealed to adjust its IMF quota. With approval from the IMF board, the quota of China was increased from 1.2 billion SDRs to 1.8 billion SDRs. China also obtained a single-country seat on the IMF executive board, which expanded the number of IMF directors to 22 members. As of 2017 the quota of China in the IMF was 30.5 billion SDRs, giving it 6.09% of the total vote.

“To further rebalance power in the IMF, China appealed for changes that would transfer voting power to developing economies.[5] In 2010, the Chinese executive director of the Fund, Zhou Xiaochuan, addressed the board and asserted that giving more power to the emerging economies was critical for the group’s legitimacy, accountability and long-term health.” China and the International Monetary Fund – Wikipedia

Currently the IMF quota for the US is 17.43%, remaining well above the critical 15% needed to retain its veto power, while those of other larger economies are China 6.40%, Canada 2.31%, Germany 5.59%, Japan 6.47%, and UK 4.23%. This is not in keeping with the IMF’s base line quota formula.

This exploitation of American dominance is driving China away and dividing global cooperation to the detriment of the whole world, including the U.S. The current U.S. approach to “competing” with China is not consistent with our values nor our long run interest. “Competing with China”

Our economic and political success—the beacon on the hill that has attracted the best and the brightest to our shores—is the result of our individual freedom and rule of law, not our coercive power and its bullyish use. I hope that we wake up before it is too late. “Why do we promote growth in other countries?”

The Debt Deal

CNN reported today on the compromise bill to raise the Federal debt ceiling agreed between Biden and McCarty, saying that:” The Congressional Budget Office estimates the bill would reduce budget deficits by $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years, and reduce discretionary spending by a projected $1.3 trillion from 2024 to 2033.”

Language can be tricky. Debt and deficit are not the same.  Reducing projected spending need not mean a reduction in actual spending. In fact, the package agree to by Biden and McCarthy will continue to increase the Federal debt (though at a slower rate than was proposed initially by Biden) and all categories of spending will continue to grow.  Not only will they continue to grow, they will be growing from the abnormally high levels reached during the COVID pandemic.

If we really want all of these expenditures, we should, and will ultimately need to, raise taxes to pay for them.  But do all of them pass the cost benefit test? Do all of them contribute to American wellbeing?

One Republican blind spot is defense spending (which, by the way does not include foreign aid to, for example, Ukraine). The defense budget for 2023 is 9.8% higher than in 2022 and is projected in the Biden/McCarthy package to continue to grow over the next two years covered by that deal. Our huge defense budget has resulted from (or encouraged?) American military adventurism that does not contribute to our security.

Ukraine War—How does it end?

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is wrong in every way (legally, morally, strategically). Ukraine’s fight to defend its sovereignty is heroic, brave, and impressive. The U.S. is supporting Ukraine to the last Ukrainian soldier. But there are a limited number of potential Ukrainian fighters left and causalities are high.

The fighting can end when: a) Russia kills or disables Ukraine’s remaining soldiers and puts a Russian friendly President in Kyiv; b) the West (NATO) provides soldiers to support the Ukrainian Army perilously launching WWIII; c) The advice offered in the letter to President Biden from 30 congressional members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus to press Zelensky and Putin to negotiate leads to a truce and end to the fighting. “CPC letter for diplomacy on Russia-Ukraine conflict”  However, the letter was later withdrawn (perhaps because the signers now foolishly believe that Ukraine can defeat Russia). “Obama already said some of what the Progressive Caucus got slammed for about Ukraine”

Of Ukraine’s total population of almost 44 million, all of fighting age and condition are on the battle fields and their numbers are shrinking every day. Of its total standing military of about 200,000 when the war began, 70,000 to 80,000 have already been killed or wounded. Another approximately 300,000 have since joined the fight. “Ukraine-Russia military comparison”    “Russia-Ukraine crisis-how big is the Ukraine army size compared to Russia’s”

Of Russia’s total population of a bit over 143 million (three times that of Ukraine), almost one million are in the military. Putin sent an estimated 190,000 into Ukraine this year. Half of them have been killed or wounded. However, unlike Ukraine, which is already all in with virtually no more potential fighters to draw on, Russia plans to send in an additional 135,000 soldiers before Spring and has 800,000 military personnel stationed elsewhere to draw on. “Putin could cripple Ukraine without using nukes”

Ukraine cannot win this war without additional soldiers from the West. “David Petraeus’s recent suggestion that Washington and its allies may want to intervene in the ongoing conflict between Moscow and Kiev. According to Petraeus, the military action he advocates would not be a NATO intervention, but ‘a multinational force led by the US and not as a NATO force.’”  “Playing at war in Ukraine”  Just think about that for a second. Whether the resulting WWIII would be nuclear or not is an open question.

I don’t want to see Ukraine lose and I don’t want to see the start of WWIII that my children and grandchildren will hopefully survive to clean up. It was a terrible mistake for us to break our promise not to expand NATO East in the early 1990s. It was a terrible mistake for us not to insist that Ukraine honor its commitments under the Minsk agreements in2014 and 2015. It was a terrible mistake to finally (2016) build the missile launch sites in Poland and Romania first announced in 2009. It was a terrible mistake for us not to press Ukraine and Russia to negotiate their semi sensible offers the first quarter of this year. I am not sure how many more mistakes we can get away with — if any.

The Ukraine War

Ukrainian President Zelensky says his country will file an expedited application to join NATO immediately. “’De facto, we have already proven interoperability with the Alliance’s standards, they are real for Ukraine — real on the battlefield and in all aspects of our interaction,’ Zelensky said. ‘Today, Ukraine is applying to make it de jure.”  “Zelensky says Ukraine filing expedited application to join NATO”  This reverses Zelensky’s statements he made in March of his willingness to stay out of NATO.

NATO members should just say no.  Hell no! After successfully serving to protect the West from the USSR, post-Soviet NATO has become a liability. After breaking our promise not to expand NATO further east in exchange for Russia’s agreement to the reunification of Germany, NATO has done nothing but cause problems.

In December 2021, Russia released an eight-point draft treaty to prevent its invasion of Ukraine. At the top of its list was no NATO membership for Ukraine. Soon after Russia’s invasion, President Zelensky offered to give up seeking NATO membership and agreed to much of what Russia demanded. The status of the largely Russian Donetsk and Lugansk was the largest sticking point. For reasons I totally fail to understand, the United States and its NATO allies refused to remove Ukraine’s NATO membership from the table while stating that membership was not a near term prospect. “Ukraine-Russia-NATO”

In March, following Russia’s stalled Feb 23 attack on Kyiv, representatives of Russia and Ukraine met at Belovezhskaya Pushcha, on the border of Poland and Belarus, for initial ceasefire talks.

Putin made six key demands:

  1. No NATO membership and a neutral position.
  2. Russian should be the second official language of Ukraine, with laws prohibiting it abolished.
  3. Recognize Crimea as Russian territory.
  4. Recognize the independence of Donetsk and Lugansk.
  5. Demilitarization of Ukraine and abandonment of weapons that could be a threat to the Kremlin.
  6. Banning of ultra-nationalist parties and organizations in Ukraine.

Of these, only #4 would be difficult for Ukraine to accept, but no agreement was reached, and the fighting continued with more and more Western support.  “Ukraine’s and Russia’s war”  The U.S. and NATO can bring Ukraine to the peace table anytime they want (by threatening to end their military and financial support).  No compromise agreement was reached in December, February, March or beyond. And NATO keeps expanding. Why? Why is the U.S. and NATO not pushing to make a peace agreement happen? If Russia still thinks it can come out ahead, China, India and others should convince it otherwise.

In a recent column in the Washington Post former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen, former U.S. senator Sam Nunn (D-Ga.) and former U.S. energy secretary Ernest J. Moniz, all of whom serve on the Nuclear Threat Initiative’s board of directors urged China to step forward:

“The most sensible policy choice for China is to wield its unique position of influence to encourage more “rational” decision-making by Putin. In particular, President Xi must make clear to Putin that nuclear use is a line he must not cross and that nuclear saber-rattling itself threatens the global nuclear order….  The United States and China can — and must — now work together with Europe and other nations to help end this war on the “just terms” called for by Biden in his speech to the United Nations.” “Xi Putin Ukraine nuclear arms”  

Every few months, I have urged us to stop this destructive war now. As winter approaches Europe with mounting energy shortages, I say it again. Stop it now.   “End the war in Ukraine”