Week in Review Part III: Foreign Affairs

Syria: Pathetic U.N. special envoy and house-sitter extraordinaire, Kofi Annan, said the level of violence post- the April 12 cease-fire was “unacceptable,” and the Bashar al-Assad regime shuddered. Hours after the U.N. sent a team to Hama, government troops opened fire on those who came out to support the monitors, killing at least 30, while at the same time there is zero evidence Syria has withdrawn heavy weapons from populated areas as required by the April 12 agreement.

French foreign minister Alain Juppe said he was giving the peace plan put forward by Annan until May 5 to show it was working or France would seek a resolution in the U.N. authorizing force.
Fouad Ajami / Wall Street Journal

“The ongoing Kofi Annan diplomacy and United Nations-brokered ‘cease-fire’ are seen for what they are – an alibi for the abdication of Western powers, and a lifeline for the regime….

“In the Syria deliberations, deliverance is always around the corner. American diplomacy is always on the verge of making Russia see its way to the proper path. In these tortured discussions, there is no end to finesse and to the parsing of things….

“In one of its alibis for passivity, the Obama administration falls back on the threat posed by Islamists within the ranks of the opposition. This is but a recycling of the Assad regime’s own assertions that its tyranny is a secular shield for the minorities and a barrier to the rise of the Islamists. Yet the surest way the Islamists and the jihadists can come to greater power in Syria is a drawn-out war that further degrades and radicalizes the country.

“The defining truth of this struggle is the abdication of the Obama administration. For a year now, American officials have skillfully run out the clock. They made much of the authority of the U.N. Security Council when any model U.N. team in any high school would have predicted the vetoes of Russia and China. It was clear that the Obama administration did not want to arm the opposition for fear of ‘escalating’ the conflict….

“In the markets in Dubai, the Assad dictatorship is dumping its gold reserves – at a discount. In the long run, this regime is doomed. But that is hardly consolation to an outgunned rebellion. We shouldn’t be waiting on a Syrian Srebrenica before the regime is pushed into its grave.

“It is a waste of time – and of precious lives – to buy into a wishful diplomacy that maintains that a few hundred U.N. observers will ward off the evils of a merciless sectarian tyranny.”
Benny Avni / New York Post

“Should we carve out safe zones to protect civilians? Nah, it would require boots on the ground (even though these need not be U.S. troops). Establish no-fly zones? Nah, Syrian air defenses are too formidable (although Israel easily disabled them in 2007). Arm the opposition? Sorry, we don’t want to militarize the conflict further.

“By default, we’re stuck with a failing plan that we’ll likely support and finance anyway. Administration foreign-policy hands who might advocate a more muscular approach are no match for Obama’s political advisers, who want no election-year complications….

“ ‘How is it that Assad is still in power?’ Elie Wiesel asked on Monday, as he introduced Obama for a speech at the Holocaust Museum; Obama insisted that Assad would fall – eventually.

“Yet if U.S. leadership remains AWOL, Assad’s likely to survive and kill for some time yet.”
Charles Krauthammer / Washington Post

“Obama has said that we cannot stand idly by. And what has he done? Stand idly by.

“Yes, we’ve imposed economic sanctions. But as with Iran, the economic squeeze has not altered the regime’s behavior. Monday’s announced travel and financial restrictions on those who use social media to track down dissidents is a pinprick. No Disney World trips for the chiefs of the Iranian and Syrian security agencies. And they might now have to park their money in Dubai instead of New York. That’ll stop ‘em….

“(Obama’s) case for passivity is buttressed by the implication that the only alternative to inaction is military intervention – bombing, boots on the ground.

“But that’s false. It’s not the only alternative. Why aren’t we organizing, training and arming the Syrian rebels in their sanctuaries in Turkey?   Nothing unilateral here. Saudi Arabia is already planning to do so. Turkey has turned decisively against Bashar al-Assad. And the French are pushing for even more direct intervention.

“Instead, Obama insists that we can act only with support of the ‘international community,’ meaning the U.N. Security Council – where Russia and China have a permanent veto. By what logic does the moral legitimacy of U.S. action require the blessing of a thug like Vladimir Putin and the butchers of Tiananmen Square?

“Our slavish, mindless self-subordination to ‘international legitimacy’ does nothing but allow Russia – a pretend post-Soviet superpower – to extend a protective umbrella over whichever murderous client it chooses….

“If Obama wants to stay out of Syria, fine. Make the case that it’s none of our business. That it’s too hard. That we have no security/national interests there.

“In my view, the evidence argues against that, but at least a coherent case for hands-off could be made. That would be an honest, straightforward policy. Instead, the president, basking in the sanctity of the Holocaust Museum, proclaims his solemn allegiance to a doctrine of responsibility – even as he stands by and watches Syria burn.”
Editorial / Washington Post

“(The) Obama administration, like its ‘partners’ on the Security Council, wishes to be seen as doing something to stop the bloodshed in Syria without having to commit resources or exert leadership. Sadly, this is far from the first such failure. In a blog at Foreign Policy’s Web site, Michael Dobbs has been documenting the eerie resemblances between the United Nations’ handling of Syria and its history in Bosnia – where an attempt to stop attacks on civilians by dispatching lightly armed peacekeepers in the 1990s led to the worst massacre in postwar European history.

“As Mr. Dobbs reported, a 1999 report signed by Mr. Annan himself concluded that the Bosnia mission was ‘at best, a half measure’ and a poor substitute for ‘more decisive and forceful action to prevent the unfolding horror.’ Said that Annan report: ‘We tried to keep the peace and apply the rules of peacekeeping when there was no peace to keep.’

“It’s bad enough that the Obama administration refuses to learn the lessons of previous failures. More galling is its claim that it has made the prevention of atrocities a priority – as Mr. Obama did Monday in announcing the creation of an ‘atrocities prevention board.’ ‘We see the Syrian people subjected to unspeakable violence, simply for demanding their universal rights,’ he said. ‘And we have to do everything we can.’

“Is sending unarmed monitors to besieged cities and shrugging when the people they visit are murdered everything the United States can do? Even in an election year, the answer has to be no.”

Iran: A Russian proposal would have Iran ending enhanced enrichment of uranium in exchange for cancellation of new economic sanctions, such as the European Union ban on crude oil that goes into effect July 1. Let’s hope this isn’t the resolution to the next round of talks in Baghdad, May 23.

Nor should we hope a report by the Los Angeles Times’ Paul Richter on Friday, that the Obama administration may be willing to allow Iran to continue enriching uranium up to a concentration of 5% if the Iranian government agreed to unrestricted inspections and strict oversight, is also not where we’re headed. [While I like to wait 24 hours after a report like this, if this last one comes to pass, I’ll go ballistic.]

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said earlier in the week that while sanctions are impairing the Iranian economy, “so far they haven’t rolled back the program or even stopped it by one iota. I hope that changes, but so far, I can tell you the centrifuges are spinning. If the sanctions are going to work, they better work soon,” he emphasized.

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said on Thursday that despite the strongest-ever sanctions against Iran, “the chances that, at this pressure level, Iran will respond to international demands to irreversibly stop its program seem low. I would be happy to be proven wrong….

“Dealing with Iran’s determination to achieve a military nuclear capability is not devoid of complexities, dangers or unpredictable results.”   But dealing with the challenge of a nuclear-armed Iran would be “infinitely more complex, infinitely more dangerous, infinitely expensive in human lives and financial resources.” [Jerusalem Post]

Israel’s military chief, Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz, on the other hand, told the newspaper Haaretz that he did not believe Iran will choose to build a nuclear bomb, a decision that is up to Ayatollah Khamenei. Thus, Gantz doesn’t see the urgency for military action. Gantz said Iran’s leaders are “very rational people” who are still mulling whether to “go the extra mile” and produce nukes.

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said, “Are they trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No. But they are trying to develop a nuclear capability, and that is what concerns us.”
Reuel Marc Gerecht writes in The Weekly Standard:

“Round two (of the talks) could be a success, and lead to a round three, if Khamenei agreed to do five things: (1) Stop all uranium enrichment to 20 percent purity, which is near bomb-grade; (2) ship abroad the entire stockpile of 20 percent enriched uranium; (3) close the Fordow enrichment facility, which is buried under a mountain near the clerical city of Qom; (4) allow inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency immediate and unfettered access to any suspected nuclear site: and (5) permit the IAEA to install devices on centrifuges for monitoring uranium-enrichment levels. Khamenei is, to say the least, unlikely to agree to this.”
Other Iran-related tidbits:

The Oil Ministry admitted it was the victim of a large-scale cyberattack that shut the ministry down, though not the flow of oil; a virus similar in power to Stuxnet, it seems.

The Iranian government said it had reverse-engineered an American spy drone it captured last year. I hardly believe this one.

Die Welt, a German newspaper, ran a poll and 48% of Germans see Iran as the main threat to world peace.

A poll sponsored by the Jerusalem Post found that 24% believe the Obama administration is more pro-Israel, 24% said more pro-Palestinian, 36% said neutral and 16% did not express an opinion.

Israel: Prime Minister Netanyahu on Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula:

“The Sinai is turning into a kind of Wild West which…terror groups from Hamas, Islamic Jihad and al Qaeda, with the aid of Iran, are using to smuggle arms, to bring in arms, to mount attacks against Israel,” he told Israel Radio.

“We are acting against this reality and we are in…continuous discussions with the Egyptian government, which is also troubled by this.”

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said the situation in Egypt was more worrying than what was happening in Iran, calling for a significant boost in troop strength along the southern borders.

Egypt’s interim military ruler, Field Marshal Tantawi, countered, “We will break the legs of anyone trying to attack us or who come near the borders.” [Reuters]

Egypt: Regarding the upcoming presidential election, the Wall Street Journal’s Matt Bradley reports that support for the Islamist parties is suddenly waning. I’m not so sure, and it’s not as if the main alternative to an Islamist candidate, Amr Moussa, the former secretary-general of the Arab League, is the answer because, recall, he is a hardliner against Israel.

Yemen: The Obama administration has given the green light to the CIA and U.S. military for an increased drone campaign against al Qaeda, which has been building a base in the southern part of the country ever since the turmoil over the central government erupted. The new government is mostly supportive of the U.S., but also argues the drone attacks are used by al Qaeda as a recruiting tool.

North Korea: Most experts seem to agree Pyongyang could conduct its third nuclear weapons test within a week or so (the other tests having been conducted in 2006 and 2009). China’s vice foreign minister warned, “China will oppose anything which might jeopardize peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in Northeast Asia, as this would damage China’s national security interests and the interests of the relevant parties as well.”

But then the vice foreign minister said, “We believe that no party should take any action that might escalate tensions,” a none too subtle hint Beijing expects the U.S. and South Korea to butt out as well. [South China Morning Post]

So while the United States was generally pleased China issued the statement, it being North Korea’s only ally, the fact is China always says one thing and does another when it comes to its neighbor.

This week was one in which the North Korean government interrupted television programming to issue a ‘special report’ wherein it went after South Korea, threatening to “reduce all the rat-like groups and the bases for provocations to ashes in three or four minutes, (or) in much shorter time, by unprecedented peculiar means and methods of our own style.”

Well that would be a bit unsettling if you were in the middle of watching a Yankees-Red Sox game.

South Korea reacted angrily: “We urge North Korea to immediately stop this practice. We express deep concern that the North’s threats and accusations have worsened inter-Korean ties and heightened tensions.”

Seoul also recently announced it has deployed a home-grown, long-range cruise missile that can hit key facilities in the North. North Korea is said to have deployed 600 Scud missiles and 200 Rodong missiles near the DMZ.

Meanwhile, the other day when North Korea held its military parade, it showed missiles being ferried on vehicles that bore a striking resemblance to a 16-wheel transporter erector launcher manufactured by Hubei Sanjiang Space Wanshan Special Vehicle Co., a subsidiary of the China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp., according to military experts. White House officials say, however, they do not believe the suspected sale to North Korea was sanctioned by the Beijing government.

Why not? So what if China signed on to United Nations resolutions imposing an arms embargo on the North.

As for the missiles on said launchers, analysts now say a study of the photos reveals they were fakes.

China: As the scandal involving Bo Xilai, former Chongqing party boss and politburo member, and his wife, Gu, suspected of murder in the death of a British businessman, exploded further with the revelation that Bo was tapping the phone lines of President Hu Jintao, some say Premier Wen Jiabao’s reform efforts will gain steam, even as he prepares to step down this fall. One Chinese Communist Party member told the Financial Times:

“The fundamental problem is that there are no real rules in this country. The party makes the laws but then says it and its members are not subject to them. This is unsustainable.”

Corruption makes the world go ‘round, but nowhere as much as it does in China.

Meanwhile, Gu Kailal confessed to police that she was in the room when Neil Heywood was poisoned, according to an account given to American diplomats. Heywood was evidently held down in a hotel room in Chongqing and forced to drink cyanide. He first spat it out and they had to give him more. [Irish Independent]

As to the phone tapping, surveillance is rampant these days in China and the politicos don’t know who to trust anymore.

And now we have the case of blind legal activist Chen Guangcheng, who fled house arrest in his rural Chinese village and is said to be under the protection of U.S. officials. I don’t have enough details as yet but high-level talks between the countries concerning his fate are now underway, just as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other top officials are due in China this week for the latest round of the Strategic and Economic Dialogue. Talk about a huge issue for the Obama administration. This comes just as the White House is seeking China’s cooperation on a slew of hot spots, including North Korea, Iran and Syria.

Pakistan: The Supreme Court convicted Prime Minister Gilani on contempt for failing to revive a long-standing corruption investigation against President Zardari, though it opted not to sentence Gilani to a maximum six months in prison as allowed. However, he could yet be forced to step down, as opposition leaders now demand. As of this writing, Gilani will defend his right to stay in office, so say his people.  The high court itself could come back and disqualify the prime minister.

Separately, talks between the United States and Pakistan over the November American airstrikes that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers on the Afghan border ended in failure on Friday. Pakistan demands a full apology. The U.S. was prepared to bite the bullet and issue one but then came the April 15 attacks on Kabul and other Afghan cities directed by the Haqqani network, which has its main base in Pakistan. So for now, Pakistan won’t reopen NATO supply routes into Afghanistan that have been closed since the November incident. The Americans, in turn, are withholding at least $1.2 billion in military aid.

Meanwhile, Pakistan successfully tested an upgraded ballistic missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead, days after India conducted its own long-range test.

So we have the Agni-V (India’s latest) vs. the Shaheen-1A (Pakistan’s). India’s missile has a far longer range, but it’s intended to scare China, while Pakistan’s test was designed to intimidate India.

Afghanistan: The United States committed to defend Afghanistan militarily for 10 years after most foreign forces leave in 2014, though Afghanistan will be able to approve any American military operations after 2014 and the agreement bars the U.S. from using its soil to attack Pakistan, or any neighboring country where the Evil Doers have their bases. So I’m not so sure this agreement is worth a damn, but we’ll cross that bridge when we get to it. Issues such as funding, by the way, were left out for now, as well as the critical issue of permanent bases for the Americans.

Meanwhile, while the details are to be worked out shortly, it would be nice if President Obama would address the American people at some point on the topic.

Kosovo: Tensions surrounding neighbor Serbia’s parliamentary elections on May 6 have forced NATO to strengthen the mission in Kosovo by about 700 troops amid signs violence could flare up anew between ethnic Albanians and majority Serbs in northern Kosovo.

Russia: Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev virtually completed their job swap when Putin announced he would hand over control of his United Russia party to Medvedev when both trade positions on May 7. But Putin also has his All-Russia People’s Front, which he set up a year ago, while United Russia’s influence has been waning, though it retains a parliamentary majority. So it’s like, ‘Here, Dmitry, you take it!’

Ukraine: Jailed former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko declared a hunger strike on Tuesday after claiming she was assaulted by prison guards. In a statement, Tymoshenko said the guards “came to my bed, threw a sheet over me and started dragging me off the bed” when she refused to leave her cell for a medical checkup.

So that was Tuesday. Curiously, on Friday, a series of four bomb blasts went off in the eastern Ukrainian city of Dnipropetrovsk, injuring 27. Ukraine hosts the European soccer championships in June. But some say the “terror attack” was instigated by the government to deflect attention away from the Tymoshenko case.
And finally…

France: The first round of voting went pretty much as the final polls said it would, with Socialist Francois Hollande gaining 28.5% to President Nicolas Sarkozy’s 27%. The surprise was that National Front (FN by the French initials) candidate Marine Le Pen captured 18% in finishing third; a higher percentage for FN than her father, Jean-Marie, picked up in 2002 when he gained the run-off, only to get slaughtered by Jacques Chirac.

Sarkozy now desperately needs every one of Marine’s supporters if he is to have a chance in the run-off against Hollande, who will pick up the bulk of the supporters of the far-left’s Jean-Luc Melenchon (11%) and centrist Francois Bayrou (8%).

But there is zero sign that more than about 50% of the FN vote will go to Sarkozy, with many choosing just to abstain from the ballot out of their disgust for the guy, even if he has adopted many of the FN’s political platforms, particularly in terms of an anti-immigration stance. [Le Pen is also virulently anti-euro, not exactly where Sarkozy is.]

It was one year ago, May Day, that I witnessed Marine (and her father) in Paris for the National Front’s traditional speech, but this May Day, Tuesday, Le Pen has said she will tell her supporters how to vote, or not.

There are many in Europe, like Chancellor Merkel, who are most concerned about the far-right’s vote in France. I have expressed similar concerns over the years myself, concerning Europe overall, going back to Jorg Haider and his Freedom Party in Austria that picked up so much of the vote in 2000 (27%), he became a coalition partner in the government.

But I was early. I always said that Europe’s far-right would rise in force (but not majority status, mind you) when the economy tanked and of course that day is now. Whether the FN’s rise sets the stage for the rest of the continent, though, is highly debatable.

It would be disingenuous of me at the same time not to say I had done my homework on Le Pen before my trip, but it was pure luck I got to see her. Upon seizing the opportunity to witness history, however, I was indeed taken with Marine’s charisma. She’s only 43, and could be a player in France for decades to come…a legitimate player…a 20-percenter, and maybe then some.

Le Pen said on Sunday evening following the vote, “We have exploded the monopoly of the two parties. Whatever might happen in the 15 days to come, the battle for France is only beginning. Nothing will ever be the same again…The people of France have invited themselves to the table of the elite.”

The political junkie in me would love to be in Paris this Tuesday. I also hope security is much tighter than it was last year.

Meanwhile, wealthy French are preparing to leave in droves, fleeing for better tax situations in Belgium, Britain, and Switzerland, where individual rates may not be much better than France’s (under Hollande), but the treatment of capital gains and estates would be.

One thing is for sure; neither Hollande nor Sarkozy has addressed France’s real economic problems.
Bret Stephens / Wall Street Journal

“No candidate in the contest has suggested the country ought to attract foreign investment or nurture its native entrepreneurs. No candidate seems to think a tax cut – whether on consumers, producers or wage-earners – might be a good idea. Is France capable of nurturing a Steve Jobs or a Mark Zuckerberg? The idea seems to have crossed none of the candidates’ minds….

“Yet Americans should also take note that we aren’t so different from France, either: in our debt-to-GDP ratio, our employment rate, our credit rating. Above all, both in France and in America there’s a belief that, as exceptional nations, we are impervious to the forces that make other nations fall. It’s the conceit that, sooner or later, brings every great nation crashing to earth. “