The Long Wait is (Almost) Over

This country and the world has not suffered from a lack of discussion of the 2008 presidential election. In fact, news commentators report the lamentations of many Americans who feel this election has gone on long enough. Is a 1.5-2-year referendum on the leadership of the most powerful nation in the world too long? I would argue that the stakes are so high, and the opportunities so great, that the length of this election is an organic product of America’s powerful position in the world. The opposition Democratic party saw an opportunity open in 2006 with seemingly poor performance in Iraq and Afghanistan;  whether or not this was true, it was a powerful message that hampered the Republican party’s chances to pass the torch to a chosen successor.

The realities of power politics are front and center in this election. Whether consciously or unconsciously, Americans are affected by a perceived reduction of American power abroad. An Economist.com poll shows global popular opinion and can be construed as a backlash from Bush’s foreign policy. Senator Obama’s message of domestic change is thought to translate into foreign policy change, or, as on some bi-lateral issues, a reversal of past policies.

If the American electorate is a rational actor, changing its collective mind of over 200 million eligible voters with a complicated arguement against the policies of the past 8 years requires time but they are fully engaged. Elections cycles measured in years do not happen unless people want them to happen.

U.S. Special Forces Strike in Syria

Just tonight I heard that a U.S. Special Forces team crossed into Syria to conduct a raid on a small town near the Syrian/Iraq border. Major General John Kelly states in the AP article that there were concerns with border security and the free flow of militants across the border into Iraq. The article also mentions that the U.S. believes that militant networks from North Africa are funneling fighters to Syria for their trip into Iraq. BBC is reporting that Syrian officials are saying that the U.S. should have used proper channels before attacking a civilian target. BBC also reports that American officials aren’t responding. Video is available.

21st Century Pirates

Imagine these guys with tanks.

In the past two months, Somalia’s pirates have made the news with a spectacular hijacking of a cargo of Russian tanks on its way to Sudan. Another ship was boarded carrying “minerals,” which later made the hijackers and their families sick. The Gulf of Aden creates a perfect geographical funnel to a choke point called the Bab el Mandeb that links it to the Red Sea. So, opportunities abound from unprotected traffic. BBC reported today that some of the pirates use a sophisticated intelligence network to determine the most valuable (and presumably most vulnerable) ships from the millions of tons that pass through that area per year. Piracy does not get this sophisticated overnight so some enterprising person or group planned on making lots of money.

Major powers have navies for just this sort of security. The 18th and 19th centuries naval powers justified their massive expenditures in response to growing international commerce. Merchants needed safe passage, especially at these choke points. What does it mean that piracy groups can operate this freely in a passage that connects Western economies with Asia? Are they that good or this just too small an issue for navies of the world to take note?