Swiss Bankers Banned from Travel?

Although I am as frightened as the next person by the instability that this financial crisis has already inflicted and threatens to intensify, it’s sometimes difficult to contain my delight when something both unexpected and completely out of the ordinary occurs, especially when it is an event that would have been considered outside the realm of possibility one year ago. Imagine my reaction to a Financial Times headline announcing that “Swiss Banks Ban Overseas Travel Amid Global Crackdown on Secrecy”. Priceless. The article goes on to describe how Swiss bankers have been forbidden to travel to the United States, the bastion of freedom and democracy, because of, and I quote, “fear you will be taken in for questioning. I am thinking twice about going to America.” And there’s more! The article goes on to describe how a handful of Swiss banks are preventing their executives from traveling anywhere outside of Geneva, including other European countries such as France. Travel back in time about one year, and seriously just try to imagine how completely insane you would find anyone who seriously thought that Swiss bankers should be quaking in fear at the prospect of traveling through western Europe or into the United States. It would sound utterly ridiculous; yet today, it is no more than another story, quickly skimmed and passed over by countless readers. Although what piqued my interest was the prospect of Swiss bankers fearing the United States in a manner similar to how political activists fear authoritarian dictatorships, or terrorists fear leaving their hideaways in protective countries, it is relevant to note that this is a sign of the emergence of a bottom-up social force that is tired of what appears to be a system that rewards irresponsibility to the detriment of the majority. Large-scale social unrest and fear of the government is in the end no laughing matter, especially in developed, prosperous, democratic societies. Governments and citizens alike must remember the ideological foundations of our free and open societies, even when tempted to overstep boundaries or to act as vigilantes, respectively. I’m not in favor of physically attacking or detaining bankers, regardless of the magnitude of their crimes against society. As a citizen in a democracy, I trust that the rule of law will bring about justice. But that won’t stop me from smirking with repressed enjoyment at the thought of dozens of bankers unable to leave Switzerland for fear of detainment.

Economic Crisis: The Fragility of “Normalcy”

Although this past week screaming headlines about executive bonuses, plummeting markets, and massive job losses have graced the the front pages of the Financial Times, this Tuesday a smaller article below the fold caught my attention. This article described the resurgence of international bartering between governments of countries who are unable to secure credit. The article lists Russia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Morocco, North Korea, Cuba, Jordan, Syria, and Iran as involved in or discussing bartering deals for commodities and food, including rice, palm oil, machinery, and oil. The resurgence of this antiquated practice struck me more than any of the recent devastating financial news because to me, it demonstrates a large-scale departure from what we consider civilized international economic practices. Bartering represents the failure of money – a tangible concept that touches everyone, not just Wall Street Banks or savings accounts. It illustrates the possible failure of the entire system at its core, and highlights the very real uncertainty of what sort of international economic future we will face. As a student of international economics, I have been following the news about the crisis and have been struck by the superficiality of much of the coverage. While experts from every sphere of the economic world have been putting forth policy suggestions and describing the best ways to handle potential scenarios, I have been struck by the political unfeasibility of many of these plans. Each warns harshly against US protectionism, yet it already appears to be growing. It seems to me true attempts to make policy prescriptions for addressing the crisis should include this growing protectionist tendency rather than simply warn against it, because to do otherwise fails to take into account the political atmosphere. While experts debate the minutia of ideal economic stimuli, American citizens are closing their doors to free trade and governments are abandoning the foundation of commerce: currency. This strikes me as a dangerous disconnect and leaves me considering a single, nagging question. How fragile is the economy as we know it, and how quickly could basic foundations like currency wither away?

Thanks for the help, Zawahiri

Ayman al-Zawahiri’s recent portrayal of Barack Obama as a ‘house Negro’ and Jewish pawn highlights Al-Qaeda’s current state of anxiety. The election of America’s first multi-ethnic and internationalist president may deal a heavier blow to the group than have the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Al-Qaeda, despite the politically potent terrorism tag, exists and operates as an insurgency with a global reach and agenda. Insurgent groups rely heavily on propaganda-driven recruitment to sustain their existence and secure their safe havens. If Al-Qaeda loses this battle for hearts and minds, it will become less influential and effective in the coming years. This is all fairly straightforward to any student of international relations.

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?

Domestic Politics and Egypt’s Nuclear Restraint

Given the security landscape of the Middle East, Egypt was seen as a prime candidate for nuclear proliferation in the 1960s-70s. Yet, despite intermittent efforts to build a nuclear weapons capacity, Egypt has repeatedly shown nuclear restraint. Its failure to build the bomb remains a puzzle for proliferation experts and International Relations scholars. A more nuanced look into the domestic politics of Egypt, however, reveals a military with latent political power. This relationship, which developed through a series of actions taken in the run-up to and aftermath of the 1967 War, has compelled the political elite to block efforts to build a weapons capacity. In short, the domestic political decisions that were made under Nasser and Sadat have created a situation that induces the Egyptian regime to forego the nuclear weapons option while showering the military with incentives at the expense of the civilian population. What implications does this relationship have for Egyptian and regional security? Should U.S. policy be adjusted to reflect (or exploit) this cleavage in Egyptian civil-military relations?

Implications of Russian Energy Development – A Policy Brief

The Russian energy sector is characterized by a lack of upstream exploration and development in oil and gas. Outside investment and market penetration problems for foreign companies decrease gains from newer technology and reduce production.      Weak and ageing infrastructure prevents Russia from fully realizing potentialrevenue from productionand transportation of its oil and gas reserves to European countries. Russia would benefit from sharp increases in infrastructure investment and has many avenues toward turning an old, inefficient and unreliable distribution network and refining sector into a world leader in capabilities and responsiveness to demand.

Putin and Turkmenistan President Berdymukhammedov at a groundbreaking ceremony. (Russiajournal.com)

Weighing A World of Secrets: Assessing the Utility of Intelligence

The world of intelligence is a dark, shadowy realm that often eludes even astute outside observers. However, open source channels provide a window into this universe, which allows for the cost-benefit analysis of having a national intelligence community. The utilization of intelligence communities can certainly provide tremendous benefits to a regime, but it comes with significant drawbacks in the form of risks for both national and international affairs. Mitigating these risks is possible, but only to a limited extent.

(en.novayagazeta.ru)