Click below to listen to Dan's interviews with the authors!
In The Graveyard of Empires: America's War in Afghanistan - Seth G. Jones - W.W. Norton and Company
Peter Hopkirk's account of Afghanistan in "The Great Game" depicted a wild west wilderness that defied taming in the face of the two superpowers of the age- Britain and Russia. When reading the images of defiant warlords, century long tribal pacts and shifting alliances, one projects a sense that Afghanistan will never be unified, never come under the thumb of a central government, not without a fight from one or more ruling interests. Not much has changed in the last century or so that was the stage in Hopkirk's book.
Afghanistan remains fractionalized, as much with influences inside its border as without. Seth Jones analyzes the difficulties the U.S. faces in meeting its objectives in Afghanistan, starting with the Pentagons refusal to recognize, both in Afghanistan and Iraq, that the U.S. was facing an insurgency. Chapter 9 breaks down the logic of an insurgency and lays out the obstacles the U.S. has been facing for the last 8 years. Currently, President Obama is delaying sending more troops, pending the outcome of a presidential run-off. I think Obama senses Harmid Karzai's administration is losing the confidence of the people, which fuels the insurgency. The Karzai regime has never had much influence outside the urban areas. The rural areas(which is a bulk of the country) has been controlled by the insurgency, which is made up primarily of the Taliban and various tribal warlords, making one rural resident quip "in the day we see the government forces, at night we see the Taliban"(sounds a lot like Vietnam doesn't it?)
At one point during the height of the Soviet invasion of the 80's, they had 115,000 troops on the ground, far more than U.S. and NATO have contributed during this current campaign. In fact, Seth Jones points out that the peak international military and police presence per capita is one of the lowest in conflict/ post-conflict modern history. Are more troops the answer? Not necessarily.
Seth Jones analysis ties perfectly into the trio of books written by Thomas P.M. Barnett. Insurgencies are built on the backs of weak governance/corruption, weak infrastructure(utilities, roads, schools, etc,) and lack of security-which includes not only policing but faith in overall law enforcement and strong judicial and administrative execution and oversight. Kinetic operations(military) are needed in the early/short term portion of any modern day conflict; however, the long term backside is focused mainly on non-kinetics-infrastructure/security. Given the recent attitudes in the Pentagon and the Bush administration toward nation building, the facts presented in this book and Barnett's recent works, lay the groundwork for a recipe for failure. More troops? Maybe more "non-kinetic" forces in LARGE NUMBERS.
Many have written off Al Qaida's strength, but Jones' extensive interviews with many intelligence experts points to an organization that has mutated and strengthened after previous attempts to cripple and dismantle their infrastructure. With meddling influences from Iran, India and the protected areas in Pakistan, U.S. attempts to stabilize Afghanistan will be fruitless without simultaneous overtures to the entire region. This is one of several books that can give you an overall picture of the political landscape in this region.
--dd
Danny's Book Blog:
GUSHER OF LIES-THE DANGEROUS DELUSIONS OF ENERGY INDEPENDENCE-ROBERT BRYCE
Byrce makes a strong argument against a haphazard rush towards energy alternatives. He especially focuses on the "gold rush" glow emanating from the agricultural community and their political allies enamored with ethanol and systematically picks apart the supportive stance kernel by kernel. He roughly shucks their layered stance, starting with ethanol's heavy subsidies, ADM's heavy political influence and subsequent windfall and domination of the market, infrastructure and distribution problems, acreage demands, environmental impacts and more. He is not much kinder to cellulosic alternatives either.
He also tosses other energy alternatives into his shredder, including wind, coal to liquids, natural gas and in the meantime-solar. What are his solutions? Read the book, but John McCain's $3 million dollar challenge for someone to come up with an efficient battery solution is an incentive program he suggested.
Bryce lays out a strong case on why oil is still the most naturally efficient form of energy. Many of the claims in the book are disputed by author Robert Zubrin in his book "ENERGY VICTORY"(forthcoming) and Zubrin has debated Bryce in a national forum. I recommend Bryce's book as part of the national debate on the future of energy, but encourage reading other books and articles who bring up different points of view.
--dd
Click here to hear Dan's interview with Robert Bryce!
Danny's Book Blog
The Rise of the Global Civil Society by Don Eberly
Encounter Books
This book is actually part of the "War on Terror". This is the non-military component of the equation. Don spent time in USAID as well as senior adviser in Iraq for the state department. He has witnessed 1st hand how various agencies deal with a variety of humanitarian crises, and expounds on which methods are most effective from a cost analysis standpoint as they impact people.
World governments have spent billions of dollars towards alleviating various human conditions from poverty to post environmental disaster relief; post war aid and intervention; agricultural education; even basic education in confronting illiteracy, and hygienic related illnesses.
Don's analysis- top down, government heavy-handed approaches are virtually ineffective. The one size fits all model dreamed up by academics and officials, who lack, to use a military term, "boots on the ground" experience, often miss the mark. Don believes in the concept of micro-enterprising. It's basically the old "give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish he eats for a lifetime" adage. There are poor and struggling cultures around the world who need more than money-they need know-who. Basic agricultural solutions we take for granted; unique energy requirements that emerging technologies can address; basic infrastructure that can't be addressed from a drawing board in Washington; know-how on market flow to effectively bring their products to markets; basic technologies to help them do this( the cell phone is the number one tool for rural African farmers); help in addressing political climates that squelch their rights and opportunities; all need to be addressed by an ARMY(emphasis added) of workers and volunteers who operate "on location" to effectively address these issues.
If government and current NGO'S(non-governmental organizations) are too bureaucratic and top heavy to perform these functions effectively, than who does Eberly envision carrying out these functions? America is and has been the world leader in exporting compassion. Recently there has been a significant surge in global corporate governance that has not been reported on by the mainstream media. Companies you see routinely on the stock market "big boards", from technology giants like IBM and Microsoft, to major oil and energy producers to financial institutions have discovered a need and awareness of their role in this world to be good corporate citizens. They have sent money, and more importantly, manpower around the world to address on-the -spot solutions to third world and emerging markets. Using their unique talents and expertise, they are interacting directly with towns and people on the lowest level and applying direct solutions to problems. Some banks have even set up low cost direct micro loans to small businesses and farmers, by-passing government entities and top-down heavy NGO's who are often ripe with corruption and mis-management. There has been in emergence of sleeker and more specialized NGO's, lead by people retired form the private sector, working with corporations to implement these actions. Eberly has found that taking money straight to the bottom level is the most effective dollar-for-dollar investment for those in need, by-passing bureaucratic levels who skim and often mismanage money on the way down(could this work for education?)
The role of government is to help facilitate geo-political changes to help the poor and needy in emerging nations. This is dangerous territory because "regime change" is a dirty word these days and this is not what Eberly suggests; however, most of the challenges met by the poor and needy(food, basic necessities, resources) are not from a lack of availability, but from controlling autocratic or outright corrupt despotic regimes. This often puts our army of concerned volunteers in the cross hairs of an internal state struggle(witness Somalia in '93: Islamic warlords holding arms over piles of rotting food while people suffered). The imbalances of our world system is prey to power and control and not from a lack of resources and necessities.
What I glean from Don Eberly's book is a sense of positiveness. Americans on all levels are reaching out. We are the most giving nation on this planet.* You can listen to may attached interview with Don. Note the exchange about anti-Americanism in the middle east.
Danny's Book Blog:
A Great Improvisation: Franklin, France, and the Birth of America - Stacy Schiff
We should never treat history as something that's dull, drab and clinical, for many characters lie at the heart of the story lines. People possessed of all their charisma and foibles. One of the great characters replete with the many plumes of colorful complexity is Benjamin Franklin, a political and cultural chameleon who adroitly adapted to his surroundings.
Pulitzer Prize winning writer Stacy Schiff weaves the tale of eight significant years in the autumn of Franklin's life as part of a delegation to win political, and more importantly, financial support from France in their revolutionary endeavor against the British Crown. The mission was often complicated, often contentious between the members of the delegation - initially Franklin, Silas Deane and Arthur Lee - then later by such principles as future president John Adams, John Jay, William Lee and others. At one point, the riff escalated to the extreme, whereby John Adams wrote tetters home to Congress questioning Franklin's patriotism (Adams suggesting Franklin had become too enamored with the French lifestyle - more on that below) his infirmity and his motives. His letters were even read aloud with glee on the floor of Congress! Imagine THAT in this day of 24 hour news!
Franklin possessed a lust for life that enticed him, lured him into the fabric of other cultures with an unabashed gusto. First the British, then the French. Franklin immensely appreciated the French tradition of ceremony - from politics to the arts to tradition, and especially the romantic dance of wine, women and food.
An underlying subplot of clash between the cultures played on throughout the book - a difference between French and American cultures that still resonates today. The French are more about ceremony and appearance. One cannot appear too industrious and must maintain an air of indifference to the mundane humdrum of everyday business. Life is to be savored, flirted with passionately. The American delegations constant drumbeat towards their mission clashed with the French priorities of 'in due time' (but first some food and a little wine). The Americans (minus Franklin, of course) ridiculed the French as all show and ceremony, but little substance. The French chided the Americans for their Calvinistic, puritanical attitude towards work and life. The French believe you should be virtuous before you're married, flirtatious afterward. They think we have it backward. This difference in attitudes continues today - witness the disparity of reactions to the Clinton/Lewinsky affair.
Right now I am enamored with Revolutionary History. This book portrays the America overture to a supportive yet reticent French Government, not quite convinced of the rebels' commitment and capability to throw off the chains of British rule and equally worried that the rabid passions of revolution might spill backwards across the Atlantic to their shores. The American delegation kept their options open the entire time, while negotiating with the French, sending backwater overtures to the British for possible reconciliation and discussions on independence. There existed many interlocutors on both sides of the ocean, with various allegiances. Schiff weaves the plot wonderfully and captures one segment of the beginning moments of the birth of the American Experiment.
--dd
Danny's Book Blog:
*Don addresses the issue in our interview- why doesn't America get more credit for its efforts world wide, like our efforts in Indonesia after the tsunami?
Click here to hear Dan's interview with Don Eberly!
Danny's Book Blog:
RISING POWERS/SHRINKING PLANET-MICHAEL T. KLARE
Peter Hopkirk wrote about the "Great Game" that took place a couple of centuries ago centered on the outer reaches between Asia, Russia and the Middle East in what is described as the "other Stans". There is a new "Great Game" that is currently under way that includes the same region, but has expanded beyond to encompass the globe. The original game was a battle for regional power over trade routes and resources; the new game is a high stakes race over resources-specifically energy.
The game is high stakes because it puts the main players-China, India, Russia, the U.S.-on a collision course to obtain and control the energy resources to feed their own voracious power appetites. This rush to energy resources is potentially a dangerous scenario that will dominate the early decades of the 21st century, pitting competing alliances against one another in a geo-political and possibly military version of a real life game of RISK. The resources are finite and impact every being globally because of the ramifications of shortages and conflict to satiate increasing demand of rapidly burgeoning countries and populations. In the current state, there will be clear cut winners and losers.
Micheal T. Klare lays out the new game in detailed fashion, including the battle over infrastructure and distribution lines over land masses and through various countries;hence, the shifting alliances and courtship the super powers must conduct. Its not just oil, but natural gas, coal, uranium and a host of other vital minerals and resources necessary for energy production.
Nation/states and the powerful corporations they comprise, own 80% of the currently available oil and natural gas. That leaves U.S. and western companies scrambling over the remaining lot. They may have a seat at the game, but the rules are often written by the nation/states and not in the favor of independent western energy entities.
Klare analyzes each energy source and alternatives currently in use or being discussed but feels new technology is the answer for energy solutions. For instance, coal is in abundance in the U.S. and China, but with recent concerns over global warming and pollution, coal has been seen in a negative light. With the new technologies, including sequestration which traps harmful by-products and houses them deep within the earths surface, coal could power the U.S. for decades to come without harmful effects to the environment.
Most importantly, he emphasizes a commitment to cooperative alliances (U.S.-China, China-Japan, U.S.-China-Russia, U.S.-China-India-Russia) in a new vision to solve our energy problems together. It would be a paradigm shift from our current geo-political/military stance held by our sitting administration.
--dd
Click here to hear Dan's interview with Michael T. Klare!
Danny's Book Blog:
Terror and Consent: The Wars for the 21st Century - Philip Bobbitt (Knopf Publishing)
This is one of the most important and challenging books I have read. This is an educational text that looks at terrorism warfare that challenges us through the legal lens that defines us. For indeed, if America doesn't stand for "something", if America cannot be viewed upon by its citizens and the international community as the caretakers of defined principles that consenting citizens aspire to, then where is the "moral imperative" to define, fight and prosecute terrorism that threatens our lawful pursuit of freedom.
This is precisely the argument Bobbitt brings forth in his book. We are entering a new constitutional change, a structural shift in 20th century democracies and institutions. From a nation state(designed to protect and benefit the society at large) to market state(to protect and empower the individual in consumer choice in a global market). Terrorism has adapted to and embraced the aspects of this shift into a decentralized global threat-free agency if you will. The current paradigm, both domestically and internationally is outdated in its approach to execute a defense, or for that matter, an offense to changing threats.
The brilliance of Bobbitt's book is that it never loses sight of the rule of law and the constitution. In fact, it is woven throughout and provides the joining thread from chapter to chapter. If we are going to allow our intelligence and law enforcement agencies to seamlessly execute the war on terror domestically and internationally SIMULTANEOUSLY, as is needed, how does that conflict with our rights as citizens under the constitution? Where are the checks and balances of perceived abuse of power(electronic surveillance, search and seizure, extraordinary rendition, torture, etc,)? What about our defined sovereignty in the world order? Can new laws fit into the constraints of the constitution or will the constitution forever constrain our ability to fight the new face of terrorism in the 21st century?
Bobbitt suggests that the U.S. take the lead in writing the new law paradigm both domestically and internationally. He argues we are best equipped to do so. From laws pertaining to military engagement, constabulary forces and non-military interventions; prosecution, execution and definition of enemy forces and sources of terrorism; establishment of international criminal courts and the very structure of how we approach and execute the war on various levels; and our approach to the proliferation of WMD, bioterrorism and natural calamities that have the same debilitating effect as terrorism.
The new paradigm must be forward thinking to anticipate the ever morphing change in market state terrorism. Above all else, the new paradigm of laws must be flexible enough to foresee events that challenge the underlying structure of law itself, for two reasons: 1) so states of consent can communicate to its citizens and to each other the transparent laws protecting agreed upon principles of human rights and the lawful pursuit of these rights and states will transparently interact and execute the war on terrorism in a fair and clear cut manner(detaining enemy combatants, rules of habeas corpus, criminal proceedings, conventional and non-conventional military action. 2) to give states of consent the moral imperative to define who are terrorists and who are not and how under principled law we can prosecute and fight the war on terrorism and allow the world community opportunity to join a principled approach to terrorism and world challenges.
I thank Mr. Bobbitt for a well thought out and challenging text for 21st century problems.
--dd
