Politics – Page 58 – Public Intelligence Blog

Has Some Real Gems, Documents Authors' Bad Points as Well,

January 17, 2004

David Frum

There are some real gems in this book. The authors:1) Document the split between the hard-line neo-conservatives who have captured the mind of 43, and their growing (and increasingly public) disrespect for 41 and for General Brent Scowcroft and Secretary of State and former General Colin Powell.

2) Are correct in their condemnation of the Clinton national security team for being weak and incompetent. Any Democratic candidate foolish enough to appoint such individuals as their advisors is not smart enough to beat 43.

3) Make it clear that the top priority for neo-conservatives in the war on terrorism is not overseas action, but the implementation of a national identification card system here at home.

4) Are correct in their condemnation of US-based Muslim charities and clerics (and FBI agents of the Muslim faith) unwilling to speak out against Islamic radicalization and those who recommend jihad in America, abusing our freedom of speech. They are also correct when they propose to end all tax exemptions and breaks for those that fail to condemn terrorism and fatwas against Americans.

5) Are correct when they point out that the trillions of dollars we have spent on national intelligence have resulted in a vacuum on both Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, and a lack of knowledge about terrorist financing.

6) They are correct when they emphasize the importance of funding the education and elevation of women into power within Islamic societies.

7) Are correct when they point out that with the exception of Jordan, no Arab country has been willing to give Palestinians a break–no access to schools, ownership of land, or passports. Lebanon, they say, forbids Palestinians from 72 professions.

8) Are correct when they point out that we are “fighting the war on terror with the same people and the same bureaucracies that so conspicuously failed us on 9/11.” They are especially powerful when they criticize the CIA for failing to collect, read, translate, or understand the openly published writings of Khomeini during the Carter years–CIA is operating on perhaps 2% of the available global knowledge because it obsesses on spying and disrespects open sources of information in 29 languages–something Herb Meyer understood when he was Special Assistant to then DCI Bill Casey.

8) Are correct when they characterize the US Army specifically, and the entire US military generally, as “forces of the past, built to counter threats that no longer exist.”

9) Are correct to emphasize how the U.S. Government as a whole is completely fragmented and lacking in an inter-agency management and coordination structure that both Kissinger and Rubin have suggested is urgently required to keep pace with the threats and demands of the modern world.

10) Are correct to slam the FBI for being incompetent at counter-intelligence, and to call for a new national homeland security agency reporting to the secretary for homeland security. They do however overlook the equal importance of funding state and local intelligence centers and counterintelligence personnel.

11) Are correct to emphasize that US free trade agreements with various nations should demand that the nations sign the same agreement with one another (e.g. in South Asia).

12) Are correct to point out that the United Nations and its focus on “armed attack” is completely out-dated, and that America should increase and sustain its support to the UN only on condition that the UN modernize both its by-laws and its operating procedures.

13) Are correct to propose that national security funding should rise to 5% of the national budget, up from 3%, but they fail to understand that modern warfare requires co-equal funding for non-military sources of power including massive preventive *peace* operations.

There is, then, a great deal of good in this book. It is, however, also full of a great deal of crap. It has no footnotes, no bibliography, no index, and a great deal of either badly researched material or plain disinformation. They misrepresent or ignore a number of very important facts. On page 24, for example, they discuss the debriefing of Hussein's son-in-law, defector Hussein Kamel, and fail to mention that he told us all the stocks had been destroyed, and only the cookbooks remained. Throughout the book, while lambasting CIA for not knowing (half true), they decline to discuss the unethical and unprofessional manner in which the neo-cons not only shut out the professionals from the Iraq war deliberations, but cherry-picked and fabricated information to mislead the president as well as the American people. On page 32 and again on page 35 they lie when they say that Iraq was “one of the leading sponsors of terrorism in the region.” On various pages they gloss over the fact that Chalabi was both a thief and a liar, fired by CIA for stealing millions from covert funds, and ultimately found by CIA to be fabricating translations to deceive the US military intelligence people. On pages 45-46 they repeat the long proven lie about Mohammed Atta meeting an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague. Not only has the FBI determined that Atta was in Florida at the time, but Vaclav Havel, former President of Czechoslovakia, recently honored by President Bush, has repeatedly stated this did not happen. On page 155, they deliberately avoid mentioning that it was Rumsfeld who allowed 3000 Taliban and Al Qaeda leaders to escape by approving a Pakistani air evacuation operation that went on all night. Rumsfeld's naiveté and ignorance cost us the chance to nail Bin Laden early on. There are many other points where the facts differ from their representations.

The book does *not* offer a true strategy for the future of American security or even the near-term war on terrorism. It is largely a baloney justification for the war on Iraq. It fails to acknowledge that unilateralist American behavior is spawning more terrorists than we are catching. On balance, this book is worth reading to understand both the good and the bad of the neo-conservative viewpoint.

2004/01/172009/12/04

Review: Winning Modern Wars–Iraq, Terrorism, and the American Empire

5 Star, Executive (Partisan Failure, Reform), Military & Pentagon Power, Politics, Power (Pathologies & Utilization), Strategy, War & Face of Battle

Ideal Primer for General Public, Satisfying on Key Points,

January 17, 2004

Wesley K. Clark

Much of this book is a blow-by-blow account of the recent US invasion of Iraq, with generally complementary comments about the performance of the US military.National security professionals will have every reason to skim most of the book, but they would be very unwise if they failed to read it. On balance, the author comes out as the only Presidential candidate who actually has deep experience in modern war, in managing very large complex coalition operations, and in handling the nuances (Bush has said he does not do nuances) of complex European relationships such as characterized his tenure as commander-in-chief of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, during which time NATO dramatically expanded to embrace the Eastern European (Partnership for Peace) nations and the Mediterranean Dialog nations.

A few key points on the author's perspectives that satisfied me:

1) He understands that reconstruction cannot be successful unless internal security, stability, and legitimacy are established first.

2) He emphasizes the urgency of operating with other nations in strong alliances, not only to be successful in unilateral operations, but in avoiding competing crises elsewhere.

3) He is very critical of the manner in which the Bush Administration represses participatory democratic discussion of the threat and the new strategy. America was “shut out” from both the facts and the discussion in the path to war on Iraq.

4) He is sensitive to the enormous damage that America's arrogance (as reflected in the actions being done “in our name”) is doing to our interests abroad. He notes, interestingly, that there is a huge difference between the messages carried by the US versus the international media (and implicitly, in our public's unawareness of that difference).

5) He is accurate and insightful in expressing concern about two simultaneous failures of the Bush Administration: first, failing to prosecute the war on terror instead of the sideshow in Iraq, and second, failing to actually make America any safer here at home.

6) He helps explain how the Bush Administration got off track by reminding us that missile defense, energy, and the Chinese incident with the US naval reconnaissance airplane all consumed the early months of the new Administration.

7) He provides useful perspective on the *considerable* challenges of terrorism that faced Germany (Baader-Meinhof), Italy (Red Brigades), Spain (ETA), England (IRA), Greece (November 17th group), Turkey (PKK), and other nations including Israel. He notes that these were defeated by constructive law enforcement campaigns, not unilateral military invasions. I found this section of the book to be extraordinarily mature, worldly, and sensible.

8) His account of the early planning process for the war against Iraq (never mind the policy process that misled America) slams Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld for being disruptive and unprofessional, resulting in “an irregularly timed patchwork process that interspersed early-deploying units with those needed later, delayed mobilization, hampered training, and slowed overall deployments considerably.” One example: 4th Infantry Division spent 45 days at sea *after* they arrived.

9) He provides incisive commentary on the failure of both Turkey and Saudi Arabia to provide much needed ports and airheads for the war. [Although General Clark refrains from making this point, the best minds at the Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute have publicly noted that we won more as a result of Iraqi incompetence than US effectiveness.]

10) There are many small signs throughout the book that General Clark is a strategist. As one who feels that John Boyd is a hero whose work must be honored in our future deliberations, I was glad to see the author emphasize the value of leadership and training over technology.

11) The author corrects existing doctrine and advances the thinking by pointing out that the air supremacists were correct but not in the way they expected. Air versus C4I was not the decisive factor in the Iraq war, but rather air in support of ground forces, something the Air Force hates to do but the Marine Corps has always understood.

12) On page 79 he discusses how a B-1 bomber was dispatched to attack a reported place where Saddam Hussein might be, unleashing two 2,000 lb. bombs. This is so sadly a repeat of the Afghan story, where a B-2 bomber was called in against 18 men in a cave, that we want to highlight it. We have a heavy metal military unsuited for manhunts or gang warfare.

13) If there is one weakness in this book, it is that it glosses over the many information and intelligence deficiencies that characterized the planning process, the operational campaign, and the post-war peace and reconstruction endeavor.

The author does not fail to give the current Administration and its operational arms (including intelligence) credit for successes against terrorism in 2002 (incidents fell by half, key people killed and captured). This is appropriate, and provides a good lead-in to his very detailed critique of how we are failing in the war on terrorism, the second half of his book. This can be generally summed up, in his words, with “We needed new thinking, and we needed to retarget our intelligence and adjust our means…” What I find most fascinating about the second half of the book is that the author is clearly charting a sensible course that is equi-distant from the incompetent neglect of the Clinton Administration, and the lunatic militarism of the Bush Administration. He makes specific reference to the now-public plans of Rumsfeld and his aids to follow up the attack on Iraq with attacks on Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia, and Sudan. This is what we have to look forward to if there is a second Bush Administration.

The author provides enough in the way of specifics (buying in, for example, with an explicit reference) to Joe Nye's views on the importance of using soft power in the context of multinational strategies for peace) to be very reassuring that his national security strategy, once fully developed, would be summed up with one word: balanced.

2004/01/012009/12/04

Review: Had Enough? A Handbook for Fighting Back

4 Star, Politics

Elegant, Missing Some Pieces, Great Bridge to the Future,

January 1, 2004

James Carville

Edit of 21 Dec 07 to add links.

Having reviewed, with appreciation, a number of the books that lambaste the extremist Republican carpetbaggers now in the White House (I am myself a moderate Republican who feels betrayed), I can say here that James Carville has done very, very well. He is vastly more elegant and politically focused than Al Franken, Jim Hightower, or Michael Moore, and dramatically easier to read than Paul Krugman, Matthew Crenson & Benjamin Ginsberg, or the cultural creative/new progressive/radical center readings (see Steele's List on Democracy & the Republic).

Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right
Thieves in High Places: They've Stolen Our Country and It's Time to Take It Back
Dude, Where's My Country?
Peddling Prosperity: Economic Sense and Nonsense in an Age of Diminished Expectations
Downsizing Democracy: How America Sidelined Its Citizens and Privatized Its Public
We the People: An Introduction to American Politics, Sixth Shorter Edition

This is a double-spaced book with big print and small pages, but it does the job. James Carville may be a ragin' Cajun with a smart mouth and a weak bladder (read the book) but he clearly has three things going for him: a brain that is in gear before he talks or writes; good friends strong on both policy and research; and a gift for cutting to the chase. Where I would want to have five of my author-advisors putting together a 1 page summary and 5 page detailed review for each of the key policy areas, Carville manages to do in one book what none of the Democratic candidates–not Dean, not Gephardt–have done: he breaks George W. Bush's back with six strokes of the rod: 1) provide for the common defense (homeland insecurity, screwed up military and foreign policy); 2) provide for the general welfare (deficits and debts matter a lot, tax cuts are a huge lie); 3) secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and posterity (education, environment and energy, health care–and notice the emphasis in the Constitution on *posterity*, which is the opposite of carpet-bagging); 4) Establish justice (campaign finance reform, corporate governance, myth of tort reform); 5) insure domestic tranquility (why entitlements matter, notes on lying, the religious right, and friends); and finally, 6) form a more perfect union.

This is a quickie book, clearly tapping a multi-million person market for books that contain truth and oppose the impeachable activities of the extremists now looting America through their control of US government policy. It is a simplistic and imperfect book, but sufficient to persuade me that anyone who can muster 1000 brilliant experts covering the 250 critical policy and budget topics that must be mastered to win the general election, must, of necessity, have James Carville as the moderator and facilitator.

The book has several useful graphics, and among them two stand out: one on the changes in the opinion of billions of people around the world from before 9-11 to after three years of Bush in power; the other on the $980 billion–almost one trillion–in uncollected annual tax revenue from corporations that tell their stockholders one thing and the IRS another. I absolutely agree with this author that among our highest priorities must be our restoration of America as good neighbor and global friend to legitimate governments (that cuts out the 44 dictators still operating as looting pals of the Cheney-Bush-Perle regime); and the capture of the lost corporate revenue that could, with other savings, fully fund the most important national security investments: in our people, their health and education, and the restoration of legitimate democracy in America.

Perhaps most interestingly, Carville has avoided the rush to Dean that characterized myself and others who thought Dean would mature quickly and move from Amway parties to structured policy and outreach to all parties including moderate Republicans like myself. Carville cites George McGovern and Nancy Pelosi as special people, and I agree with the first. Pelosi has had her moments, but she has been a doormat in the anchor leg and I will never forgive her for taking impeachment off the table). He also highlights the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Citizens for Tax Justice as meriting special attention, and I only wish that George Soros has earmarked funds for these rather than for organizations that have been too quick to support Howard Dean and abandon a centrist non-partisan policy development position.

Buy this book. Read my other 435 or so reviews. And then, as Carville suggests, stop writing to your Senators and Representatives. Write instead to the editors of your local newspaper and start putting these people (Senators and Representatives) on the spot for betraying the public trust. Download the free NATO Open Source Intelligence Handbook (at oss.net or Google for it) and begin following Tom Atlee's concept for citizen wisdom councils. Take back the power, and don't wait for the Democrats to get their act together, it may be years.

2003/12/232009/12/04

Review: Al On America

5 Star, Biography & Memoirs, Culture, Research, Democracy, Politics

Leader with Specifics, with Dignity, with Persistence,

December 23, 2003

Reverend Al Sharpton

Edit of 21 Dec 02 to add comment and links.

New Comment: Oprah Winfrey has replaced Al Sharpton as the leader of black America, and while Barack Obama is a rising star and has already earned my vote, Al Sharpton is still, in my view, an essential voice and spirit. See links below for why.

Black Commentator noted in November that Al Sharpton has assumed the mantle of leadership for black America, and that it is highly likely that he will receive a majority of the black votes, at least in the South. For that reason alone, this book is *must reading* for every Democratic and non-Republican voter.

Below I summarize a few highlights from this rich book that took an afternoon to absorb:

1) Reverend Sharpton is strongest in his articulation of the hypocrisy of America, its lip service to slogans. I take him at face value when he speaks of the need to unite the country again around its values, and when he speaks of the emerging black/Latino coalition that resonates on the street level.

2) He lists some of his role models, and it merits comment that three of the four are pioneers of non-violence: Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela, and Mahatma Ghandi. Later on the in book Reverend Sharpton discusses James Brown and Adam Clayton Powell as length, and I found his account of their merits and his lessons drawn from them to be compelling and credible.

3) Fidel Castro comes in for special mention, as do Ronald Reagan and Minister Louis Frarakhan, and I have to give Reverend Sharpton very high marks for directness and accuracy. Others, those with less integrity, might have left Fidel Castro out for fear of the kind of unethical attacks it might unleash against him from the extremist Republicans. I for one agree with Reverend Sharpton, as I agree with his view that the embargo against Cuba should be ended immediately.

4) He is powerful and convincing when he addresses the prison-industrial complex, a complex as threatening to America's long-term security and prosperity as the more well known military-industrial complex. As he points out, prisons are big business, and politicians on pay-offs have every incentive to keep pumping out contracts for major construction and related services including guard employment.

5) Reverend Sharpton is intellectual and emotional dynamite when he describes the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) as an anti-Rainbow Coalition organization, and Bill Clinton (and by extension, Joe Lieberman) as rich boys eager to stay to the right and reap the benefits, rather than true Democrats committed to delivering people from poverty. In brief, Al Sharpton has to run for President precisely because neither the DLC nor Dean are unwilling to reach out to and represent black America in the truest sense of the word. On this basis, I see Ralph Nader's 2000 campaign in a different light–Nader was campaigning for those that the DLC had shut out of the Democratic Process, and Al Gore was too slow to understand that he was leaving a very big crowd out of the big tent.

6) Reverend Sharpton impresses me on the foreign policy front. Although his experience is limited to foreign travels and specific interviews, his intellect and his gut instincts are totally consistent with the 430+ books I have reviewed on national security and international relations. Reverend Sharpton gets it: America has made many deals with the devil, with dictators like Saddam Hussein, with terrorists like bin Laden, and the American people do not realize that 9-11 is in fact the beginning of payback for decades of official US hypocrisy in its international relations.

7) Although very short on the topic, in my special area of interest, intelligence qua spies and secrecy, I give Reverend Sharpton the highest marks. He is the only Democratic candidate to really understand that we need “an intelligence unit that would allow us to really know what's going on out there in the world.” Reverend Sharpton is also committed to allies, investments in nation-building, and strong relationships nurtured over time. He also understands that you cannot threaten those who are not afraid to die suicidally, and that whipping out a bigger gun against them is precisely the wrong thing to do.

8) He focuses correctly on the internal dynamics of America as its greatest area of vulnerability, as the area most in need of attention if America is to be strong and prosperous. He correctly notes that the 30 percent increase in the US military budget in 2002 was *not* about making America safer, but about buying all the things that could not be rationalized before, and at the expense of domestic priorities such as health and education.

9) There are several chapters that offer up specific lists of initiatives that he would support, across many policy areas, and I find them all sensible. This is a man I could work for and follow.

10) I am satisfied that he puts the Tawana Brawley matter to rest with a chapter.

11) His chapters on black leadership, Jessie Jackson, why anti-Semitism is strongest in the Billy Graham-Richard Nixon crowd, and how the hip-hop movement is both wrong to be obscene and yet a major power in waiting, a power that can mobilize youth toward a more Christian vision, are quite fascinating, words that are not to be found anywhere else.

Bottom line, and I say this with the utmost respect, being scornful of most beltway politicians and bandits: Al Sharpton may have baggage and be a spendthrift in some ways, but when all is said and done, his voice absolutely must be fully and consistently heard as America charts its course into the future. Like Pat Buchanan, Sam Nunn, and a few others great voices that may never be President, Rev Sharpton has a depth of intuition, understanding, and experience that he has ably articulated in this book. We need to read it and we need to ask for his views in all major future decisions bearing on the security and prosperity of American's core black community and constituency, a community and constituency that too often in the past has been over-shadowed by new immigrant communities–Asians and Hispanics, for example. America cannot be great if its black community is not itself great. Rev Shapton stamds for this.

I notice from the tags that those who do not like this review appear to be literate but ignorant whites. As Michael Moore notes, it is the whites that have done the most damage to our economy and our society, and in my view, the Wall Street whites have finally realized the error of their ways, and Reverend Sharpton's views will receive a more respectful hearing, especially if we can all come together to elect Barack Obama as President in 2008.

2003/12/072009/12/04

Review: Winning Back America

4 Star, Politics

Great Stuff for the Masses–Need Second Book for the Serious,

December 7, 2003

Howard Dean

Updated 21 Dec 07 with links.

I was one of the first “substance experts” to believed that Dean could and should be President, and I remain very upset with the Democratic Party for sabotaging his chances.

This is a great book for the masses who want the stump speech in a very easy to read doubled-spaced form. Unfortunately, it reflects zero understanding of the real world (see my 400+ reviews of non-fiction national security books at Amazon) and it reflects zero understanding of the core issues that need to be dealt with in the US economy (see my review posted today of Robert Rubin's “In An Uncertain World”).

I still believe in Dean, but if he does not get his policy and outreach acts together at the substantive level, but Dean and his campaign manager gave policy substance short-shrift, and this is important *not* because of the details, but because it must be the foundation for creating a coalition government that integrates Independents, moderate Republicans, Greens, Reforms, Libertarians, and “Drop-Outs” (where Barack Obama is making great gains in 2007) into a united electorate that will a) work together in the open and modified primaries to overcome the Democratic Leadership Council bias in favor of beltway “suits” and b) work together in the general election to defeat the well-fended and often illegal endeavors of the Republican extremists, who are *not* playing by the rules and who believe they have a God-given right to steal the 2004 election just as they stole the 2000 election.

This is a fine book for those who want a quick “read” on Dean as a man and potential leader. It does *not* fill the bill for a serious book about integrated policy issues and an executable sustainable budget that addresses the needs of the vast majority of Americans who are not represented by the incumbent President, nor for that matter by the incumbent Democratic and Republican Senators and Representatives that have chosen to give the incumbent President a blank check for over-turning 50 years progress in multilateral global security, environmental and labor protection, public health and education, and civil rights.

Dean has his heart in the right place, and this book documents that. Now we need to read about where his head is at, and that will take another book entirely.

2003/12/072009/12/04

Review: In an Uncertain World–Tough Choices from Wall Street to Washington

5 Star, Capitalism (Good & Bad), Economics, Politics

Solid Serious Overview of Core Economic Security Issues,

December 7, 2003

Robert E. Rubin

Edit of 22 Sep 08 to recognize that Rubin did not bail out Mexico, he bailed out Wall Street, and Paulson is about to rip the heart out of every American taxpayer in the boldest and most insane national treasury rip-off anyone on this planet could conceive of….we don't need a Wall Street bail-out, we need a complete recall of both the Executive and the Legislative leaderships–a fresh start. These pigs have destroyed the nation–see my new book, free online from 24 Sep, ELECTION 2008: Lipstick on the Pig.

Edit of 21 Dec 07 to recommend update and reissuance in collaboration with John Bogle, author of The Battle for the Soul of Capitalism: How the Financial System Underminded Social Ideals, Damaged Trust in the Markets, Robbed Investors of Trillions – and What to Do About It and a few others whose books are linked below.

Rubin is self-effacing and not at all, in any way, claiming personal credit for how well it went as America experienced one of its greatest economic booms, despite some rather scary international threats to our economic security. I believe this will be a classic reference for years to come.

1) Early on, and then throughout the book, Rubin does a fine job of documenting and explaining why markets, which are relatively autonomous beasts, and at least as important as governments and government policies, in setting the economic security environment.

2) A corollary to the above, but all the more important because it dovetails precisely with Henry Kissinger's caution (“Does America Need a Foreign Policy”), is Rubin's detailed articulation of how U.S. politics and US policy mechanisms are not now well-suited to coping with the new risks of the global economy. The speed and reach of the marketplace is now such that the industrial-era government bureaucracies and 1970's information technology stovepipes are completely inadequate–however well-intentioned a President might be, the current structure and current approaches to establishing economic strategies and policies are NOT OKAY.

3) Rubin is quite excellent in explaining in a very understandable manner how specific fiscal policies toward other states (e.g. Mexico) can be directly related to consequences in terms of illegal immigration (surging if Mexico is allowed to collapse), illegal drugs and crime, and trade.

4) Especially helpful in this book is its emphasis on the importance of educating the American public as a pre-requisite to the politics of making the right economic decisions for America. Rubin quotes Clinton as saying that one of his (President Clinton's) greatest lessons learned from his two-term Presidency was the need to do the public education (political strategy) before the public politics and deal-making. Senator David Boren (today President of the University of Oklahoma) and Mr. David Gergen have made this point earlier (“Preparing America's Foreign Policy for the 21st Century”), but Rubin's focus merits strong emphasis, because in combination, our mediocre policy structure and our mediocre public understanding combine to create not one but two devastating Achilles' heels for US economic security policy-making.

5) Rubin excels at documenting the direct relationship between poverty and inner-city distress and poor education of important segments of America's population, and its economic well-being. He extends this analysis internationally, focusing on how vital it is to extend the fruits of prosperity across all nations and peoples, if the US is itself to have sustainable economic stability and prosperity.

6) The book is a case study in decision-making, a manual of how to and how not to approach problems for which, as he notes with frequency, there are no certain outcomes. I was very impressed by his acute sensitivity to the fact that most subordinates are incapable of speaking utter truth to their bosses–they pull their punches. This is equally true, as he explicitly notes, of Chief Executive Officers invited to meet with the President. Rubin appears gifted in his ability to draw out the concerns and negatives from all subordinates, with a special kindness extended by him to the most junior or front-line subordinates, a kindness that is repaid in full with honest opinion.

7) I noticed some very strong observations from Rubin on the inability of the Department of State and of the Central Intelligence Agency to provide him with core information that he needed on Indonesia, among other fiscal hot spots. Lee Kuan Yew from Singapore turned out to be much more useful to him in understanding the context and possibilities. From this Rubin draws the lesson that the Department of State needs to get smarter about economics, and that a new kind of Foreign Service Officer is needed, one that is not just following political matters, but economic matters. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that State needs to migrate from the old POL-MIL mind-set, to a new POL-ECON mindset. CIA must of course get much better at understanding demography, public health, economics, and infrastructure issues down to the province and township letters, something that will require them to finally take Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) much more seriously, and to become competent in 29+ languages.

8) “Rubin's Rules”, actually prepared by his staff as a going-away gift when he departed Treasury, are listed on page 251, with an 11th rule on page 252, and are alone worth the price of the book. They will not be repeated here, they are precious.

9) Rubin is critical of the private sector for having over-invested in Third World ventures without doing the due diligence related to risk assessment, and he ventures into some discussion of the importance of defining and communicating best practices, codes and standards for debt management, bankruptcy, deposit insurance, and bank supervision. I could not help but reflect on how much more important the ISO might become if it also becomes central to economic security and stability by contributing a standards process that helps reduce and mitigate risk for all.

10) There are many other gems in this book, from his review of “deficit economics” (and why it is an idiot idea writ large), to how Monica Lewinsky cost the US taxpayer much more than the cost of the impeachment proceedings, to the need to always review old assumptions, to the dangerous reliance by Wall Street on models (as with Long-Term Capital Management failure), to the need to redefine GDP calculations (in addition to deducting negative investments like prisons and health care that others have recommended, Rubin suggests that the presence or absence of positive investments related to environmental sustainability need to be included).

This is a solid serious book about core economic security issues. I venture to say that no one could run for President, or be an effective President, without absorbing all that Robert E. Rubin has to teach us. His assistant author, Jacob Weisberg, is to be congratulated for helping bring this extraordinary work to the marketplace. We all benefit.

2003/11/302009/12/04

Review: Breaking the Real Axis of Evil–How to Oust the World’s Last Dictators by 2025

6 Star Top 10%, America (Anti-America), Congress (Failure, Reform), Diplomacy, Empire, Sorrows, Hubris, Blowback, Executive (Partisan Failure, Reform), Military & Pentagon Power, Philosophy, Politics, Power (Pathologies & Utilization), Strategy, Survival & Sustainment, Values, Ethics, Sustainable Evolution

Single Most Important Work of the Century for American Moral Diplomacy,

November 30, 2003

Mark Palmer

Edit of 21 Dec 07 to add links and new comment,

New Comment: In my view, this is the single most important work of the century with respect to American moral diplomacy. I note with concern that under Bush-Cheney “Failed States” have increased from 75 in 2005 to 177 in 2007. We've lost our mind, and our morals, as a Nation.

Ambassador Mark Palmer puts to rest all those generally unfair stereotypes of Foreign Service Officers as “cookie pushing” softies who fall in love with their host countries and blame America for any flaws in the bi-lateral relationship. With this book he provides an inspiring model for precisely what every Foreign Service Officer should aspire: to understand, to articulate, and then to implement very great goals that serve democracy and help extend the bounty of the American way of life–moral capitalism and shared wealth–to every corner of the world.

This is a detailed and practical book, not just visionary. It is useful and inspiring, not just a personal view. It is also a damning indictment of fifty years of US White House and Congressional politics, where in the name of anti-communism and cheap oil America–regardless of which party has been in power, has been willing to consort with the most despotic, ruthless, murderous regimes in the history of mankind. Still alive today and still very much “friends” of the U.S. Government are dictators that think nothing of murdering millions.

There has been some improvement, offset by an increase in partly free countries. From 69 countries not free at all in 1972 we now have 47. From 38 countries partly free in 1972 we now have 56, many of those remnants of the former Soviet Union. Free countries have nearly doubled from 43 to 89, but free and poor is quite a different thing from free and prosperous.

The level of detail and also of brevity in this book is quite satisfying. On the one hand, Ambassador Palmer provides ample and well-documented discussion of the state of the world, on the other he does not belabor the matter–his one to two-paragraph summative descriptions of each of the dictatorships is just enough, just right.

He distinguishes between Personalistic Dictatorships (20, now less Hussein in Iraq); Monarch Dictators (7, with Saudi Arabia being the first in class); Military Dictators (5, with US allies Sudan and Pakistan and 1 and 2 respectively); Communist Dictators (5); Dominant-Party Dictators (7); and lastly, Theocratic Dictators (1, Iran).

Ambassador Palmer makes several important points with this book, and I summarize them here: 1) conventional wisdom of the past has been flawed–we should not have sacrificed our ideals for convenience; 2) dictatorships produce inordinate amounts of collateral damage that threatens the West, from genocide and mass migrations to disease, famine, and crime; 3) there is a business case to be made for ending U.S. support for dictatorships, in that business can profit more from stable democratic regimes over the long-term; and lastly, 4) that the U.S. should sanction dictators, not their peoples, and we can begin by denying them and all their cronies visas for shopping expeditions in the US.

The book has an action agenda that is worthy, but much more important is the clear and present policy that Ambassador Palmer advocates, one that is consistent with American ideals as well as universal recognition of human rights. Ambassador Palmer's work, on the one hand, shows how hypocritical and unethical past Administrations have been–both Democratic and Republican–and on the other, he provides a clear basis for getting us back on track.

I agree with his proposition that we should have a new Undersecretary for Democracy, with two Assistant Secretaries, one responsible for voluntary democratic transitions, the other for dealing with recalcitrant dictators. Such an expansion of the Department of State would work well with a similar change in the Pentagon, with a new Undersecretary for Peacekeeping Operations and Complex Emergencies, my own idea.

This is a very fine book, and if it helps future Foreign Service Officers to understand that diplomacy is not just about “getting along” but about making very significant changes in the world at large, then Ambassador Palmer's work will be of lasting value to us all.

Forthcoming on Amazon in February and also free at OSS.Net/CIB:
COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE: Creating a Prosperous World at Peace, edited by Mark Tovey with a Foreword by Yochai Benkler and an Afterword by the Rt. Hon. Paul Martin, Prime Minister of Canada. I have high hopes for all of us finally getting it right (Winston Churchill: “The Americans always do the right thing, they just try everything else first.”) Now is our time to get it right. We can start by electing Senator Barack Obama as our forward-thinking always listening open-minded President.

Category: Politics

Review: An End to Evil–How to Win the War on Terror