Michael Brenner is professor of international Affairs at the University of Pittsburgh and a Fellow of the Center on Transatlantic Relations at SAIS in Washington. He has published widely on American foreign policy, European politics and the Middle East. His recently has published a Study On Democracy Promotion & Islam, and a monograph, Fear & Dread In The Middle East, with the DUASA Institute and the Center for International Studies at the University of Pittsburgh. In addition to a number of books, Prof Brenner's articles have appeared in journals on both sides of the Atlantic, including: Internationale Politik, International Affairs, Relations Internationales, Survival, Europe's World, European Affairs, Foreign Policy, International Organization, World Politics and Comparative Politics. He has held previous teaching and research appointments at Harvard, MIT, Cornell, Stanford, the University of Texas at Austin, and the Brookings Institution. He also has served as an advisor to the United States Departments of State and Defense.
Lawrences of Arabia/Somalia/Afghanistan/Pakistan/Iran(?) That senior American policy-makers are actually pursuing such fanciful ideas is revealing of how disconnected from reality and good sense the whole Islamic Terrorism mania has become. A bit of history (the British sold out the locals whom Lawrence seduced - see the film), a bit of empathetic capacity to understand the minds of other peoples as other than objects for anthropolgical exploitation, and a bit of self awareness should dissolve these chimeras before the dawn of a new day. Indeed, all it would take to restore sanity is some slight reflection on our dismal performance everywhere… Read more
Even a sketchy attempt to address these issues would lead to a short disquisition. So here are a few stray thoughts. 1) American Muslim immigrants are far better integrated into American society than their British and French counterparts are over there. There simply is no comparison with Bradford or St. Denis. 2) It is easy to exaggerate the significance of the Somalis from Minnesota who went back to fight with Shabbab. Their targets were groups and peoples who were seen by these recent immigrants as threats to the homeland they ledt under duress. There were grounds for joining up with the Shabbab. After… Read more
Shane has put us on the spot by posing an unanswerable question. Unanswerable because the information is concealed as to what we have done and are doing with what effects. The tangible evidence in view is too scant to allow for even the most tenative judgments. More disconcerting, I suspect that the White House itself doesn't know; by White House in mean President Obama and General Jones. Most disconcerting, I do not believe that that any effort will be made by the White House to find out - for the compelling reason that it fears revelations of misdeeds that it may not… Read more
A calibrated campaign targeted on identifiable, tangible threats seems preferable to the kinds of massive, vaguely oriented – and counter productive – projects that we have pursued in Iraq. Afghanistan and Pakistan. To do so would follow the counsel of several counter terrorism professionals of senior rank in London and Paris. Treating the terrorism challenge as a police cum intelligence problem makes sense. We should recognize, though, that such a strategy is not self defining or straightforward in execution. Here’s why. 1. There are questions of legality. United States law prohibits assassination of foreign government leaders while leaving somewhat hazy… Read more
Sun Rise, Sun Set The sun rising in the East continues its ascent even while we distract ourselves in Iraq and Afghanistan. The shadows that it is casting over the international scene are visible nearly everywhere. Here at home, they noticeably darken the outlook for the country’s troubled financial prospects. The challenge to thinking through the full implications of China’s growing strength and confidence lies at once in its immensity and in its pervasive effects on all manner of international affairs. It makes sense to begin with the big picture. In historical perspective, there is reason to expect a… Read more
I am dubious about the assertion that there is a correlation between an organizational rearrangement of the State Department and either the quality of its advice or the amount of influence it has. Consider Iraq. Colin Powell oversaw the preparation of a comprehensive, detailed set of plans for the occupation of the country. By all available accounts, it was a superior piece of work. Nonetheless, it wound up in trash cans - literally in the case of the Pentagon where Donald Rumsfeld issued a fatwa against anyone in the building even reading it. What would make a difference today is… Read more
Treating National security policy-making as a just another sphere of celebrity culture is itself indicative of how deformed public discourse on serious matters has become. Hillary Clinton has contributed two things to analyze of critical issues abroad: (1) her advocacy of 'smart power' (evidently in apposition to the advocacy of stupid power); and (2) now, her dedication to "rethinking the nature of diplomacy and translating that vision into a revitalized State Department, one that approaches U.S. allies and rivals in ways that challenge long-held traditions. "Grand Project" - as the French say. So grand that it strains credulity how it can… Read more
I have no first-hand knowledge of Iran. I do not read Farsi. I do read a fair amount about current developments and occasionally speak with true experts. In this I am like the vast majority of those inside government and out who pronounce on Iranian affairs. With this avowal of relative ignorance, here are a few thoughts about attempts to interpret how internal Iranian politics may evolve. All predictions have wide confidence margins. That is one. This is due not only to fluid conditions, but also to the high importance of individual judgments and actions among political elites. Individuals count most at times of uncertainty… Read more
I am writing from Heidelberg at the end of a visit to Paris and Germany. The different responses to the Nobel award shed some light on what may be the reaction when it dawns on people that Obama is not the long awaited American messiah. The French reaction was the classic Gallic shrug - that expressive gesture that conveys indifference, bemusement, resignation or, occasionally, ´that´s nice but who cares.´ The Germans, by contrast, see a confirmation that Obama indeed could be the incarnation of all the American virtues. Their already high hopes have been further uplifted. Obviously, the inevitable… Read more
Paul's question is a tricky one since we are dealing with the intangibles of perceptions and their translation into behavior. Also, the effects are differentiated from country to country. I have limited first-hand knowledge of the Middle East. Mine is restricted to North Africa. A few thoughts. The Palestinian issue cuts much deeper there than do any of the other American actions in the Middle East. This despite geographical distance. That's one. The political class on the whole is waiting to see whether Obama’s actions are a clear break from the past. That's two. His rhetorical flourishes in Cairo was pleasing to hear… Read more
The White Houses’ approach to the combustible Palestinian issue was predicated on five assumptions. Each is fallacious. The key assumption is belief in the President’s ability to wrest from the Israeli leadership concessions of sufficient importance and scope as to lay the foundations for a durable settlement - that is one. Obama at first seemed prepared to invest considerable political capital and personal prestige in the effort. In fact, as we now know, he backed away from doing that – preferring the course of least resistance. Success, as he saw it, would require making his demands on the Israelis… Read more
James et al I am not aware of any hyper-partisanship on the issue of the American occupation of Iraq- much less the invasion. Nor was there much partisanship at all. Tthe Democrats performed their usual act of docile deference throughout. It was not until the 2006 Congressional election that one heard any criticiam whatsoever, criticism that was barely partisan at all but rather within the mainstream of an emerging policy debate. So I don't think the ascription of equivalent hyper-partisanship holds up under close scrutiny. Historical note: Barack Obama was quoted as saying in October, 2004 the following: "my only disagreement… Read more
James Kitfield has posed an intricate set of questions. A full issue of the NATIONAL JOURNAL would be needed to do justice to them. So, I propose simply to lay down a few analytical markers as I see them to help guide the discussion. The now abandoned Missile Shield does not work. That is one. The test results do not justify its deployment on purely technical grounds. A roughly 40% success ratio in a limited set of carefully controlled tests implies that it would have only a slight chance of intercepting a missile fired at a time of the originator’s choosing. An additional factor… Read more
9/11 was a unique event. The perpetrators were a transnational network without a national affiliation who used hijacked civilian aircraft to attack monumental buildings in the homeland of the world’s greatest power located across an ocean – and did so with devastating effect. To describe what happened is to evoke the audacity of the project and the intensity of the reaction. Any serious appraisal, therefore, must detach itself from the powerful emotions of fear and dread as well as the horrific imagery – to separate actuality from legend. INFERENCES The operation did not depend critically on a fixed location although facilitated… Read more
Permit me two further comments on the Afghan dilemma. I think them worth raising because they pertain to our other interventions in the Greater Middle East as well. One is the unstated notion that we have the intelligence and skills to manipulate the politics of foreign peoples to our advantage. The fallacy lies not just is the cavalier oversight of cultural and social complexities that, as several contributors have noted, characterize Afghanistan. Even more insidious is the subliminal belief that we are smarter, cleverer, just better than they. They are ‘they’ – we are Americans. A look at the recent record should disabuse us… Read more
AMERICA’S AFGHAN ELECTION The White House is upset by the Afghan election. Celebrated at first by Obama on the south lawn as a signal success marking the country’s progress on the road to democracy, it now looks like a monkey wrench thrown into the already stuttering engine of our mission there. The turn-out in Taliban intimidated areas was only about 10%. Voter fraud seems to have been endemic. And President Karzai, our wayward protégée, may be further weakened as a result. So Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke flies to Kabul for the umpteenth time and screams at Karzai that he should… Read more
I am struck by two features of the collective response to the battery of questions posed to us. The first is that we have not made much progress toward outlining the terms of a conscientious debate about the country’s grand strategy. Admittedly, that is not an undertaking that lends itself to an essay of a few hundred words. Still, it does not seem unreasonable to have gone further in offering broad stroke sketches of the lines along which we ought to be thinking. The other noteworthy feature is the preponderant view that the past three presidents have gotten it just about… Read more
Updated at 9:43 a.m. on Aug. 12. Prof Edward Luttwack has always been provocative at the intellectual level. He now has added crude polemic to his repertoire. A pity - since it at once conceals the occasional valid point (neither core American interests nor the shape of world affairs is being determined in Anbar Province or in the Hindu Kush) and tempts a quite unhelpful response in kind. Trying to avoid the latter, let me briefly note the gross errors in Luttwak's rant. 1. Iraq. Bush did not 'win the war' in Iraq. None of our objectives are close to being reached; the… Read more
In principle, there is a logical sequence in security planning that begins with the formulation of a grand design embracing a broad assessment of the nation’s position in the world, a prioritization of its interests, and an appraisal of policies for achieving them. The structure of military forces along with doctrines for guiding their possible deployments follows. It should be focused on threats derived from the overall foreign policy design. In practice, these sequenced connections were made with less than full rigor in process and with imperfect fit in substance. Still there usually were discernible intersections that reflected considered judgments… Read more
In responding to Paul's query re. 'The Clintons,' I think it helpful to reverse the sequence of the two phrases. Instead of "Bill Clinton's mission to North Korea, resulting in the release of the two U.S. journalists," I believe a more accurate statement is "Kim's decision to release the two U.S. journalists was conditioned on getting a big name to come to Pyongyong" for the sake of maximum publicity. Who bigger than the former American President. (Although cynics, knowing of Kim's love for Hollywood films, might have suggested Brooke Shields or Angelia Jolie. Perhaps it is the fact that… Read more
Colleagues, Paul has posed for us the vexed question of why the unharmonious sounds issuing from our senior foreign policy-makers. Our commitment to a Gulf security umbrella, attitudes toward Israeli threats to bomb Iran, the reset button on relations with Russia vs distaining it - dissonant voices are heard on all of them. One can form four hypotheses that conform to the facts as we know them. An unseemly pattern of uninhibited commentary due to lax discipline on the part of the White House. Obama may take too literally the notion that giving his subordinates a loose rein in expressing their views is a… Read more
Colleagues, Most every detached observer applauds the termination of the F-22 program. After all, it makes no sense to spend tens of billions on hugely expensive weapons that have little utility for the contingencies that are foreseen. Broader issues surround the F-22 affair, though, as indicated in Sydney Freedberg’s last set of questions. Daniel Goure has set us in the right direction. Since we cannot make sound decisions on either weapons systems or force deployments without placing them in a clearly delineated strategic context, formulating the latter is imperative. There is reason to question whether an adequate… Read more
In response to Shane Harris' questions: 1. I would be very surprised were Congress to undertake a serious ivestigation of any of the past transgressions. Neither the conviction nor the political courage is evident. One need only look at the list of proposed panelists for the commission Pelosi is putting together for this to be confirmed. Almost no heavyweights and no one at all we might even suspect of determination to do a searching investigation. Among the names indicated we find Fred Thompson of TV fame. 2. The Holder investigation will be self-limited. Obama has made it abundantly clear… Read more
Colleagues, I propose that we begin by sweeping aside the rubbish cluttering the electronic ether on this issue, an accumulation equal parts litter from the Langley fabricators and regurgitations from a slothful press. What we know seems to be the following: The CIA, as commanded by Dick Cheney, was designing a wide-ranging program to liquidate persons who they judge hostile to the United States in terms of some loosely defined terrorist connection. The Agency for decades has taken considerable license in doing just that with other reference points under a Presidential directive (see Tim Weiner’s Legacy of Ashes). Let’s also… Read more
I just ran across this from that famed strategist Lao TZU: "If a ruler behaves as if he invented the world, He will do no good at all; The earth is a sacred vessel vessel - and it cannot be owned; If you try to possess it, you will destroy it; If you try to hold onto it - you will lose it." Or, in current American venacular, maybe it's time for our masters in Washington 'to chill out' cheers, Michael Brenner … Read more
The terms of much (most?) coverage of leftist trends in parts of Latin America is redolent of the Cold War era. There were bad guys (anyone who didn't curry favor with the United States and/or declared himself 'a socialist') and the good guys (anyone who did the former and didn't do the latter). The consequence was a string of interventions, military & political, direct & indirect, which had no bearing on America's strategic confrontation with the Soviet Union but did keep/place in power various rightest elements - several repressive autocrats. Today. the war on communism is over. The war on terror… Read more
It is exceeding difficulty to pronounce on these issues for three reasons: the "War' was multiform since we faced several armed opponents; and it was being fought as much at the political level as the military level; and, finally, the aims and purposes of the intervention shifted constantly. How we define 'end' and 'success,' therefore, remains fluid. Permit me the unconventional response of drawing a picture of what Iraq will look like in five years time, and each of us can assess its likelihood what that scenario would mean in terms of answers to the questions posed. Here is my vision of Baghdad, New Year's… Read more
A major world event such as the ‘coup d’etat’ in Tehran.is sure to provoke a flood of commentary. Iran’s prominence in America’s strategic field of vision is the main reason. In truth, so too is our lack of inhibition in pronouncing on matters of which we know next to nothing and understand less. I suggest that the discourse on Iran, especially Washington’s policy toward that benighted country, begin with a prudential recognition of that uncomfortable truth – that is one. After all, if Moussavi and Rafsanjani themselves had only an inkling of what was afoot, and today seem to be… Read more
Colleagues, There is another aspect to the deterrence issue: the utility of a rudimentary nuclear arsenal for deterring a superior conventionally armed enemy. NATO struggled for decades with how to operationalize a first use doctrine to deter the Kremlin from exploiting the strength of the Red Army. Fear of an Arab onslaught is why Israel developed nuclear weapons and why its nuclear force was activated by Golda Mieir in 1973. It is surely one motive that explains the Iranian interest. If anyone of us was a policy advisor in Tehran with the United States' forces grouped around it at all points of the compass,… Read more
Colleagues, There is another dimension of the deterrence issue: the utility of a rudimentary nuclear arsenal to deter a superior conventionally armed opponent. That was question bedeviled NATO straegic planners for decades as we struggled to bring the nuclear factor into play to offset the Redy… Read more
Colleagues, Permit me to add a few words about the Vietnam-Iraq comparison - if it's not too late or against the rules. I'm writing from Paris where there is active interest in the comparison and some insight into the revealing differences - and one dismaying similarity. As to differences: Vietnam had no strategic significance whatsoever. Whatever was done there, or might have been done, changed nothing of global geopolitical/idological importance. That was clear by 1985, not 1991. Iraq has had, and will continue to have, very serious negative implications for the region and for the United States' standing in the world. As… Read more
Colleagues, A number of commentqtors view Iraq through a glass darkly; fewer so view Afghanistan. Both episodes, seen through an even darker lens, mark out a broader national tragedy. Since 9/11 the US has embarked on a global campaign not only to eliminate all those elemnets who threaten us but also all those who are hostile to us. Barack Obama has reiterated that. The implication, and the ulterior motive for the Bush people, is thtat national interests require the establising a world order according to American specifications and overseen by us, i.e;an American hegemonyy. To date, it has produced only failure for us… Read more
Seems that we were pretty much on the mark in our expectations, except for one or two surprisingly (to me, anyway) candid admissions (e.g. Mossadegh affair). It was eloquent and earnest in tone – as are all of Obama’s public declarations. Let us not be churlish, attitude and mood do count even if actions alone are the sufficient factor that determines outcomes. A dispassionate listener, though, would find it hard to reconcile the principles and high mindedness enunciated with just about everything we have been doing, and continue to do, in the Islamic world. Even leaving aside military actions, consider Obama’s subtle disquisition… Read more
Colleagues, Whatever words Obama utters likely will have only transitory effect in themselves. They must carry a credible commitment to action; they must be followed by concrete changes in what the United States has been doing in the Islamic world. Too many in Washington and its environs suffer from the delusion that hostility toward the United States stems from misunderstandings, especially about our goodwill toward Muslims. This is a convenient delusion. Indications suggest that Obama will stress his own respect for, and sympathies with the believers in Allah. That could produce an up-tick in the public opinion polls – little more. … Read more
Honesty is the crucial element for a mature discourse on the intricate and multi-layered issues raised by Guatanamo and related matters. Deep emotions and manipulative politics have stood in the way of candid, dispassionate analysis. That remains the case, unfortunately. Barack Obama’s speech last week advanced the cause of truth telling only in part. Indeed, in some important respects it perpetuated our collective failure to come to grips with what we have done and what we should do. So I ask the indulgence of forum participants as I try with unvarnished frankness to frame the issues of analysis and policy as I see them.… Read more
Nancy Pelosi's role in the torture drama has been minor - that is one. Congress' self-abnegation on the issue is notable due to its nominal constitutional and statutory responsibilities; still, it is only one element in the tacit complicity of every other element of American society - that is two. This cravenly irresponsible behavior has been pronounced in regard to other aspects of the 'war on terror,' e.g. illegal surveillance and intrusion on the privacy of citizens - that is three. This conforms to a pattern that now covers as well the absence of any serious debate about the escalation… Read more
Drawing up a scorecard of winners and losers from the financial crisis and the resulting global economic downturn is relatively easy if we concentrate on straightforward economic effects, and if we think of them in the short term. Political ramifications, especially over the longer term, are more difficult to calculate. Some losers by both measures are readily identifiable, though. Oil exporting countries head the list: e.g. Russia, Iran, Iraq, the Gulf states, and Venezuela. All are suffering a sharp drop in revenues as oil prices have fallen precipitously from $160 a barrel last summer to around $45 today. Russia, the… Read more
FEARFUL AMERICA TORTURES There is compelling reason to undertake a rigorous investigation of torture American style. For our recent experience is neither an isolated event nor explicable solely in terms of bad judgment by a coterie of policy makers. It grew out of the national psychology post-9/11. That psychology remains prevalent. That is why we need a deliberate process of purification. It should be undertaken by a non-partisan commission – by no means a bi-partisan commission. Let us recall the serious flaws in the conduct of the 9/11 Commission. It was a b-partisan whitewash in some important respects. Staff… Read more
Related Link: http://www.pitt.edu/~mbren
