Ideology versus Pragmatism

    Everyone professes to have trouble analyzing Vladimir Putin, current President of the Russian Federation.  Perhaps Christopher Hitchens had the best broad stroke guess when he said "KGB goon."   If that alienates Russians who admire the way Mr. Putin has led Russia during the past 14 years, then so be it.  There are many questions about Putin in regards to Ukraine.  Where is he and the Russian leadership going to go next?  How can they develop this situation into something positive over the long term?  The operation in Crimea, as opportunist as it was, was a master stroke.  If Russia could have stopped there, it should have.  An important geographic area to the Russian psyche was relatively secure with little effort.  What became very clear is that Russia tying itself to Russian nationalists in Ukraine was probably a mistake.  They are, by nature of being loose militias, going to be less disciplined and more unpredictable.  Much like the Serbian nationalist militias of the 90s, atrocities are quite possible.  So as much as making Ukraine into a frozen conflict could support a Russian narrative of an ideological battle, it is not a good idea.  Ukraine has gained much more visibility than Moldova and Transnistria.  Putin is fairly pragmatic.  In a way it is surprising to see him get as emotional as he does about Crimea.  He seems to be fairly astute at making decisions without a lot of ardor or passion.  The pragmatic step is going to be to distance the Kremlin from the passionate nationalism that itself inspired.  The consequence of not doing so means being identified with terrible acts, such as shooting down the commercial airliner, MH 17.

Proxy Wars and their Consequence

      Large, arms exporting nations such as Russia and the United States need to take care in where they decide to do business.  Each has sold arms in various proxy wars in the past, and continue to do so today.  The cost is real misery and a needless loss of life.
     During the Cold War, the United States sold arms to the mujaheddin in an effort to drive the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan.  The unintended result was that Islamic fundamentalists received arms and training.  The persons that later went on to form al-Qaeda or were inspired to form similar groups from this jihad.  Many had knowledge and training that was begat from this proxy war.
     The United States has shown less overt (thus shown) carelessness in selling arms in Syria.  In the past, such as it did in Afghanistan, in the 1980s, it may have shown more aggression and less caution.  Today, at least it seems by the public discussion, it seems much less inclined to sell arms that can later be used against it.  Russia has shown no such caution in Ukraine.  The pains of terrorism in Russian urban centers don't seem to be enough.  Thus what results of putting arms at the disposal of 'pro-Russian separatists' is the shooting down of commercial aircraft, such as Malaysian Airlines flight 17.  Could fighters in Ukraine covertly sponsored by Russia become a direct threat to Russian interests?  Some fighters may certainly gain experience and training in Russia that are later directly used against Russia.  If they later feel spurned or disillusioned they may want to form another Transnistria or semi-independent fiefdom.  They would have to respond to Russian pressure and forced sponsorship to do that.
    Not directly related to this subject, but interesting nonetheless, is the idea that the U.S. recent involvement in Afghanistan was actually a proxy war against Pakistan.  Fact or fiction?  Or both?

So What is a Shura?

   Credit goes to Wikipedia for a concise explanation.  'Shura' is the Arabic word for consultation.  It is mentioned in the Quran three times as a praiseworthy activity.  The point is that you hold a consultation with those that will be affected by that decision.  Often the term is used for forms of parliaments or congresses.  It links directly back to Afghan culture whereas shuras are held among tribes, ethnicities and regions on important matters affecting all.

    A tie in to each of the entities of this blog title does exist, interestingly enough.  In Persian and Dari in Afghanistan, the term شوروی, shuravi is used for 'Soviet' (the etymology being related to council). In Tajik language it is written Шӯравӣ.  Again, credit goes to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shura for this information.  It is somewhat disappointing to Google and not find a lot of substantive results for 'Shura.'  Perhaps its necessary to pick up a book first, and then Google in Arabic second.  It could be deeper in the search results, it could be more searchable in the news.  It would be interesting to study how they work and make a comparative analysis to western democratic institutions.

Cue, Routine and Reward

     A good book is "The Power of Habit" by Charles Duhigg.  The author describes how people, and animals in general, use routine on a much more regular basis than you might expect.  It is not a broad generalization to say that most of us operate daily on 1) cue, 2) routine, and 3) reward.  It saves brain power and it can make life more or less efficient.  Most people don't spend a lot of time deciding how to tie their shoes or brush their teeth.  It is a matter of habit and what you know.  You have a cue, say your untied shoe, the routine of ensuring it is tied properly, and finally a reward of perhaps getting to work on time.
     How does this apply on a large scale, in a macroeconomic sense?  Do international relations function in some way shape or form in this fashion?  Do whole societies and civilizations function on a cue, routine and reward?  It would seem so.  It starts in terms of internal affairs and priming a population on patriotism.  If the national anthem is played, you stand up, you remain silent and respectful and a reward you feel good about yourself.  You did the right thing.  Congratulations, you are officially a patriot.  A whole society can respond to outside stimuli or cues, enact a routine and receive a reward.  Russia is a strange duck in the sense that many nations around the world can't recognize or process what their own cues, routines and rewards could be.  It is simply not possible to project your own nation's routines on Russia, you must look at it from the inside out.  The fact is that the Russian world war experience is still out of the psychological reach of many.  Sovietologists never have to worry.  The fact is that they will always remain gainfully employed.

Donbas Stability Operations

    The Ukrainian federal government has reasserted authority in Donbas.  So what does that look like?  For one thing, it is a lot easier than in countries such as Afghanistan.  Wholesale chaos reigned in population centers of places like this for various reasons.  Ukraine is reasonably developed and does not necessarily require stability operations in accordance with U.S. Army field manual 3-07.  This is starting to sound like New Orleans after hurricane Katrina than Iraq after Operation Iraqi Freedom.
   The first thing that the federal government is doing is firing a lot of policemen.  It won't be necessary to train a whole new police force.  In theory hiring and training can probably be done in an inexpensive manner.  The second thing they are doing is taking a hard look at civil servants.  It is going to be important to determine who is necessary and why.  Not surprisingly, a lot of sick leave was used by government workers.  It seems like a good way to avoid the violence.   I am not sure if that job in the zoning office of Donetsk was worth dying for.
   A third thing I might recommend is going to be to get between the populace and some of those that  foment violence.  It is one thing to advocate unity with Russia.  Honestly, if you are an ethnic Russian it is the most natural thing in the world.  Yet disturbing the peace and committing crimes in the name of an illegitimate independence movement should be punished in the court system.  Donbas is one of the most populated regions in Ukraine.  It is important for the federal government to assert itself there, and primarily through law enforcement and civil services.  The military should be used only as a last resort.

Civil Society and Ukraine

     One of the laments of post-Sovietologists is the relative weakness of civil society in some former Soviet states.  Specifically, ones that support western ideals of freedom of the press, free speech in general, and a transparent government responsive to the people.  What is happening now is Ukraine is a greater flowering of such groups.  It is an open question whether more groups exist now than before the Euromaidan revolution.
     One site I found is http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/07/04/verified-ways-to-help-the-ukrainian-army/
     The purpose is to help the Ukrainian armed forces, yet it is so much more.  There are also ways to help the many refugees that are going to result from this armed conflict.  The displacement of people from their homeland is always a tragedy.  So much more so when considering how unnecessary any violence was in the first place.

Democratic Process tries to get a Toehold in Tribal Afghanistan

     Last Saturday, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry was able to broker a deal between the major Afghani presidential candidates.  Since the Afghan presidential election run-off in June, there had been an effective stalemate.  Adullah Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai had threatened to set up separate governments and in general the situation was quite tense.
    In a side note Harmid Karzai was not able to run for president again.  A fact for which many, many people were thankful because he was something of a nutcase.
    So this looks like a victory for those that support democratic processes.  The U.N. will audit the election results, including 8 million votes.  A decided winner would presumably form an inclusive government and not necessarily make it 'winner take all.'  Iraq serves as a poor example of what happens when one ethnic group conciously or unconciously occupies the whole seat of power in a federation.  Violence, rebellion and chaos as 'identity groups' seek some modicrum of power.  Either of out personal ambition of the leaders, or even a certain zeitgeist of the group that they are going to avoid genocide and holocaust.  For hundreds of years men have certainly showed that they are capable of that.  This is no phantom fear.
    If you look at each of these men, what do you see?  Abdullah Abullah is a 'reportedly' a persian speaking Tajik.  His stepfather was Pashto, so presumably he has been intermingled with other ethnic groups since an ealry age.  He was a close friend of Ahmad Shah Massoud, who was persian Tajik. Abullah did not accept the run-off results as legitimate.  Ashraf Ghani is commonly referred to by his first two names, since the last is the name of this tribe.  He is a Pashtun, and thought to be a leading intellectual in not only Afghanistan, but the world.  The U.S. does well to exert influence at this point between these two men.  As educated and worldly as each obviously are, they still stand as symbols of a diverse Afghan society.  Each part of this society need to remain intertwined and preferrably move towards interdependence.  The last thing that Afghanistan needs now is more ethnic fighting.

Ukrainian Civil War

       Many of us never would have not guessed we would see a civil war in Ukraine in our lifetime.  Much like the fall of the Berlin wall, the crumbling of the Communist bloc, the bitter war in the Balkans, there has been a failure of imagination and dread.
      No more.  I think the ones with the best analysis of the current situation tend to be those that have not studied the region for years.  Perhaps some objectivity is needed when approaching the crumbling of a nation state.  If you recognize that tribes and clans supersede national boundaries then you have little trouble understanding Libya, Syria, Iraq and now... Ukraine?
     Do such loyalties really come before the modern nation state system?  This is international relations theory according to Samuel Huntington and others.  However, his work as far as I know stops from scrutinizing  the Slavic regions apart from naming them as Slavic.  I still think the ancient past calls to us, and the fact that Vikings made their way down the Dnieper river and essentially established Kyiv counts for something.  What also counts is that there is a Donetsk clan as sure as there Shi'a muslims.  The difference counts when modern men use ancient traditions and ties for their own power plays and purposes.  It is what Viktor Yanukovich did in assuming the presidency, and it is what rebels in Donetsk are doing now.

Russia Rolls on with Mixed Signals from the West

     There are two sad facts and one interesting development.  What this makes for is United States and global policy towards Russia that is inconsistent.  It marks action towards Russia as perhaps symbolic and dedicated towards hurtful rhetoric as opposed to effective sanctions.

     One sad fact is that U.S. exports to Russia are increasing.  Even during the Ukraine crisis of 2014, they have increased.  Unfortunately, the number one export to Russia is exactly what they need.  Engines, pumps and machinery.  It would be great to say that the U.S. charges obscenely high prices, but even that would be of sorry consolation.  Russia gains a tremendous amount of currency from oil and arms sales.

     Another sad fact is that Russian arms exports are increasing.  Sales are approximately $5.6 billion for the first part of 2014.  Russia uses old Soviet designs and sells large amounts of arms to countries like India.  Questions may exist about the profitability of some industries.  However, even some immediate cash flow can help a business (or ultimately a country) today while it may not ultimately help that same entity tomorrow.

     The interesting development is that the U.S. has made John Tefft the next U.S. ambassador to Russia.  A career diplomat, he has at times served in Lithuania, as U.S. Ambassador in Georgia and as U.S Ambassador in Ukraine.  He was also Deputy Chief of Mission in Moscow.  This lesser known but important post is the person actually responsible for running all parts of the embassy.  Always respected, sometimes feared, they get things done and report as the #2 to the Ambassador.  It is also a welcome development that the U.S. will send someone that is critical of Russia.  However, protocol and diplomatic language have to be backed up with practical action to have long lasting substance.  Otherwise signals are mixed and relations are less than effective.

Tymoshenko and the Popularity of an All-Ukrainian Woman

   Yulia Tymoshenko was a quintessential leader and symbol of the Orange Revolution in Ukraine.  In 2004 she   Even now she is only 53, but granted in poor health after 2 1/2 years of prison.

   Most recently she ran for the office of president.  Yet she is not nearly as popular as she once was.  Why is this so?

    Yulia Tymoshenko's fortune stems from the early 90s in natural gas.  However, as state control was released on whole industries, if you knew someone on the inside you could most likely make a factory or entire natural resource rights effectively your personal property.  You too, could have been an oligarch.  It was a crazy time, and a person would effectively had to be somewhat crooked to take advantage of it.  People know this.

    Bickering during and after the 2004 Orange Revolution means  less progress was made.  People honestly voted for Victor Yanukovich in the next election for various reasons.  The fact that the participants in the Orange Revolution, including Yulia Tymoshenko, were mostly concerned about jockeying for power did not impress anyone.

    As the Ukrainian joke goes, Yulia Tymoshenko is actually the only real man in Ukrainian politics.  As the Euromaidan is rebuilt, we'll see if this remains true.


source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/ukraines-yulia-tymoshenko-back-on-stage-but-this-revolution-happened-without-her/2014/02/24/030d14bc-9d42-11e3-9ba6-800d1192d08b_story.html

Second Most Exported Item from Russia

      As you might guess, petroleum and petroleum products make up the leading exports from Russia. A mighty sixty three percent are petroleum.  This probably begs the question of what economic sanctions are most effective versus a petroleum  producers.  That actually sounds like another article.
     However, what may be of interest is what do they export most after that?  A bad guess would be manufactured goods.  While their armaments industy goes gangbusters, it is not as if they export a lot of cell phones or computers.  According to http://atlas.media.mit.edu/profile/country/rus/ , the second most exported item is technically coal briquettes.  Still very much fuel, so what comes after that?  Why semi-finished iron of course. 
      And so it goes.  The long list of Russia's exports are natural resources.  The fact is that this is an achilles heel, but it remains to be seen how weak of an achilles heel.  African nations have dealt with poverty issues stemming from being primarily natural resource rich.  Other nations will buy their natural resources cheaply and sell back finished and manufactured goods dearly.  So instead of politically based economic sanctions, isn't there a way to use market economics to encourage Russia to be a responsible member of the nation-state community?
      Also see:
http://www.businessinsider.com/russians-billions-old-weapons-2014-7?nr_email_referer=1&utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Business+Insider+Select&utm_campaign=BI+Select+%28Tuesday+Thursday%29+2014-07-08&utm_content=emailshare

The Important Question for Entrepreneurs

   I have a friend who advises entrepreneurs.  He does this because he likes it; it is part-time work at a university and not necessarily lucrative.  Thus, I thought he would be a good person to as a valuable question.  After many discussions with him about entrepreneurship, I heard him repeat over and over that one has to know their own markets.  Many people want to start a business but have no idea whether a market even exists for their business.  So slowly I realized that there is a key question that had to be answered.  One that is valuable perhaps in monetary terms but also in self-worth as you grow a successful business.

    How does one know what market demand exists?

    His response was something like as follows.  As matter of fact it was pretty darn close to this.  "Usually you start with an idea, and then you try to qualify the market. If it's retail, it's mostly location (zipcode) and demographics (including age, income, education, gender, religion, family situation, disability, profession, politics).  If it's business to business, it's the type of business and precise industry.  If you say 'healthcare' or 'IT' that is too vague.  the size of the business (revenue), and sometimes the location.  Competitive analysis is critical."

   "In most cases, entrepreneurs are better off starting in an area where they have expertise, or a strong personal interest. It's also good to start a business with a goal in terms of when you want to start it (now or in 2 years), and how much money you have set aside, and how long it's going to last."

  "I've advised more than a few of my clients (the younger ones) to start by getting hired by a similar business, so you get the inside story.  Don't look at it as a job, look at it as an investment in a learning experience that lowers your risks."

  I have heard other entrepreneurs say much the same about a job.  Basically, don't take one unless you are going to learn a skill.  I met a lovely young woman that has a university degree and is interested in international affairs and security issues.  Currently, she cleans hotel rooms.  We didn't quite get to a comfortable point in the conversation where I could grill her about what she is learning from the job.  I am of the belief that you could learn something from it, if you tried.  Attention to detail, what makes a good hotel room cleaning, what makes for a good cleaning crew, how you manage a hotel cleaning crew.  I wouldn't be terribly excited to do that work again myself (I have in the past) because I really don't like the hospitality industry.

  My friend closed with these questions:

"- What are you professionally really good at (non-military).

- Do you have a strong personal interest? Some like a hobby or politics, a strong ethical view of something you want to change, or some lifestyle desire."

Because if you are going to spend so much time working and not necessarily with your family, you might as well feel worthwhile.

Perhaps Russia Just Hit the High Water Mark

    Russia has perhaps ridden history to its latest crest.  A combination of military action by Ukraine, sanctions from the West on 'silovniki,' and general adaptation to its model of warfare could turn the tide.  All that is left is some sort of oil shock that could set Russia back in financial terms.  Unfortunately, it is clear that a Russia that is a decided and determined opponent to accepted Western values is here to stay.  Russia's power is going to ebb and flow, and we just seen the latest flow.  Now it has Crimea and can claim a relative victory in 20th century terms.
   Ukraine has mounted successful military operations against Sloviansk and the surrounding area.  It has right concentrated its efforts on restoring civil order.  Government buildings are to be restored to authorities and criminals should be punished.  It is difficult to say how bloody it will be to move against Donetsk.  Yet, the Ukrainian government has shown that such a restoration of order is possible, thus bolstering its legitimacy.
     

Financial Structure and Stability Matters

      It may very well be that the financial structure of a nation matters.  However, what happens when the economy of that nation is either too big or too laden with natural resources to fail?  Nothing in the short term, which may very well be three generations or 60 years.  In the case of the United States, a system laden with short cuts, bubbles and capitalist 'cheats' can be ably managed enough not to fail.  Only for the reason that there is no viable alternative, such is the legacy of Bretton Woods.  In the case of Russia, folks can discuss the curse of natural resources, yet it doesn't seem to slow 21st century Russia down.  It can act with impunity, if not smart impunity in the style of smart power.  If your 'near abroad' neighbors do not act the way you want them to, find a way around modern rules for elections and military aggression.  It is not had to do in a multi-polar world.  This is because of oil price shocks or not, your natural resources and economic ties will prevent others from taking any real action.

Maskirovka Ball

     A real issue for the security studies community will be how does invasion and occupation look in the 21st century.  Many believed terrorism to be the defining problem of the century, yet just over a decade later it is already receding to a degree.  What exists now are great powers willing to control and conquer lands through subterfuge.
     Why would you risk condemnation from the global community and probable sanctions if it is entirely unnecessary?  It is now possible to arm militias and send disguised professionals, all while denying any official involvement.  What Russia has developed is a model for other nations to follow.  The individual that planned the Crimea invasion will undoubtedly be promoted.  Russia gained a long coveted piece of real estate with little resistance or protest.
     If a nation is playing by the accepted rules and taking advantage of the loopholes, no nation or alliance seems able to mount much of an opposition.  This is especially true in a liberal world where economic ties are strong between nations.  So the argument goes that a hundred years ago World War I would not happen because of such ties.  Yet the tempestuous pull of nationalism won out.  It is not so today.  Non-sovereign entities such as corporations hold much more sway and say.  You cannot have open conflict if it is bad for business, especially for the petroleum business.  Thus, the plans of Russia are safe, and it seems that eastern Ukraine is in real trouble.

The Minimum Tools for Thinking

This is written with all due respect for Daniel Dennet.  I cribbed these notes from one of his talks.

So let's say you are arguing with someone extremely smart or perhaps being asked not to think at all by some extreme rhetoric.  Just pull these simple tools out and do...not...let...go.

For starters, "Reductio Ad Absurdum."  Which means that you prove that something is true by demonstrating something absurd results from its denial.  Water poured on your head, minus any protective wear, will make you wet.  McDonalds food is not as healthy as carrots, given sensible amounts of each.  Finally, because I like groups of three, "Happy" by Pharrell is a good song.  No, really.

For seconds, "the Surely ding."  If you hear someone say 'surely' before an argument, they are probably wearing a tweed jacket.  Aside from that, if someone says 'surely' don't believe what they are about to say.  Odds are that it is not quite so much of a sure thing.

Finally, try to answer "rhetorical questions."  They are not meant to be answered; yet if you at least try then new ways of thinking may creep into your brain.

Given these small tools, you can actually think for yourself.  Imagine that.

The Syrian Conflict beyond the Cultural Gap

Its very unfortunate that the Syrian civil war does not draw the daily attention that it used to.  The internecine conflict within the rebel movement has changed that recently.  What has happened is that elements influenced by Al-Qaeda made serious gains in controlled territory.  Apparently they were driven back and their fortunes reversed by fellow armed fighters.  It is difficult to say how much most of the world's population can truly appreciate and understand the region if:
a) you don't speak Arabic
b) you don't speak that dialect of Arabic
c) you have no cultural ties to the region
Perhaps its up to each individual to decide how much understanding is enough.  More importantly, do the individuals that ultimately form United States policy towards Syria have 'enough understanding.'

People Love Lists

     We all love lists of things that make the complex simple.  10 best songs of the year.  7 habits of highly defective people.  96 or so ways to leave your lover.  With all due respect to Paul Simon and Art Garfunkel.  The reason may be rooted in our minds' need to categorize and classify in order to function in everyday life.  Modern civilization takes this to an extreme, but in pre-history it seems like it would be pretty useful.  I want to know the three plants that would make me really ill if I tried to eat them.

    It bears mentioning that my previous day's post was in fact, a list.  It won't be my last either.

    With these facts in mind, I will say that I am reading "The 5 Elements of Effective  Thinking" by Berger and Starbird.  It is a good, quick read that probably clarifies concepts that we all would consider commonsense anyway.  I will also note that it happens to be on a reading list of at least one of the courses at the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies.  Thus, perhaps, at least one of our academics thought it would be helpful for our students.

10 Truisms for Career Success

This information is from a recent talk at the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies.  The subject can roughly be defined as '10 Truisms for Career Success.'  Although I think that there is a certain level of public service and selflessness implied.  If the author claims credit for these points I would be glad to name him/her, and flattered that they even found this column.

1) Mission accomplishment is the truest metric.  Taking care of people is a good value but how do you define success?  At the end of the day, crossing the goal line is what is remembered.

 

2) Rule of law works and you need to ensure it happens in your organization. No one is above the rules.

 

3) 'Yes' should be your default answer. You seek cooperation and positive action in all aspects of your duties.

 

4) Power peaks at the rank of lieutenant colonel (or civilan equivalent) or colonel (or civilian equivalent). After that you are persuading junior leaders to adopt your vision and they lead others to action.

 

5) Keeper ideas are keepers no matter where or how you get them.  They are found everywhere.

 

6) Networking is very important. You are building and strengthening your network everyday.

 

7) Expertise leadership is always valued. Build your own expertise and watch as people follow.

 

8) Trust is the key to relationships and your reputation. Relationship development is hard but worth it. Draw sparingly on your savings account of relationships and contribute liberally.

 

9) Routinely do the routine. 50 meter targets done consistently will be remembered.

 

10) Have a goodwill reservoir. This develops through good leadership. It helps to maintain a positive morale in adverse circumstances.