C-Span Washington Journal Wednesday

-

logo_wj02.jpg
Greetings to TWN readers. I apologize for being a bit AWOL in last few days as I’ve been absorbing a flood of information on President Obama’s Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy and very involved in some of the back end efforts trying to affect the agenda of the G-20 Summit in London. SDRs have been high on that agenda.
I will soon have some “think pieces” up that move beyond the quick hit reactions that I see abounding in the media and blogosphere. I think that serious observers need to take a step back and do a more serious job sorting through the strengths and weaknesses of President Obama’s recent economic policy moves and his national security course.
But for those who are awake, I will be talking about some of this — particularly General David Petraeus’ comments during hearings today about a troop increase request, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Israel, and more — tomorrow morning with anchor Robb Harleston on C-Span’s Washington Journal.
My segment will start at about 7:30 am EST.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

6 comments on “C-Span Washington Journal Wednesday

  1. Eric says:

    TOPIC: Nuclear deproliferation
    Ms. Pletka’s reservations concerning America acknowledging it’s mistakes is somewhat reminiscent of Jean Kirkpatrick’s rants of “blame America first”. Sometimes we, as a nation, need to point out what is obvious to every other nation on the planet, that is the obvious fact that the US made a profound and reckless mistake in Iraq.
    Ms. Pletka’s take on provocational nature of certain statements of Iranian leaders ignores the provocational nature of the US’s policy of regime change and Israel’s statements of bombing Iran.

    Reply

  2. Eric says:

    TOPIC: Nuclear deproliferation
    Every nuclear-armed country since the beginning of the nuclear age have developed nuclear arms in fear of the enemies getting them first. Even the United States was fearful of Nazi Germany’s heavy water experiments might lead them into nuclear domination. It’s unreasonable and unrealistic to believe that demanding others shut down their nuclear programs, when there is no attempt on the part of the United States or Israel to do the same, is the pathway to peace. At the heart of this issue is the sovereign right of self-defense.

    Reply

  3. Mr.Murder says:

    Sarkozy loves him some Obama. France is stepping up with NATO.
    This should be predicate to Iran normalization.

    Reply

  4. erichwwk says:

    Apology accepted re absence. We got it back w/ dividends on both this mornings CSpan talk on the A-P strategy and developments, AND on the G-20.
    You certainly gave me a lot of food for thought, that when fully digested, will likely alter my perception of both.
    I certainly realize I am one of those that “need to take a step back and do a more serious job sorting through the strengths and weaknesses of President Obama’s recent economic policy moves and his national security course.”
    I look fwd to the “think pieces”.
    And encourage those interested in the latest on the US/A-P/ISI to watch the CSpan show when it is archived. Thanks, Steve.
    PS I am halfway through Liaquat Ahamed’s “Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World”. I can also recommend that for folks (like me) needing help with how understanding of “what to do” and “how things work” interface with personalities, cultures, and particular circumstances.

    Reply

  5. Mr.Murder says:

    China is influential with Iran(supplies its navy, etc.) China enjoyed Dubya pushinhg the west away from Iran to funnel the influence its way as a side effect of said policy.
    How to flip that trend?
    Normalization and use France as an armament supplier once again.

    Reply

  6. Mr.Murder says:

    Obama’s trip is dealing strictly with known knowns. Hillary did the heavy lifting and all things talked will have been already determined.
    That should make it one of the most effective foreign visits by a POTUS in recent memory.
    Trying to forecast more ambitious aims at this time can be more interesting.
    The problem is that NATO has to help with the Afghanistan surge and its strategic toehold on the caucus ventures that can wean the eastern bloc of the EU off Russia’ energy teets.
    Will Turkey fast track membership to expand the EU influence into the middle east to greater degrees? Will Kurdistan accept this, along with Chechen interests and even into Armenian enclaves that overlay the region?
    How can these parties be bought out their interests?
    What of Iran normalization? That would be crucial to some of the energy concessions as well, it would reduce some stress factors on pricing for fuels.
    More than likely these items must be paired to level growing Iranian power with a Western counterbalance in the EU path to progress.
    It’s clear Israel, a country driven by mandatory military service and its prevailing influence upon electoral cycles, will choose its own stubborn path. Laying tact for new bearings aside from that path is a need.
    The hot confluence of Kurdistan between the two largest powers provides a plausible portion of the opportunity to play opposite these trends. Its emergence is a thorn to Turkey and Iran’s borders, and it can rival some of Iraq’s future energy and water gains.
    The ability to make each country an important stake in the process insures that each player is most likely to operate for interests it shares in common with the others. Keeping Kurdistan part of Iraq allows one a shot at policing it on better terms than as sovereign, because left to its ends more than likely the other big neighbors will end up in the middle of something with them.
    No more one sided solutions or answers, everything is a joint venture. Reshaping the area with EU interests could also set example for the Israeli and Saudi leadership. Their excess has shaped the region for so long that they have legitmate reason to fear emerging powers to contend with their strategic aims.
    Lebanon is the end tap of the trans Arabian pipeline and Israel’s presence there is a threat to that oil faucet leading westward. The Trans Iraqi pipeline is aiming the same destination.
    Other lands in the crescent are tired of those countries having such influence over their ability to be part of the market. Business means also seek to redraw the energy map.
    The future is now. Accelerate the planned decades, since the tech curve is fast approaching a point it will render certain market plans obsolete(it already has to the extent leadership will allow).
    Bringing Turkey into the EU may be the one item needed to station the Caucus region. The present force countries may be ready to exit there as Pakistan widens the conflict. Much remains at stake.
    Russia might not want a part of it but China is ready to buy into the plan and expand influence. Containment is something to be revisited there. If Turkey comes online and helps get the pipeline that way as well, it’s a new game. Iran can be a point to stage from and harden opposition to that presence from China.
    Then containment can be revisited.
    A decade from now continued Israeli/South African proliferation will shape strategic aims as part of containment, probably with Taiwan in plausible form.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *