Posts tagged International Relations

statedept:

A simple explanation of what sanctions are and the impact they are having on Russia. The actions by the Kremlin’s inner circle of government officials and oligarchs to  destabilize Ukraine are affecting the entire economy. Sanctions are damaging Russia’s investment, its growth, its currency, and its interest rates. Check out the video here.

statedept:

A simple explanation of what sanctions are and the impact they are having on Russia. The actions by the Kremlin’s inner circle of government officials and oligarchs to  destabilize Ukraine are affecting the entire economy. Sanctions are damaging Russia’s investment, its growth, its currency, and its interest rates. Check out the video here.

From foreignaffairsmagazine:

How Germany’s response to the Ukraine crisis signals a new era for German foreign policy: http://fam.ag/1iA8BAX

Interesting.

From foreignaffairsmagazine:

How Germany’s response to the Ukraine crisis signals a new era for German foreign policy: http://fam.ag/1iA8BAX

Interesting.

theatlantic:

If a Drone Strike Hit an American Wedding, We’d Ground Our Fleet

On my wedding day, my wife and I hired a couple of shuttle vans to ferry guests between a San Clemente hotel and the nearby site where we held our ceremony and reception. I thought of our friends and family members packed into those vehicles when I read about the latest nightmarish consequence of America’s drone war: “A U.S. drone mistakenly targeted a wedding convoy in Yemen’s al-Baitha province after intelligence reports identified the vehicles as carrying al Qaeda militants,” CNN reported, citing government sources in Yemen. “The officials said that 14 people were killed and 22 others injured, nine in critical condition. The vehicles were traveling near the town of Radda when they were attacked.”
Can you imagine the wall-to-wall press coverage, the outrage, and the empathy for the victims that would follow if an American wedding were attacked in this fashion? Or how you’d feel about a foreign power that attacked your wedding in this fashion?
The L.A. Times followed up on the story and found slightly different casualty figures: “The death toll reached 17 overnight, hospital officials in central Bayda province said Friday. Five of those killed were suspected of involvement with Al Qaeda, but the remainder were unconnected with the militancy, Yemeni security officials said.”
Read more. [Image: Reuters]


Indeed. We should seriously think about why things like this encourage (not discourage) people to join al Qaeda. The inability to put ourselves in the shoes of others seriously hampers our ability to conduct a serious, effective foreign policy.

theatlantic:

If a Drone Strike Hit an American Wedding, We’d Ground Our Fleet

On my wedding day, my wife and I hired a couple of shuttle vans to ferry guests between a San Clemente hotel and the nearby site where we held our ceremony and reception. I thought of our friends and family members packed into those vehicles when I read about the latest nightmarish consequence of America’s drone war: “A U.S. drone mistakenly targeted a wedding convoy in Yemen’s al-Baitha province after intelligence reports identified the vehicles as carrying al Qaeda militants,” CNN reported, citing government sources in Yemen. “The officials said that 14 people were killed and 22 others injured, nine in critical condition. The vehicles were traveling near the town of Radda when they were attacked.”

Can you imagine the wall-to-wall press coverage, the outrage, and the empathy for the victims that would follow if an American wedding were attacked in this fashion? Or how you’d feel about a foreign power that attacked your wedding in this fashion?

The L.A. Times followed up on the story and found slightly different casualty figures: “The death toll reached 17 overnight, hospital officials in central Bayda province said Friday. Five of those killed were suspected of involvement with Al Qaeda, but the remainder were unconnected with the militancy, Yemeni security officials said.”

Read more. [Image: Reuters]

Indeed. We should seriously think about why things like this encourage (not discourage) people to join al Qaeda. The inability to put ourselves in the shoes of others seriously hampers our ability to conduct a serious, effective foreign policy.

globalvoices:

Dilma Rousseff’s UN speech was met with praise from digital rights advocates around the world. Human rights lawyer Eduardo Bertoni argues that this is a positive development, but actions speak louder than words, he cautions.
Brazil: the New Internet Freedom Champion?

Brazil is increasingly playing a stronger role in global affairs. This is another good example.

globalvoices:

Dilma Rousseff’s UN speech was met with praise from digital rights advocates around the world. Human rights lawyer Eduardo Bertoni argues that this is a positive development, but actions speak louder than words, he cautions.

Brazil: the New Internet Freedom Champion?

Brazil is increasingly playing a stronger role in global affairs. This is another good example.

President Evo Morales acted on a longtime threat Wednesday and expelled the U.S. Agency for International Development for allegedly seeking to undermine Bolivia’s leftist government, and he harangued Washington’s top diplomat for calling the Western Hemisphere his country’s “backyard.”

Bolivia’s President Morales expels USAID, accused it of working against him | The Washington Post

I was going to comment on this. But I’ve been asked to do so on NPR affiliate WBEZ’s Worldview tomorrow. So I’m going to hold off until after that. Plus, I want to get my thoughts together on this.

Just in time for tomorrow’s “Apocalypse, Now!” discussion in POL 103 about international relations & global climate change. I’m also going to show this report on the Maldives.

From guardian:

The broadcaster and naturalist Sir David Attenborough says scientists and environmentalists have been cautious of overstating the dangers of global warming, but recent evidence of melting polar caps shows the situation is worse than had been thought. He also discusses population growth and disappearing habitats

A fascinating (!!) look at diplomacy in action—and in real time.

From thepoliticalnotebook:

International diplomacy in action… A very interesting set of tweets/exchanges between the feed for the Muslim Brotherhood (@Ikhwanweb) and that of the US Embassy in Cairo. The Muslim Brotherhood decries the violence in Libya that killed the ambassador and three others, and moves on to denounce clashes at the embassy in Cairo. One of their tweets was this:

”.@khairatAlshater:We r relieved none of @USEmbassyCairo staff were harmed & hope US-Eg relations will sustain turbulence of Tuesday’s events”

To which the embassy responded:

”.@ikhwanweb Thanks. By the way, have you checked out your own Arabic feeds? I hope you know we read those too.”

(Oooh, snark.)

The latest in the exchange has been this from the Brotherhood:

”.@usembassycairo we understand you’re under a lot of stress, but it will be more helpful if you point out exactly the Arabic feed of concern”

All screencapped above. 

[HT: The Guardian’s excellent live-blog]

From foreignaffairsmagazine:

The September/October issue of Foreign Affairs is now online!
Kindle, NOOK, and Google Play subscribers can also access the new issue on their devices.

From foreignaffairsmagazine:

The September/October issue of Foreign Affairs is now online!

Kindle, NOOK, and Google Play subscribers can also access the new issue on their devices.

The political debate in London reveals how immensely difficult—intellectually, morally, and politically—it was for Peel and his colleagues to withdraw [from Afghanistan]. They had to tackle the dense thicket of expert opinions on regional security, which had grown up to justify the intervention. They were forced to challenge parts of the military establishment and contradict the generals (many of whom continued to insist that all that was needed was a clearer mission, more resources, and more troops). They took the risk that withdrawal would leave Afghanistan in civil war, and that they would be accused of shirking their moral responsibility to improve conditions there. They accepted the humiliation of seeing their enemy, who they had invaded to topple, take back control. They ignored the media screams about cowardice and national disgrace. They faced down the fears about national security and loss of credibility. And by doing so, they avoided being trapped by the guilt, paranoia, and irrational momentum of war.

Rory Stewart, from his review of Diana Preston’s book The Dark Defile: Britain’s Catastrophic Invasion of Afghanistan, 1838-1842.

—As US combat casualties pass the 2000 mark in America’s longest war, some perspective from 1842. 

(via politicalprof)

They [the British] needed to win the support of the population if they were to defeat the insurgency and build a legitimate state; but the population would not support a weak, corrupt state in the middle of an insurgency. To reassure the nationalists, the foreign force had to convince them they were leaving; and to reassure the supporters of the British, the foreign force had to convince them they were staying. Such political problems could not be solved with more troops. They were all (to use a British policymaker’s phrase) “the inevitable consequence of our position in Afghanistan.”

Rory Stewart, in his review of Diana Preston’s book, The Dark Defile: Britain’s Catastrophic Invasion of Afghanistan, 1838–1842, about the British invasion and failed occupation of Afghanistan. In 1838-42.

Ah. Again.

(via politicalprof)