Avuncular American

BRAC à la française: CINC Sarkozy and His Army

(Photo Source: AP)

The politics of national defense

BRAC (Base Realignment and Closure, a bureacratic DoD term that doesn't translate well into elegant French) is nevertheless what is on the President Nicolas Sarkozy's mind these days when he considers France's defense options.  BRAC - that lengthy process that the US last went through in 2005-2006, involving multiple clearances through military, Congressional, and state and local filters before any base is closed - is basically what Sarkozy and his government are proposing, though they are holding off until the end of July (maybe they are hoping that as much of France goes on vacation, no one will notice).  Update: today's "Telegramme de Brest" says that the announcement will be made by Prime Minister Francois Fillon on 24 July).

Though much of the plan had already been leaked, last week's Bastille Day pageant was allowed to take place before official pronouncements of painful cuts.  The outlines are clear, however: close bases, disband units, and make France's Army (the Navy is also due for hits, though of a lesser order, while the Air Force is to be trimmed by almost 25%) better fit for deployment abroad, whether alone, or as part of UN, EU, or NATO operations.  Sarkozy, as President of the European Union Council for the rest of 2008, also has in mind making forces available for a new "European Pillar of NATO."

As in an American BRAC process, much of this doesn't go down well with those most concerned: the military hierarchy, and the local hosts who depend on a unit's presence in their jurisdiction for economic stimulus, a kind of reverse NIMBY: "cuts are fine, as long as they're not in my constituency."  Given the military's traditional presence on France's littoral or along its eastern and northern borders, these "legacy" bases are often in economically deprived areas, making the hits even harder to absorb.  But they probably make sense from a standpoint of rationalization (much was made of the move of the 13th "Dragon" Paratroop Regiment [RDP, a reconnaissance unit] from its longtime home in the Moselle valley along the border with Germany, to southwest France where several of its sister special forces units are stationed.  Local officials only see the zero-sum aspect of losing, in the case of the RDP, half of its population.  In an excellent July 23 article, Catherine Magueur in Le Telegramme shows that party politics - shocking! - plays a large part in gerrymandering the new military map of France.  Too bad for bases and communities represented by the opposition...

Civilian control of the military

All this was hovering in the background (the excellent "JDD," le Journal de Dimanche on 13 July had a special two page pre-Bastille Day spread on Sarkozy and a discontented military) on 14 July, when France's military showed its finest marching style down the Champs Elysées.  Luckily for Sarkozy, the French military has matured from the days when, a half century ago in Algeria, its frustrated generals staged a "putsch" that helped fell the 4th Republic.  In 2008, there is grumbling in the ranks, where some feel that Sarkozy "humiliated" the honor of professional soldiers when he spoke of "amateurs" after a live-fire accident during a public event in Carcassonne - resulting in the resignation of the Chief of Staff of the Army, General Cuche.  Other officers anonymously joined a collective called "Surcouf" to sign a broadside against the "White Paper" that in the US context would have been the equivalent of the initial BRAC recommendations.  But don't expect any "putsch."

In the end, all the military wants is a little respect (one senior officer admitted that "the army is une grande sentimentale").  Many realize that "modernization" is overdue, and lament having to spend scarce resources on excess manpower when what they really need is spare parts.  Sarkozy's task (one of the many he has set himself in his "hyperpresidency") is to convince the French Army and its constituency that his reforms are in a context of recognition of the Army's worth.  One issue to monitor closely: as Sarkozy develops his "European Pillar of NATO" proposals and tries to leverage American acceptance of EU defense prerogatives in exchange for French reintegration into NATO's military command, check the French military reaction.  Away from the EU/NATO negotiations, will Sarkozy be seen as strengthening the French pillar, or undermining its foundations?  And what of the multiplicity of commitments?  Former defense minister Jean-Pierre Chevenement, in the JDD, questioned how France could maintain 18 current overseas deployments, and entertain expanded commitments under an activist Sarkozy, all while reducing its military establishment.

As with all things Sarkozy, it's best to wait until the fireworks are long over, the dust settles, and then look at his military modernization campaign with a little bit of "recul."  In the meantime, wish the French Army a quiet summer holiday, and a bit of distance from its hyperactive Commander-in-Chief.

Belgium's Lost Year: Politics Cancels Governance

(Image source: Brussels Export)

This has happened more than once in the past 12 months: Belgium decides to have an existential crisis when we happen to be away.  But existential political crises are the norm in a country where there are seven parliaments, three languages, and borders that include a wonderful geopolitical construct sometimes called the donut.*

The current kerfuffle is, again, essentially over the future outlines of the "linguistic frontier," both on maps and in how decentralization is pushed to its limits, before the "country" is no more than a shell for the all important regions and communities (Dutch speaking Flemish in Flanders, French speaking Walloons in the south, Germanophones along the eastern border, and a mix of all of the above, plus lots of internationals, in Brussels).  Things came to a head on July 15, the deadline for an "institutional reform" (Belgian for separatism) package.  See Le Soir cartoonist and author of "Dessine-moi la Belgique" Pierre Kroll for his take on the impact of the deadline on the daily life of Belgians.

The recent proffered resignation of Prime Minister Yves Leterme is simply the latest manifestation of the seemingly limitless capacity of Belgian politicians to conduct themselves as if the only thing elected officials should do is play politics.  Things like economic impact, national image, care for the national brand - those are for sissies.  Brinkmanship is the name of the game, and Leterme's resignation (as of this writing, not yet accepted by the head of state, King Albert II) is almost a footnote.  He's still in place, running a caretaker ("affaires courantes") government, and the name most talked about as a replacement in a future (coalition, as always) government is... Yves Leterme ("Leterme II").

Economic, business, and labor leaders throw up their hands in frustration: "A wasted year," sighed Vincent Reuter, head of the Wallonia employers association.  Essentially, the country has had a full year of holdover caretaker governments or short-lived successors since elections in summer 2007.  Months ago Belgian economists hazarded guesses on the cost of the crisis, which has only been compounded since.  The reaction of the politicians?  Hold the economy hostage to the outcome of a redistricting proposal dear to the hearts of Flemish politicians, and anathema to the French speakers.

The redistricting of the Brussels Hal Vilvoorde (BHV) constituency is a vital issue, even though trying to explain it to anyone living outside of Belgium results in understandable yawns.  Vital only because it risks splitting Dutch speakers and Francophones in the only area - the capital and its hinterland - where they live in close proximity.  Francophones (and many interested observers) fear that such a split would only be a precursor to further Flemish moves to bring an end to Belgium as a country.

Rather than splitting BHV, some thoughtful citizens are circulating a petition to unite Brussels and its hinterland, known by its historic name of Brabant (which exists, of course, in Flemish and Walloon versions).   They point out that the greater Brussels represents 2 million people, 1/3 of Belgium's GDP, and "more NGOs, lobbyists, embassies and consulates than Washington DC."  The Greens - probably the only Belgian political grouping that truly coordinates between its French and Dutch speaking sections - had earlier tabled proposals along the same lines, noting the natural synergies that regionalization would bring to the capital area, in terms of transportation and economic development, not to mention the main beneficial side effect of restoring some sense of shared destiny.

But there are other centrifugal forces at play, and not just on the Flemish side.  There has always been a fringe "rattachist" element wanting to find refuge with France, but of late at least one serious politician has come out with a "Belgique française" scenario in case the Flemish carry matters to their logical, separatist, conclusion.  Last month there was brief attention in the international press to the idea of a "Brussels Corridor," floated every few decades when Bruxellois get antsy about being cut off from their French speaking cousins down the road in Waterloo.

*So what about the donut?  It's actually worse than that.  According to Wikipedia (be sure to look at the map):

Baarle-Hertog is noted for its complicated borders with Baarle-Nassau in the Netherlands. In total it consists of 24 separate pieces of land. Apart from the main piece (called Zondereigen) located north of the Belgian town of Merksplas, there are twenty Belgian exclaves in the Netherlands and three other pieces on the Dutch-Belgian border. There are also seven Dutch exclaves within the Belgian exclaves. Six of them are located in the largest one and a seventh in the second-largest one. An eighth Dutch exclave lies in Zondereigen.

The border is so complicated that there are some houses that are divided between the two countries. There was a time when according to Dutch laws restaurants had to close earlier. For some restaurants on the border it meant that the clients simply had to change their tables to the Belgian side.

Let's hope that this doesn't become the template for Belgian cartographers.

The Sea in Between: Sarkozy’s Mediterranean Project

A Project Dear To The President’s Heart

On Monday’s July 14 Bastille Day in Paris, spectators will be treated to another grand military parade, one of the few such martial national day displays remaining in the democratic West.  The audience will include the leaders of the European Union member states as well as those from the (mostly Arab, but including Israel and Turkey) countries bordering the southern and eastern coasts of the Mediterranean.  They will be gathered in the French capital for one of the most important events in the early days of the French EU Presidency, the launch of the “Union Pour la Mediterranée (UPM)” or the Union for the Mediterranean.

In Arabic, the Mediterranean Sea is poetically called Al-Bahr Al-Abyad Al-Muttawasit, "the middle white sea.”  President Nicolas Sarkozy was a schoolboy when Algeria (where his father had served in the Foreign Legion) became independent, though he may have had occasion to hear the geopolitical adage taught to generations of French schoolchildren: “The Mediterranean separates France, like the Seine separates Paris.”  Algeria was an integral part of France, and then suddenly, it wasn’t.  A million European settlers left independent Algeria, and in the intervening 46 years, millions of Algerians have settled in France.  The Med is definitely a middle passage between North and South.

With his present and former family connections in Ottoman-era Greece (mother's family), Corsica (first wife) Spain (wife No. 2, Cecilia), and Italy (current wife Carla), it is perhaps not surprising that the Mediterranean has had a special place in Sarkozy’s heart, even before his election to the Elysée Palace in spring 2007.  And this has all the hallmarks of a personal project: in June 2007, Quai d’Orsay diplomats responded with quizzical looks when asked about the new president’s Mediterranean ambitions.  Even now, on the eve of the summit, the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs website gives much more space to the EU-Mediterranean Dialogue (an ongoing program) than to the Presidential UPM, which still has much to be defined (not the least of which, where will it be headquartered: Tunis on the southern shore, or Barcelona on the Spanish coast?).

Emotion-Laden North-South Relationships

The love/hate relationship between France and its former “colony” (the word was never used by the French, but the Algerians still pride themselves, sometimes even define themselves, by being at the forefront of the anti-colonialist drive from the Fifties through the Seventies) has in some ways been the bellwether of the Sarkozy Mediterranean proposal.  France and its policies are always treated with circumspection in Algeria, and few domestic points are gained in Algeria by seeming to kowtow to the former masters. (Though Algeria's ace political cartoonist Dilem has it right when he shows what Algeria's unemployed "hittistes" want out of the UPM: calm Mediterranean seas for their rafts, or preferably, French visas; emigration is still a big drain/safety valve).  At one point, it seemed that Algeria would scupper the whole deal.

In the end, Algerian President Bouteflika’s foot dragging on the Mediterranean project was overcome by careful French diplomacy, though not in the case of the one remaining holdout, Colonel (do we still call him that?) Kadhafi of Libya.  Despite blandishments (nuclear project, arms deals, wife No. 2 Cecilia as emissary-of-charm, week-long state visit to Paris last year), Kadhafi has condemned the Sarkozy Med Union.  Anyway, his life long ambition has been to unify (often literally, through mergers and sometimes with weapons) the Arab and African worlds that are Libya’s home turf.

Sarkozy’s ambitions for a French-led Mediterranean project were severely modified by Germany, which succeeded in EU-izing (opening up to non-Med EU countries what had previously been seen as a Mediterranean riparian state grouping) Sarkozy’s vision.  As former French foreign minister Hubert Vedrine said today on France-Inter radio, the test of the new Med Union will be whether it can create a co-secretariat to build on the high-level co-presidential (France and Egypt) kickoff summit, and not just become a subcommittee of the EU.  Egypt, with its concentric Arab, African, and Middle East (especially longstanding relations with Israel) circles, and its experienced diplomatic corps, is an inspired choice to help France get the new grouping off the ground.

Another “Machin” or An Essential Tool?

Vedrine, along with a number of right and left of center European and southern Mediterranean luminaries, signed an “open letter” to the leaders gathering in Paris this weekend, published in Thursday’s Le Monde.  Though the letter enthuses about the Med Union’s potential for peacemaking (all eyes will be on the body language between Israeli and Syrian leaders this weekend), Vedrine on the radio spoke to the more nuts-and-bolts projects for the Union.  One not so trivial matter: North-South cooperation on cleaning up what is essentially massive a salty lake, one that gets dumped on, literally, with every effluent man and industry can produce.  If nothing else, Union for the Mediterranean success in this one crisis area could make the nascent organization worth all the hoopla.  As one commentator put it, success in "small" practical matters counts, and cited the EU's beginnings as a post-WW II coal and steel cartel combining the victors and the vanquished.

In his definitive work on the fall of France in 1940 “To Lose a Battle,” British historian (of France and Algeria) Alistair Horne starts off with a vivid portrait of another Bastille Day parade, that of the victorious French Army in July 1919, the first such parade after the end of the carnage of World War One the previous November.  At the time, the consensus was that the French Army was the biggest and best in the world.  True, but we know what the inter war period did to its relative standing against the Wehrmacht.  There was no follow up to the big show.

For the EU and Mediterranean leaders lined up on the Champs Elysées for Monday’s parade, what comes after will be the true test of the fine new Union For The Mediterranean to be unveiled this coming weekend.  Those 40 plus leaders, if not backed up by painstaking staff work, may be present at the creation of another “machin” (probably best translated as “thingy” - Charles De Gaulle’s ironic description of the UN and like multilateral organizations, which have to struggle to avoid being labeled talking shops).

Haraka mush Baraka: The Dangers of Perpetual Movement

Machin vs. functional coalition: does Sarkozy himself have the wherewithal and patience to stick with his bright shiny idea in the long term?  Wherewithal: yes (once the Quai d’Orsay is convinced that this is a going concern, it will apply itself to making it work).  Patience: this is Sarko’s Achilles heel.  The man, once described by an observant Brit as a kind of Tigger, bounces around from idea to proposal to next inspiration, whether domestic or international.  Bitter Lemons also has misgivings about his "frenetic" pace, and has devoted several articles to the Mediterranean Union plan from Arab, Israeli, and Turkish viewpoints.

The Mediterranean is timeless, but action is urgent; Sarkozy is a man in a hurry, but he’ll need to down shift and focus in this forum which will juxtapose cultures with different notions of time.  After all, his Maghrebi counterparts know the meaning behind a traditional expression, "Haraka mush Baraka."  Movement - for movement's sake - does not equate with benediction.

Ireland, Europe: Why "Not?"

The end of Europe.¹
Clearly demonstrated the deep division that exists between the European elite and the citizens of Europe.²
Underneath all this there is a more profound question, which is about the future of Europe.³
"No" brings Europe to a kind of standstill.⁴
For me, the worst that could happen is if the citizens of the European Union or the leaders of the European Union enter into a zone of paralysis psychologically.⁵

Europe is still dealing with the Irish audacity of No, its unsurprising rejection of the Lisbon Treaty last Thursday.  Search the opinion columns of the European press, and you'll likely come up with sentiment similar to that expressed above.  Only the quotes I've provided date back to May 2005, when French voters rejected the EU constitution, the failed precursor to the Lisbon Treaty.  Providing the wisdom back then were:

¹Romano Prodi, former EU Commission President;
²President Vaclav Klaus of the Czech Republic;
³Tony Blair, then British PM;
⁴Jean-Luc Dehaene, former Belgian PM;
⁵Javier Solana, the EU's foreign policy chief.

Some of these luminaries are still in the same jobs; others (Blair, Prodi, Dehaene) have gone on to other occupations.  The quotes are found in "French No Vote on European Constitution Rattles Continent," by Elaine Sciolino in the 31 May 2005 New York Times.

Perhaps the only unexpected aspect of Thursday's referendum was the relatively high turnout (53.1 %).  As an informed Irish reader of this blog put it, the high turnout revealed "the fallacy of the silent majority's favorable feelings towards the EU."  The same reader pointed me in the direction of pre-vote analysis by Irish writer David McWilliams, who pondered on the eve of the referendum ("Why 'Yes' and 'No' voters are in a class of their own")

Is the debate on the Lisbon Treaty coming down to class? Is the overwhelming bourgeois accent of the ‘Yes’ vote an election issue? In an era when many considered class politics to be more or less over, the social breakdown in the polls is fascinating. The trend that has emerged is that the middle-class is considerably more pro-European than the working class. According to the latest polls, the ‘Yes’ campaign is only ahead among the better off voters. So the posh are pro-Europe while the majority of the working class is planning a ‘No’ vote.

With the benefit of hindsight, now you can look at the Irish Times' great interactive map, showing the map of Ireland divided into No (flaming red) and Yes (bright green) and Undecided (gray for Dublin, which was still counting when the Times went to print).  Beyond the Pale (the way the English described Ireland outside of the Dublin area in the old days), poorer, rural Ireland appears to have given Lisbon a massive Red light.  But why?

Fintan O'Toole, assistant editor of the Irish Times writing in today's Guardian, speaks of the "scattergun negativity" of the naysayers defeating the "miserable" and uninspired Yes campaign ("Good for Ireland, Good for Europe").  His examples of voter sentiment would make you laugh, if you didn't want to cry:

• One anonymous voter was using the opportunity of a vote on the structural reform of the European Union to protest against the withdrawal by the newly privatised state airline Aer Lingus of its regular service between Shannon airport and Heathrow.
• Another voter "got a bit of information that, if I voted yes, my sons would be drafted into the army, so I voted no ... Our sons are too good-looking for the army."

Of course, we know how irrational voters can be once in the booth, and I fear what results such behavior will yield in next November's US presidential elections.  But that's what happens in democracies: people will do the damnedest things.

But once the "end of Europe as we know it" ill-informed reaction to this vote subsides, serious minds will approach the negotiating table with salvage in mind... just like Nicolas Sarkozy did last year when he helped unravel the mess that French voters helped cause when they rejected the EU constitution.  Getting Europe right is messy, time-consuming, frustrating, expensive, and more.  But, as Romano Prodi told Elaine Sciolino three years ago after the French reverse, "This is still better than a war of secession like the United States once had.  We must keep this perspective in mind. We don't have a treaty, but we also don't have wars."

Europe: All Eyes On Ireland

A copy of the Agreement was posted to every household in Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic and put to referendums the following May, which gave them substantial support by 74% and 94% respectively.
BBC on the Good Friday Agreement Referendum, 22 May 1998

I remember seeing one of those copies at my cousins' home, on the coffee table and well-thumbed.  They had read it before voting.

I’m voting ‘no,' though I don’t know an awful lot about it.
Brendan Fairbrother, retired Dubliner, quoted in today's New York Times by Sarah Lyall.

It looks like Mr. Fairbrother hasn't studied the 287-page Lisbon Treaty, but I can't be sure.  For those Irish voters (or readers) who want a quick summary, today's Irish Independent provides "The Treaty Made Simple."

If Brendan Fairbrother can't manage 287 pages of, as Sarah Lyall writes, "vintage bureacratese," I can't really blame him.  Nor is it the fault of the Irish that their constitution requiring Yes/No plebiscites puts them in, as today's Guardian cheerfully calls it, Europe's "awkward squad" along with Denmark and other sometime naysayers.  That's the problem with referendums: reducing complex 287-page treaties to a yes or no response can elicit the "wrong" response.  "Wrong" as in "no."  What then?  As the NYT's Lyall reports, "French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, spoke ominously on Tuesday of a “Franco-German” response to a “no” vote."  Sarkozy, who early in his presidency made a big show over his role in "simplifying" the treaty, has a personal investment in its ratification.

A "Franco-German response?"  France tried to help the Irish win their independence in 1798, "The Year of the French" (great historical novel, by the way, by Thomas Flanagan).  That didn't go well, and the Irish had to wait another century-plus to rid themselves of the colonial British.  Germans have been buying up lots of vacation homes in Ireland in recent years, and Germany's designs on a newly-independent neutral Ireland in the '30s and '40s worried the Anglo-American alliance, but things never went too far.  The Irish have to vote - it's not optional.

It's this kind of talk, Monsieur Sarkozy, that gets Ireland's Irish up, so to speak.  As the Irish Independent's cheat sheet puts it on the cherished notion of Irish neutrality:

Q:What does the treaty do on the military front?

A:Over the last five decades Ireland has built an internationally respected reputation for UN peacekeeping, thanks in part to neutrality.
Fears have been expressed over military expansion in Europe and demands on countries to massively increase their defence budgets.
Under the Lisbon Treaty, foreign, security and defence decisions must be made unanimously.
Ireland's neutrality is protected but there is an obligation to aid and assist, in accordance with the UN, a state which is the victim of armed aggression.
The type of aid and assistance that is required is not specified, but it must not affect security and defence policies of states, including Ireland's neutrality.
Also, states are obliged to help each other after a terrorist attack, natural or man-made disaster.

Such step-by-step gingerly handling of the Neutrality Question may strike non-Irish readers as overly cautious in the post Cold War present.  Not so.  Neutrality, and supposed threats to it, is sacred to the Irish.  I recall that when the US Mission to NATO (of which I was then a part) organized a seminar in a Dublin suburb in the late '90s, there was a mini-hullabaloo over this "military alliance" coming to neutral Ireland.  That the conference was on NATO's expansion to the East (and not west to Ireland) mattered little.  It was their very presence on neutral soil that counted.

Referendums, like elections, are sometimes decided on issues that have nothing to do with the question at hand.  Are voters unhappy (or happy?) with the ruling coalition this month?  Has the president (or prime minister, or chancellor) been unpopular of late?  Do people want to get their revenge by opposing whatever the government is proposing?  How's the weather on referendum day?  The Guardian:

Europe's future, being decided today, may hinge on such happenstance as the Irish weather. An unlovely day could keep people at home. A low turnout will hurt the pro-European vote.

Today's weather forecast for Ireland is "intermittent clouds."  Will attitudes toward the European benefactor - the hand that helps feed the Celtic Tiger - be sunny today?

(Image Source: Traditional Lace Makers of Ireland)

Getting To Know Barack Obama

He wasn't physically there last night, but Barack Obama was very ably "introduced" to the members of Democrats Abroad Belgium (DAB) by one of our number, John-Paul Bernbach, who joined the Obama bandwagon as soon as the Illinois Senator announced his bid for the White House.  The room was filled by those of us who took a bit more time to rally to the cause, and JP's presentation, I hope, will also have provided lingering Clinton supporters in the room ample reason to justify their jumping on board.

Though people availed themselves of the good Belgian beer at the hotel bar, it wasn't a "victory party," and there was no gloating or untoward triumphalism evident over the events of last week.  DAB Chairwoman Faustina Mercado-Sandoval set the tone with a very appropriate Hillary Clinton quote from last Saturday's concession speech:

So I want to say to my supporters: When you hear people saying or think to yourself, If only, or, What if, I say, please, don't go there. Every moment wasted looking back keeps us from moving forward.  Life is too short, time is too precious, and the stakes are too high to dwell on what might have been. We have to work together for what still can be. And that is why I will work my heart out to make sure that Senator Obama is our next president.

With that conciliatory admonition from Senator Clinton, we Democrats in Belgium set to learning more about our candidate.  And JP Bernbach did not disappoint.

It reminded me of the Boy Scout motto: "Barack Obama is: Pragmatic, Non-Ideological, an Organizer, a Real-Politic politician, etc."  JP did well to remind us of these aspects of our candidate, since there's a danger in his being (rightfully) renowned solely for his oratory.  There's a lot of senatorial substance behind the way with words, as we heard last night.  And years of experience in politics, at local, state, and now Federal levels.

Naturally for a group of expatriated Americans, the audience was best informed on foreign policy issues (interestingly, at the very time we were discussing international issues in Brussels, back in the US both Democratic and Republican candidates were concentrating on economic themes, which may have more resonance with voters).  There was concern over the Bush Administration's apparent desire to use "Status of Forces Agreement" negotiations in Iraq to form a secret "strategic alliance" that would complicate withdrawal plans for an Obama Administration.  It was no surprise that Americans in Brussels, home to NATO and the EU, would be more aware than many Americans of national security issues and relations with our European allies.  Several work with US military personnel, and pointed out that the military vote is not a shoo-in for McCain.  As Mark Benjamin noted in Salon a couple of months ago, at the height of the "3:00 AM" excitement:

Clinton has now turned the debate about commander-in-chief readiness into a contest of résumés. And the conventional wisdom is that John McCain -- ex-fighter pilot, former POW and war hero -- wins.  But that's not necessarily the case, say senior military officials and political analysts. In interviews with Salon this week, several experienced military officers said McCain draws mixed reviews among military leaders, and they expressed serious doubts about whether McCain has the right temperament to be the next president and commander in chief. Some expressed more confidence in Obama, citing his temperament as an asset.

As long as Obama's calm temperament does not come across as aloofness, this may be an important ace up his sleeve in matters military and beyond.

Given the rampant speculation last week about Vice Presidential possibilities, we might have expected more Obama-Clinton ticket promoters in yesterday's crowd.  Not really.  The consensus seemed to be that a Clinton VP slot would load down the Obama campaign with problematic baggage, especially on the "Whither Bill?" question.  There was more interest in a potential Clinton Supreme Court future (for life...) especially since, as JP pointed out, she has a long way to go in the Senate before amassing sufficient seniority for leadership positions.

I think we were very well served to have been treated to a "Getting To Know" evening, scheduled weeks before Barack Obama in fact became the uncontested Democratic candidate.  JP's encyclopedic knowledge of Obama mirrors that of longtime Obama friend Cass R. Sunstein, whose article in the London Independent a few months back is the best one-page summary of the man who could be President:

The Obama we know is no rhetorician; he shines because of his problem-solving abilities, his creativity and his attention to detail. In recent weeks, his speaking talents, and the increasingly cult-like atmosphere that surrounds him, have led people to wonder whether there is substance behind the eloquent plea for "change" – whether the soaring phrases might disguise a kind of emptiness and vagueness. But nothing could be further from the truth. He is most comfortable in the domain of policy and detail.  From knowing Obama for many years, I have no doubts about his ability to lead. He knows a great deal, and he is a quick learner. Even better, he knows what he does not know, and there is no question that he would assemble an accomplished, experienced team of advisers. His brilliant administration of his own campaign provides helpful evidence here.

JP Bernbach has not had the benefit of Sunstein's years of proximity to Obama, but I think that his reading of the man is as accurate.  In all, it was a very nice follow up to last week's cessation-of-hostilities in the Democratic camp, and a great kickoff for the general election campaign to come.  

Democrats: Suspend Hostilities, Form Shadow Government

The way to continue our fight now, to accomplish the goals for which we stand is to take our energy, our passion, our strength, and do all we can to help elect Barack Obama the next president of the United States.

Today, as I suspend my campaign, I congratulate him on the victory he has won and the extraordinary race he has run. I endorse him and throw my full support behind him. And I ask all of you to join me in working as hard for Barack Obama as you have for me.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, National Building Museum, Saturday 7 June 2008 (text here)

Suspend, defined, thanks to Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary:

1: to debar temporarily especially from a privilege, office, or function
2 a: to cause to stop temporarily
2 b: to set aside or make temporarily inoperative
3: to defer to a later time on specified conditions
4: to hold in an undetermined or undecided state awaiting further information

I understand that the Clinton campaign defines "suspend" in a technical, convention-related sense, so that Senator Clinton's delegates can be recognized as such, akin to a similar John Edwards formulation.  I am willing to suspend my judgment on the temporary, undecided, deferred, and undetermined connotations of her one use of suspend, and take her at her word (repeated at least 8 times in yesterday's speech), that she will "do all she can to elect Barack Obama the next president of the United States."  Trust, but verify.

Okay, now that that's out of the way, what next?  Barack Obama has deftly chosen the deliberative, "form a committee" path to ponder the Vice Presidential question, so maybe we can leave Caroline Kennedy and colleagues alone, and focus on some other matters.  Given Hillary Clinton's stirring-but-suspended speech yesterday, I think discussion of her as a potential VP running mate would best be "deferred to a later time on specified conditions," to borrow a Websterism.

But November 2008 is not just a Presidential election, where Americans get to choose between two pairs of candidates.  A true Senate majority (preferably veto-proof, should, heaven forbid, John McCain win in the Electoral College) is up for grabs, and it never hurts to improve on your majority in the House.  There will be governorships and state assemblies.  All these races will hopefully ride on Obama's coattails.

So, while the Kennedy et al VP committee is performing its due diligence, the Obama campaign might consider who might be invited to form an American version of what is done so effectively in other democracies, especially of the parliamentary type: a shadow cabinet.

A shadow cabinet, American-style, would not necessarily be a mirror image of, say, the UK's venerable institution, with designated ministers (or "Secretaries" in the American context) for each government department or agency.  But Barack Obama has attracted a number of extremely competent and bright Americans.  So, it should be added, has Hillary Clinton.  These people, many of whom have served in prior Democratic administrations, might be called upon at appropriate moments.  Like when the Bush Administration flubs up another time on energy policy, and goes begging to the Saudis for more oil and comes home humiliated.  Or when the administration belies its pro-military rhetoric and opposes help for soldiers and veterans.  Barack Obama, though he does it very well, need not be the only Democrat who addresses issues.  The important thing is getting the message right, and coordinating it so that multiplicity of voices does not mean cacophony.

Hillary Clinton, who has shown herself extremely persuasive in the campaign, can be given a voice - should be given a voice.  Whatever the outcome of Obama-Clinton private deliberations, their public voice can be in harmony.  Welcome to the Obama Campaign, Senator Clinton.

Burma's "Deadly Decision" - Aid Ships Steam Away

"Over the past three weeks we have made at least 15 attempts to convince the Burmese  government to allow our ships, helicopters, and landing craft to provide additional disaster relief for the people of Burma, but they have refused us each and every time. It  is time for the USS Essex group to move on to its next mission. However, we will leave several heavy lift aircraft in place in Thailand so as to continue to support international  community efforts to deliver aid," [Commander of U.S. Pacific  Command, Adm. Timothy J.] Keating said.

The Essex ships will now head to the coast of Thailand to backload their remaining  helicopters and personnel on June 11th. "However", said Keating, "should the Burmese  rulers have a change of heart and request our full assistance for their suffering people we are prepared to help."

Press Release, 3 June 2008, US Pacific Command

This has to be one of the most frustrating commands that the good admiral has had to give in his career.   Navy and other US military personnel are used to delivering timely, massive assistance in all corners of the world, whenever natural disasters strike (my first experience in the Foreign Service was helping shepherd Navy and Coast Guard relief to volcano victims on the island of St. Vincent in the Caribbean).  In the response to Cyclone Nargis and the unprecedented devastation it caused the inhabitants of Burma's Iriwaddy delta, US, French, and British naval ships steamed to Burma's coast.  And waited.  Only to be turned away, repeatedly.

There are lingering glimmers of hope, carrots still dangled out there for the jingoistic junta:

• Admiral Keating's order of June 3 is to take effect June 5, giving two days to reconsider;
• The vessels are to head to the Thai coast, to "backload" helicopters and personnel involved in the relief efforts;
• This operation is to take place June 11, giving the Burmese generals another week to reconsider.

But no one should hold their breath.  Any regime that ignores cyclone warnings and fails to alert its own populace, then deliberately abandons the resulting victims to starvation, disease, and the elements, is not going to be shamed by earnest pleas or strong condemnation.

The only question remaining for the United States is whether it should use the opportunity, awaiting off the Thai coast, to offload further relief supplies on board those ships.  France, whose Mistral contained 15 days' worth of aid for 100,000 people and shelter for a further 60,000, decided to hand over its supplies to the UN's World Food Program after a similar rebuff from the Burmese junta.  The Mistral arrives in Phuket, Thailand today.

As frustrating as that decision must have been for France (the Ministry of Foreign Affairs called the Burmese attitude "particularly shocking"), offloading its aid was the right decision.  What was it going to do - sail off over the horizon with its holds full of tons of supplies for another rainy day?  What will the Essex Group do next week?

"The Irriwaddy" ("Covering Burma and Southeast Asia), that authoritative Burmese exile publication, has an excellent opinion piece by Aung Zaw, "No Warships Please, We're Burmese," which provides some interesting history to clarify the junta's allergy to warships:

It is safer for an impassive Than Shwe [junta leader] to allow hundreds of thousands of villagers in the Irrawaddy delta region to die rather than permitting a US relief mission to save them—a deadly decision indeed. Than Shwe knows full well that millions of Burmese wait in hope for the arrival of US warships, and not only for the relief supplies they would bring.

At the time of the 1988 democracy uprising, Burma’s military leaders lodged a complaint with the US embassy after sighting a US naval fleet of five warships, including the aircraft carrier Coral Sea, within Burmese territorial waters on the morning of 12 September, six days before the army staged a bloody coup.

The sighting caused “major concern” among Burmese leaders including Ne Win, who in the 1970s had secured US military assistance, including helicopters, in fighting communists and drug warlords.  In those years, Burma sent its officers to the US General Staff College for training and study. Burma’s official policy was, and remains: Americans are welcome, except in times of political crisis.

Applying this policy, the military leaders even refused permission for a US C-130 plane to land in Rangoon in 1988 in order to evacuate US embassy staff during the anti-government uprising.

For paranoid dictators, one person's innocent offer of aid is another's Trojan Horse.  They won't change.  So just offload the cargo in Thailand, turn it over to the UN, and chalk it up to another bad experience with ungrateful dictators.

Living Like Europeans

Last week Paul Krugman wrote "Stranded in Suburbia" in the New York Times.  His dateline was Berlin, and he marveled at the sheer livability of many urban neighborhoods:

To see what I’m talking about, consider where I am at the moment: in a pleasant, middle-class neighborhood consisting mainly of four- or five-story apartment buildings, with easy access to public transit and plenty of local shopping.

It’s the kind of neighborhood in which people don’t have to drive a lot, but it’s also a kind of neighborhood that barely exists in America, even in big metropolitan areas. Greater Atlanta has roughly the same population as Greater Berlin — but Berlin is a city of trains, buses and bikes, while Atlanta is a city of cars, cars and cars.

Krugman laments that "many Americans [are] stranded in suburbia — utterly dependent on their cars, yet having a hard time affording gas."

(images: STIB Brussels Transport)

As expats familiar with both suburban American and urban European lifestyles, we can relate to Krugman's depiction of the dilemma.  We live in a leafy part of Brussels, in the kind of apartment building and neighborhood described by Krugman.  We have a car, and it is parked in the building's underground garage.  Unless we take a ride in the country (and even then, we can reach greenery by public transport), we only use the car to do major food shopping about once a week.  Everything else is by tram.  We can use the same ticket for Brussels' metro or bus systems, and for those train lines that cross the city.

This is not to gloat - far from it, since we do all this on a declining dollar - but to illustrate Krugman's point about the oil-induced reasons for Americans to change, the "strong incentives to start living like Europeans."  My fellow Americans... it's not that hard, "living like Europeans."  Once freed from the tyranny of the internal combustion engine, possibilities open up.

Last week a delegation of Brussels regional officials traveled to Malmo, Sweden, just across the water from Copenhagen, Denmark.  They saw Scandinavian examples that some would like to emulate, like urban planning that incorporates energy efficiency in building design, something which is now catching on in Brussels and elsewhere in Belgium and in Europe.  Though Brussels has a long way to go before it can resemble Malmo or Freiburg in Germany, it at least has a massive head start in its integrated public transport network.  And it didn't make the monumental mistake made by Los Angeles and other cities in ripping up their "quaint" tramway/trolley lines for "modern" freeways, like LA did in the fifties ("At its peak, the Pacific Electric Railway was huge: 1,150 miles of track covering four counties and 900 cars. 1944 marked the highest ridership: over 109 million passengers)."  Imagine the cost of recreating that.

No, living like Europeans doesn't mean abandoning the car, but it does mean embracing what's best in urban life, recognizing that it requires public investment, and is sustained by improvements to the infrastructure.  It is the opposite of the throwaway car culture.

Culture Wars, European Style - May '68

I would be remiss in my duty as an observer of the European scene if I let the month of May pass without a comment on May 1968.  Since I was a pimply teenager in Pennsylvania at the time, I cannot speak from personal experience.  But you cannot be alive in Europe in the spring of 2008 without being bombarded with documentaries, books, commemorations - nostalgia of the most maudlin to the intelligently reflective.  At most recent count, 100 books (!) have been published in French alone.

One of the most thoughtful TV programs (now out on DVD), one of the few to put the street protests in France into their international context, is Patrick Rotman's "68."  Francophone readers can listen to an RTL radio interview with Rotman here.  Rotman, as a 19 year old student at the Sorbonne, was a participant and witness.  It was definitely a turbulent year, worldwide.

Anniversaries, especially those ending in round numbers like 40, are fair game for reflection.  Especially when many "soixante-huitards" (in the States, we would say baby boomers) are themselves in their sixties.  In France, there is a particularly contemporary - political - slant to these recollections: President Nicolas Sarkozy is an anti-68, conservative politician, in a country where the dominant intellectual strain grew up in the shadow of the May '68 protests.  Shadows of the US, where "what did you do during the Vietnam War?" continues to fuel political debate, and where the Republican Party would like to program the national DVD player to skip the tracks between Eisenhower and Reagan.

But just like America's boomer hippies have morphed into Wall Street lawyers and Washington politicians, so too have many soixante-huitards joined the establishment.  Probably the best example of a student leader keeping his youthful ideals while succeeding in the political world is "Danny The Red" Daniel Cohn-Bendit, now a member of the European Parliament for Germany's Green Party, though he has as much of a profile in France (born there while his parents fled Nazi persecution, he's perfectly bilingual and bi cultural).  Cohn-Bendit was recently shown chatting with the long-retired chief of the Paris police, who he credits with saving lives (and perhaps French democracy) by holding his fire during the student/labor protests.

"'68" is perhaps most resonant now because of the current existential crisis in the world economic system, with financial, food supply, environmental, and societal (immigration, aging, unemployment) pressures causing many to question the way the Western world organizes itself.  It's another nostalgia "industry," for sure.  But without necessarily offering answers, this season's European retrospectives serve a purpose in forcing introspection of the most useful type.  For the US too, this will be most evident once the Democratic Party finally sorts out its candidate to face John McCain.  Will it be '60s vs. '70s? (age, not decades).  Or will it be McCain national-security-means-guns vs. Obama's more inclusive definition of security through diplomacy, economic strength, and inclusiveness?  The Culture Wars in the United States are not over yet.