Tag Archives: foreign policy

Lawyered Up

Posted on by
Reply

Recall the PRC’s invasions of our government computer systems including theft of personally identifying information—including fingerprints—of millions of Americans who are, or were, or merely applied to be Federal government employees. Keep in mind that “government employees” includes our soldiers and our intelligence personnel.

Recall what President Barack Obama said he’d do about that.

We’re not going to just stand by while these threats grow. If you think you can just hide behind borders and leap laws and carry out your activities, that’s just not going to be the case.

Here’s what Obama actually did about that. He got PRC President Xi Jinping to agree to this:

neither country’s government will conduct or knowingly support cyber-enabled theft of intellectual property, including trade secrets or other confidential business information, with the intent of providing competitive advantages to companies or commercial sectors.

Of course the PRC’s non-government entities will be winked at (Did that do that? Really? That’s a shame) and go merrily on their way doing the thefts to the State’s content.

Never mind, too, that there are a lot of reasons to penetrate another nation’s computer systems other than to steal information:

  • test their cyber penetration tools
  • test our cyber defenses of their penetration tools
  • test our cyber defenses generally
  • learn what we know about their capabilities—military, economic, cyber, political, etc
  • learn what we know, or think we know about our own capabilities—military, economic, cyber, political, etc
  • oh yeah—steal information for its own sake

Of course the famous Yale Law Review Editor and Constitutional Law Instructor knows this, full well.

Mysteries

Posted on by
Reply

That’s what foreign policy seems to be full of for our State Department boys and girls.

Russia is in Iraq, joining a loose coalition of Iraq, Iran, and Syria, ostensibly to help Iraq fight the Daesh. Russia is inserting generals into a “coordination” cell in Baghdad, and it’s moving in fighter aircraft to fly “reconnaissance” missions for Iraq (and for themselves…).

Separately (at least the boys and girls in State seem think it’s a separate thing), Russia has been supplying ground combat hardware and soldiers to Syria, ostensibly to fight the Daesh there, and to prop up Bashar al-Assad.

What’s going on here, as Walter Cronkite might ask?

A carefully anonymous “senior US official” who attended a meeting between the head boy, the guy who sits in the SecState chair John Kerry, and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov mumbled this:

We’re just at the beginning of trying to understand what the Russians’ intentions are in Syria, in Iraq, and to try to see if there are mutually beneficial ways forward here. We’ve got a long way to go in that conversation.

In other words, State, caught completely by surprise by Russia’s move into Syria, has been caught even more flat-footed by Russia’s move into Iraq.

It’s actually pretty clear “what’s going on here.” Syria was a Soviet client since shortly after World War II. Iraq was a Soviet client—a heavily supplied and armed one—for nearly as long. Apparently, in the latter case, the boys and girls missed whose equipment we shot up in two Iraq wars, for instance.

It seems, too, that our boys and girls have forgotten Russian Premier Vladimir Putin’s goal of reconstituting the Soviet Empire. The collapse of the Soviet Union, Putin has said, was a geopolitical tragedy of epic proportion, but it seems our boys and girls slept through that part of the lecture. Or perhaps the idea is just so foreign to them that they can’t conceive anything about it.

Putin is busily reconstituting that Soviet empire. Pure and simple. And if any of that deprecates American influence, if any of that embarrasses us (always assuming anyone in the Obama administration has the grace to be embarrassable), so much the better.

No mysteries there.

Education and Educators

Posted on by
Reply

Vladimir Putin doesn’t seem to share President Obama’s definition of “smarter.” Ten days ago Mr Obama declared that the Russian President’s military deployments in Syria were “doomed to fail” and the Kremlin was “going to have to start getting a little smarter.” Mr Putin then began sending fighter jets, and now it looks like Mr Obama is the one who has been taken to school.

Indeed.

In addition to the jets, Russia is sending T-90 tanks, howitzers, troop-transport and attack helicopters, a company of armed Marines, and further equipment to establish an air base near the coastal Syrian city of Latakia. Mr [Russian Minister of Defense Sergei] Shoigu describes the build-up as “defensive in nature.”

Kind of like the way we should be helping the Kurds in both Iraq and Syria.

Hmm….

Assad Must Go

Posted on by
1

Or so said President Barack Obama:

The future of Syria must be determined by its people, but President Bashar al-Assad is standing in their way. For the sake of the Syrian people, the time has come for President Assad to step aside.

Now, with 200,000 of those Syrian people dead, the guy who sits in the Secretary of State’s chair, John Kerry, says, “Well, whenever.”

We’re not being doctrinaire about the specific date or time. We’re open.

And

He said Mr Assad doesn’t have to leave “on day one or month one or whatever.”

Yeah, whenever’s good. Because Bashar al Assad the reformer can be trusted to step down at the appointed time. Absolutely.

Further Obama administration retreat.