Distant Thunder

Daniel Jackson reports:

I've been travelling up and down Israel the last several weeks talking with the young men and women who are either in service or recently out of service. They are an incredible group. They are bright, fit, clear, and incredibly pleasant company. They are also very sober with how things are shaping up. They will be the ones in Harm's Way.

There's a place where I go to look at stars where the Israel Trail cuts through.

On any given night, I will run into four to six young people eager to play with telescopes, share some tea and food around a campfire, and talk about things to come.

The coming war is on everyone's mind.

I cannot comment on the veracity of Mr. Jackson's comments, but there is a building tension in the Middle East as the United States and Europe wallow in their self-inflicted misery and turn their focus ever-more myopically inward.

Rumors of moves and counters, of Israeli plans and Iranian initiatives, of Hezbollah rockets and Syrian chemical weapons. Israel views Iran as an existential threat; Iran views Israel as the paramount obstacle to its Arabian ambitions. Israel is said to be considering a preemptive strike to slow Iran's nuclar program; Iran is now rumored to be planning a strike of is own to forestall that, figuring it better to take the initiative while its nuclear capabilities are an open question.

I've been reading too much about World War One of late, so these rumors cannot help but invite comparisons to the various crises that lead to that horrible war. Much like the summer of 1914, I feel that we are in for a long, tense summer of diplomatic initiatives that ultimately fail to prevent a horrible war. And regardless of your feelings about it, Americans will be caught in the crossfire, in Israel, in the Persian Gulf and in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It's going to be a long, hot summer.

Two Russian Submarines Patrolling Off East Coast

Back to the Bad Old Days. Paging Jack Ryan...

From the New York Times(!):

Russian Subs Patrolling Off East Coast of U.S.

WASHINGTON — A pair of nuclear-powered Russian attack submarines has been patrolling off the eastern seaboard of the United States in recent days, a rare mission that has raised concerns inside the Pentagon and intelligence agencies about a more assertive stance by the Russian military.

The episode has echoes of the cold war era, when the United States and the Soviet Union regularly parked submarines off each other’s coasts to steal military secrets, track the movements of their underwater fleets — and be poised for war.

But the collapse of the Soviet Union all but eliminated the ability of the Russian Navy to operate far from home ports, making the current submarine patrols thousands of miles from Russia more surprising for military officials and defense policy experts.

“I don’t think they’ve put two first-line nuclear subs off the U.S. coast in about 15 years,” said Norman Polmar, a naval historian and submarine warfare expert.

The submarines are of the Akula class, a counterpart to the Los Angeles class attack subs of the United States Navy, and not one of the larger submarines that can launch intercontinental nuclear missiles.

Of course, if they were of the type that could launch ICBMs, the Russians would be violating several conventions, and escalating matters far more than they already have.

And the Russians aren't denying it. From the AP:

Russian general confirms submarine patrols near US

MOSCOW – A top Russian general says two nuclear-powered Russian attack submarines that have been spotted off the U.S. East Coast are part of regular patrols. Anatoly Nogovitsyn, the deputy chief of staff of Russia's armed forces, says the patrols are not newsworthy.

Right.

But this doesn't seem to cause much consternation among the Navy blogs I visit.
Cdr. Salamander isn't worried. Neither is EagleSpeak.

Galrahn at Information Dissemination isn't too concerned, but has his usual thoughtful insight, and is worth reading.

So maybe I'm overblowing this. Taken in isolation, I probably am, but taken in aggregate...

Can't Stop The Signal

When viewing the situation in Iran, I find myself wavering between hope for a real change to happen - and fear that this will all come to a bloody and costly end. Iran's fanatic Shi'ite masters have no trouble throwing lives away to get what they desire.

But will the troops shoot their own if they are ordered to the streets?

I have no real insight to offer, but one thing I find fascinating -news is still getting out. Despite Iran's autocracy, news still seeps out through the various avenues of the internet. Even should the worst happen, and a crackdown occur, we will know. Iran's leaders will not be able to sweep future atrocities under the rug.

We'll be watching.

A New Tide of Authoritarianism

From Freedom House:

Democracy seen threatened by new authoritarianism

China, Iran, Russia and Venezuela form a clique of authoritarian states that use their wealth and influence to undermine global democracy and rule of law.

Their findings:

Democracy Redefined: Authoritarian regimes are tarnishing the public understanding of democracy.

Internet Under Threat: Leading authoritarians are using advanced and well-funded techniques to subvert legitimate online discourse, especially in China, Iran and Russia. In addition to controlling access through physical, economic, and technological means, these regimes have deployed armies of commentators and provocateurs like the “Fifty Cent Party” in China and the “Brigades” in Russia to disrupt legitimate internet discussions.

Authoritarian Foreign Aid: By doling out billions of dollars in no strings attached foreign aid, these regimes are hobbling international efforts to improve governance and reduce corruption.

Rules-Based Organizations Under Siege: As part of a broader effort to export authoritarian influence, these regimes are disrupting key international rules-based bodies that support democratic and human rights, including the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Organization of American States (OAS) and the European Court of Human Rights. At the United Nations, they have formed ad hoc coalitions to blunt criticism, obstruct proposed sanctions, and advance antidemocratic measures. The governments of Venezuela, Russia, and China have been particularly active in creating new institutions to serve as counterweights to existing rules-based multilateral organizations.

Illiberal Education—Tainting the Next Generation: By either actively promoting or enabling the distortion of history through a nationalistic or extremist lens, authoritarian regimes are inculcating in the next generation attitudes of hostility toward democracy and suspicion of the outside world.

Their summary of the challenges facing us:

Today’s authoritarians recognize that absolute control over information and economic activity is neither possible nor necessary. Instead, they have adapted their traditional coercive mechanisms with more subtle methods. Political discourse is “managed,” rather than blatantly dictated, through the selective suppression or reshaping of news and information. And while the most important business entities are either co-opted or swallowed up by the state, the days of the command economy are over. Their citizens are allowed to enjoy personal freedoms—including foreign travel and access to consumer goods—that would have been unthinkable in the era of Mao and Brezhnev.

During the Cold War, the nature and goals of the dominant authoritarian states were clearer. In contrast, modern authoritarians, integrated into the global economy and participating in many of the world’s established financial and political institutions, present a murkier challenge.

In a 21st-century context, isolation of or disengagement from these states are not viable options. And generally speaking, in order to advance economic interests, these regimes would prefer engagement with the United States and its allies, but only on their terms.

And while the new authoritarians continue with this sophisticated approach, we become less so. ("If we just talk to them, they'll like us!")

The 1930s were often described as an authoritarian age, as it witnessed the rise of Hitler, the consolidation of Mussolini, and the ascendancy of Stalin. It was even worried about here, as FDR pushed the limits of government power to their limits.

And today doesn't seem too dissimilar, does it?

More worrying still - we know how the 1930s ended.

Come Again?

From Haaretz:

Some 23 percent of Israelis would consider leaving the country if Iran obtains a nuclear weapon, according to a poll conducted on behalf of the Center for Iranian Studies at Tel Aviv University.

Some 85 percent of respondents said they feared the Islamic Republic would obtain an atomic bomb, 57 percent believed the new U.S. initiative to engage in dialogue with Tehran would fail and 41 percent believed Israel should strike Iran's nuclear installations without waiting to see whether or how the talks develop.

But what caught my eye was this odd statement:

"The findings are worrying because they reflect an exaggerated and unnecessary fear," Prof. David Menashri, the head of the Center, said.

How is that an "unnecessary" fear?

You have a leader of a nation engaged in developing nuclear weapons making statements that the Holocaust never happened and that Israel should be destroyed.

That sounds like an inherently logical fear to me.

Granted, Islamic extremists tend to talk a lot. But eventually they follow through on their threats.

And they only have to succeed once.