[Serial guest-blogger Dorzhiev tries his hand at satire. — YH]

The year is 2012. Against all odds a Pat Buchanan/Ron Paul administration has taken control of the White House. Unhappy with the adventurism of past administrations President Buchanan drafts an isolationist foreign policy that is closer in line with his nuanced understanding of global politics. Here is a copy of his first daily security briefing.

National Security Briefing: Top Secret

Terrorism: We have reliable reports that a trireme full of fundamentalist Mohammedans have disembarked from Mesopotamia and are heading to the New World with the intention of fomenting religious fervour. While it is clear that their intentions are insidious there is little cause for alarm. To reach our shores they would first have to negotiate a gauntlet of obstacles including the Cyclopes of Polyphemus, the piratical waters of Tripoli, and the dragon infested doldrums of the mid-Atlantic. Threat level: one lantern. (For more information please read attached report on Homer’s Odyssey.)

Policy Planning: A forward policy of containment has been drafted regarding the Middle Kingdom’s recent economic advancement. So as not to awaken the slumbering giant we currently recommend a rethinking of our military alliance with the prince of Siam. We also recommend protecting our domestic interest by a) implementing tariffs on imported opium, spices, and jade and b) immediately deporting all Chinamen currently working on the transcontinental railway so as to provide more jobs for God-fearing Americans.

Counterintelligence: After a harrowing counterintelligence operation it has been discovered that previous reports relating to Persia were merely the fabrications of a shadowy cabal of Hebrews who were engaged in a plan for world domination. Upon further review we find no evidence of a threat from Persia and recommend sending emissaries to the Proconsul of Persepolis to express our sincerest apologies for our errant sabre-rattling. Appropriate gifts should also be sent including: assorted hunting fowl, a nickelodeon, wildlife etchings, and a jewel encrusted ear horn for his majesty’s hard of hearing mother. We also recommend a purge of all Benjamites from government office so they cannot continue with their campaign of subterfuge. For more information please consult the attached report on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Weapons Proliferation: Our surveillance telescope Monocle 2 has picked up images of the Tsar’s latest long-range catapults stationed in the Crimea. While more sophisticated than previous designs it is our finding that these war machines do not yet have intercontinental capability and as such do not threaten our national security. They are more likely to be used as a deterrent against Prussian rearmament or for suppressing local uprisings of scheming Jews.

Homeland Security: The FBI should be applauded for its recent infiltration of a Masonic order, a coven of witches, and a dangerous network of intelligentsia who propagate the heretical belief that the world is round.

Several commentators such as John Robb have noted that the war in Iraq is in many ways similar to the Spanish Civil War, foretelling future developments in warfare. So far, we’ve seen new tactics and strategies there being exported around the world. However, perhaps more interesting than the insurgents is concentrating on the normal residents and how they and the US military are coping with security problems and what types of solutions they are coming up with. Thus it was of great interest for me to read this:

Even as the Iraqis are removing some of the concrete blast walls that divide Baghdad, authorities have quietly installed about 100 metal gates near a major Shiite shrine—a clear sign of ongoing security concerns as bombings continue. Perforated gates have been put up in the past three weeks in the heavily policed Kazimiyah district along streets and alleyways leading to the shrine of Imam Mousa al-Kazim, a much revered eighth-century Shiite saint. Security cameras are also being installed at the gates of the double-domed complex.

While it is easy to dismiss Iraq as an exception, it is important to note that such gates exist in Israel too (as this author has seen and passed through) and when Hurricane Katrina hit, residents of New Orleans quickly erected makeshift ‘gates’ of furniture and trash to protect their blocks. In fact, such gates are nothing new and are simple, basic security measures that have been taken in the past. The question is when they will come to the United States. Walls and gates are nothing new in South Africa. Will cities with bad neighborhoods opt for such measures one day in the near future? Lord knows, the US doesn’t typically deal with the root of such social problems making the use of barriers a far more likely.

As the financial crisis continues and people worry more about crime, unrest and general social order while buying record numbers of guns, we may one day be manning gates outside small towns or within cities.

Today, the Treasury Department issued an announcement providing for the implementation of a financial security advisory system, recognizing that the world has changed since the sub-prime crisis. The press release was clear about the driving principles behind the introduction of the guideline: “We remain a nation at risk to financial meltdown and will remain at risk for the foreseeable future. At all Threat Conditions, we must remain vigilant, prepared, and ready to take sufficient precautions.”

The government has also added provisional investment advisory subtitles to each threat alert to help ordinary citizens appreciate the changes in each level. This was deemed to be more appropriate than listing, from bottom to top, the categories as no concern, mild apprehension, nagging dread, crippling fright, and shit-your-underwear terror.

Treasury Secretary Geithner stressed that the government does not want individual behavior to be affected by the alerts, encouraging citizens to go about their business, while noting that the current status of orange is just barely this side of Red Alert, the highest level of danger possible when the entire banking system could breakdown, and when the Treasury Department warns that citizens should plant their own crops, shutter windows, and horde supplies.

Of course, there are a myriad of problems with the alert, which I’ve written about before—you can read more about them here.

A few days ago, I alerted readers to another proposed security reform in Germany which would centralize Germany’s signals intelligence gathering. While I still have found little in the press in English or German, this longer Spiegel article outlines the concerns it has raised and the mood in Germany a bit more.

Germany Plans to Centralize Intelligence-Gathering Activities

German Interior Minister Wolfgang Schäuble wants to set up a central communications monitoring agency in Cologne for use by the police and intelligence agencies, modeled after the US’s NSA and the UK’s GCHQ. But critics fear the creation of a powerful new super-agency.

When Deputy Interior Minister August Hanning starts talking about his latest official visit to the United Kingdom, the otherwise unemotional security expert waxes altogether enthusiastic.

The former head of Germany’s foreign intelligence service, the BND, describes a superforce of highly-trained specialists who sit at the most powerful and expensive computers where, in loyal service to Her Majesty the Queen, they pursue the delicate task of monitoring, recording, and evaluating electronic communications. Everything top secret, of course, and extremely effective.

Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) is the name of the agency that made such an impression on Interior Minister Wolfgang Schäuble’s deputy minister. The listening post is situated on the outskirts of Cheltenham and is housed in a ring-shaped complex that cost €1.8 billion ($2.8 billion) to build. It employs a staff of around 4,000 and is considered by experts to be the most modern facility of its kind in the world, on a par with the National Security Agency (NSA) in the United States. Enigma, the legendary German encryption machine used during World War II, is on display in an in-house museum and is the organization’s most prized trophy. It was the staff of GCHQ’s predecessor who cracked the supposedly unbreakable code, making it possible to decipher German radio communications from 1940 onwards.

As was the case with the cracking of the Enigma code back then, Hanning is convinced that agencies like GCHQ will make all the difference in today’s world—except that today security authorities see their main enemy as being Islamist terrorism inspired by Osama bin Laden.

The only problem is that no agency comparable to GCHQ exists in Germany. There is the Federal Office of Criminal Investigation (BKA), the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), the Federal Intelligence Service (BND), and the Federal Police. All four currently have their own separate systems for monitoring communications. And that’s just at the national level—there are also numerous law enforcement and security agencies at the level of Germany’s 16 federal states. All in all, there are more than 75 separate monitoring facilities in operation nationwide—and they are frankly not very effective compared to the central monitoring stations in the UK and US.

This is likely to change in the near future. On orders from Schäuble’s ministry, a BKA project group has been working since April on the ambitious plan of giving Germany its own central agency for communications monitoring, known in the trade as signals intelligence. This large-scale monitoring initiative is the latest in a series of bold security policy reforms Schäuble has proposed—and is one that is particularly controversial.

Read the rest here.

Not long after proposing a comprehensive reform of Germany’s security policy, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) in Germany is pushing for yet another security reform, combining Germany’s intelligence agencies under one roof. At the moment, German runs the following intelligence agencies:

* Federal Intelligence Service (BND or Bundesnachrichtendienst)

• Military Security Service (MAD or Militärischer Abschirmdienst)
• Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV or Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz)
• State Offices for the Protection of the Constitution (LfV or Landesbehörden für Verfassungsschutz)
  

The BfV however, consists of 16 separate agencies, one for each German state, which are coordinated at its central office in Cologne. Therefore, coordination and information sharing and overlap are ongoing issues to be dealt with. The new proposal from the Ministry of the Interior headed by Chirol’s favorite German politician Woflgang Schäuble would

set up a new authority to combine its various eavesdropping operations in a purpose-built headquarters near Cologne, news organizations reported.The combined police and espionage center would be modeled on the National Security Agency (NSA) in the United States or the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) in Britain.

[...] The interior ministry is keen to take away surveillance functions from the BND foreign intelligence service, and will argue that a new authority similar to the NSA could provide foreign and domestic eavesdropping from one spot. The system needs a revamp because modern communications are mainly digital and use sophisticated new encryption methods, creating a risk that police and intelligence services could be unable to crack the codes, according to Der Spiegel.

At the moment, the Federal Police (BPOL), Federal Criminal Police (BKA), the Federal Intelligence Service and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution all engage in surveillance activities. This plan would centralize the surveillance activities of each office into a new federal agency and “harmonize domestic and foreign communications surveillance.” Der Spiegel first reported on this Friday and there are still no other sources of information that I have found on the matter, neither in the German news nor on the German Interior Ministry’s website. Little public discussion has thus far taken place however it can be fairly easily predicted that this will come under criticism from the left as dangerous centralization and likely from the SPD for similar and political reasons.

I’ll keep readers posted with relevant developments and will have more soon on the proposed new security strategy for German. It is however, both interesting and exciting to watch Germany’s development in security policy and reform proposals of its military, security and intelligence agencies. Now if we could just get them to fight and kill…

More information can be found in German here.

The WSJ has an op-ed on the recent Abkhaz-Georgian-Russian tensions which for anyone following it, offers mainly a summary of the situation up until now recounting especially Georgian mistakes while spending little time on Russia. In fact, it fails to clearly define Russia’s role. While most articles continue to refer to Russian “peacekeepers” it seems a glaring oversight not to note that ongoing and very public threats against Georgia by Moscow makes it clear there are no peacekeepers in Abkhazia or South Ossetia but instead occupation troops. In what other conflict has the side (UN, NATO, AU) whose job it is to maintain peace constantly threatened the other party while actively violating its airspace and shooting down its planes?

Nevertheless, the op-ed ends with a fascinating suggestion for Tbilisi:

Abkhazia is now virtually lost to Georgia—almost as lost as Kosovo is to Serbia. The only chance for Tbilisi to reverse this process and see Georgian refugees ever returning to their home is, paradoxically, to let go. Tbilisi should open up Abkhazia and free it from dependence on Russia. That means lifting sanctions and permitting a sea link to Turkey and the re-opening of a railway line connecting it with Western Georgia.

Such a policy would change the atmosphere and call the Abkhaz bluff—forcing them to negotiate in earnest and confront the issue that holds the key to their future status: Abkhaz responsibilities to their prewar Georgian population. And the rest of us would sleep a little easier if only this tinderbox in the Caucasus could be damped down.

Such a plan would make Thomas Barnett proud.

Thomas de Waal also wrote the fantastic book Black Garden which I read as research for my trip and can highly recommend.

Remember that confusing security debate happening in Japan?

Well, things are looking to get a little more complicated as more international voices join in. Next week eleven envoys will be speaking up to Japanese lawmakers in support of the refueling mission. So far only three countries — United States, Britain, Pakistan — have been named, but what gets me is the location of this little pow-wow: the Canadian Embassy in Tokyo. Hey, they have a nice club there, so why not? So far I can’t find anything else in either the Japanese or Canadian media. We might have to wait until next week. I am interested in seeing what the official Canadian position is on the Japanese mission in the Indian ocean. Though considering how our NATO allies have not been willing to stand up in Afghanistan, I am sure we’ll be ready to accept any help we can get.

Our pal Schloky has fired up his new site naxaliterage.com and I just wanted to give him a shoutout.

Shlok Vaidya was in India this summer investigating the vulnerability of the Indian railway system. His interest lies in the Naxalite insurgency, systempunkts and the effects on the global economy. Naxalite Rage is his new blog to examine these issues. It looks sweet, I urge you to take a look. (Added to the blogroll)

It is interesting how soon nuance enters the analysis of IR theorists. After the cold war many analysts had dire outlooks on Asia. Predictions of Japanese rearmament and war were abound with such book and article titles as The Coming War with Japan and The Coming Confrontation between China and Japan. Yet nearly two decades after the end of the cold war Japan has yet to rearm to its full potential and there have been no wars in Asia. A common argument made by realists is that Japan yearns to be a great power, and return to a “normal” foreign policy by casting off its pacifist constitution and rearming to a level commensurate with its economic power. Though there has been a minuscule increase in defence spending, Japan has yet to rearm to the level consistent with its economy and technological advancement.

Once the influence of the zeitgeist wore off (bursting of the economic bubble?) more nuanced analyses come to the fore. Some twist the old theories to capture the empirical evidence, creating new splinters such as “mercantile realism” and “realism through neoliberal institutionalism.” Some simply says that Japan is neither pacifist nor militaristic but that its survival and economic strength depend on a stable order. Japan is not in danger of being attacked by China because of the American security umbrella. Moreover, Japan need not balance against the United States since it does not fear an attack. Richard Samuels seems to have come around to a similar outlook. I am currently reading his new book Securing Japan: Tokyo’s Grand Strategy and the Future of East Asia which was released at the end of the summer. It attempts to trace the history of Japan’s grand strategy and forecast its future aims. A tall order. Samuels argues that Japan will strike a balance between strength and autonomy, preventing it from becoming too dependent on America or too vulnerable to China. This is a more moderate position than the other post-cold war analyses, but still within the realm of balance-of-power realists. Still, it is a difficult proposition.

My view is much more culture based. I believe that the Japanese government won’t act until it is too late. It will take an emergency for them to get their act together. They will stall and try to maintain the status quo as long as possible, without preparing for the worst. Then everything hits the fan. In other words, there is a lack of a grand strategy. Consider it part of the greater arc of Japanese history. Japan has a sort of island mentality. They will keep on doing the same old thing until some sort of disruption causes everything to change: think Mongols, Jesuits, Black Ships, SCAP. I know it isn’t some grand theory of international relations, but my view is limited by my personal experience living in Japan for so many years. That’s my two yen… back to the book.

The current state of the national security debate in Japan:

Government: Japan must be a part of the War on Terror! We must extend our refueling mission in the Indian Ocean. Remember ‘91¹?

Opposition: No! We are American lapdogs! The mission is a violation of the pacifist constitution. Troops home now (erm… after Nov 1)!

Gov: No! Let’s compromise, we can stop the refueling ops and just “police” the Indian Ocean. Remember ‘91?

Opp: No! You are old and factional! Pacifist constitution!

Gov: What do you propose?

Opp: Let’s go to Darfur, or Afghanistan!

Gov: That may be difficult. There is the constitution…

ADDENDUM—LDP heavy: Terrorists!

Confused yet?

¹ Japan faced heavy international criticism for not committing personnel to the first Gulf War. Instead Japan contributed $13b, and was accused of “checkbook diplomacy.” This was a big impedetus for the adoption of the Kaifu Bill, which allowed Japan to deploy troops overseas for UN missions.