Just How Much Time Has Russia Bought?

Much of Russia's policy toward China is clearly an effort to appease China to buy time for Russia to rebuild from their post-Soviet collapse of military and economic power. Is Russia's time over in 2020?

I ask this because the recent DOD China report notes 2020 as an important year for China's development plans:

China’s leaders routinely emphasize the goal of reaching critical economic and military benchmarks by 2020. These benchmarks include successfully restructuring the economy to maintain growth and increase Chinese citizens’ quality of life to promote stability; making major progress in military modernization; and, attaining the capability to fight and win potential regional conflicts, including those related to Taiwan, protection of sea lines of communication (SLOCs), defense of territorial claims in the South China Sea and East China Sea, and defense of western borders. Statements by Chinese leaders indicate that, in their view, the development of a modern military is necessary for China to achieve great power status. These statements also indicate that the Chinese leadership views a modern military as a deterrent to prevent adversaries from threatening Chinese interests or to allow China to defend itself, should deterrence fail.

Russia wants a quiet Chinese border. And China likes having a quiet Russian border given Peking's interest in pushing their core interests at sea in regard to Taiwan, the South China Sea, and the East China Sea. Russia's once robust arms sales (naval and air power) to China and Russia's disregard for China's theft of Russian technology in the process was one part of their common interest of keeping China focused on the sea and away from Russia.

Something about that year kept nagging at me. What happens after 2020?

Oh yeah, a twenty-year Russian-Chinese treaty that put their border disputes (China lost a lot of land to Russia in the 19th century) on hold becomes subject to cancellation by either party:

As the article notes, both sides have reason to keep the border quiet for now. China is focusing on Taiwan and Russia is too broke to defend itself. Russia clearly hopes that the balance of forces will shift its way by 2021. Either Russia is economically strong enough to defend their Far East or China gets blasted a bit by the US and Japan in a war over Taiwan (a war the Russians seem determined to facilitate). China must either hope to own Taiwan by then or be strong enough economically to build a military strong enough to cope with both threats at the same time.

So we need to make sure that China can't achieve their offshore objectives--especially the conquest of Taiwan--before that treaty comes up for cancellation.

And it would be nice to get Russia to stop thinking of itself as a victim of non-existent NATO plots and view NATO as a potential ally against a country that might not want to keep those territorial questions on ice for much longer than 2021.

But Putin and his territorial ambitions in the west make the latter a project likely to last longer than 2020--if it can be achieved at all. The paranoia may run too deep.

The one thing that is subject to our actions is to make sure we can react quickly to a Chinese attack that seeks to conquer Taiwan and pretty much nail down China's influence and control over the South China Sea and East China Sea by the time that Russian-Chinese treaty can be cancelled.

We can't make Taiwan take the threat of invasion seriously. But we should encourage them to pay the price it takes to defend their island democracy.

As for Russia? Well, they've throttled back arms sales to China out of concern for technology theft, well short of 2021. That's smart. If Russia wants to keep China pointed away from Russia and toward the sea, Russia probably needs to focus on making sure Taiwan is too strong for China to solve their Taiwan problem before 2021. Selling submarines to Taiwan would probably be a good idea at this point.

Twenty years probably wasn't enough time to purchase, from Russia's point of view.

Mission Not Accomplished

The administration victory lap over deterring Russia from conquering eastern Ukraine--if you can ignore that Russia already took part of Ukraine by seizing Crimea--is premature even in that narrow focus.

Pro-Russian elements in eastern Ukraine are still fighting to separate the region from Ukraine:

Pro-Russian separatists attacked Ukrainian military checkpoints and other strategic points in eastern Ukraine overnight but they were beaten off with only minor casualties on the Ukrainian side, a government forces spokesman said on Tuesday.

Fighting took place at Kramatorsk, Luhansk, and Slaviansk.

At Luhansk, the Ukrainians offer the detail that their "special force units" repelled the attack.

This does not mean elite special forces. Ukrainians have called their newly raised National Guard units special force units, and I'm sure this is what the spokesman was talking about.

I also tend to ignore the body counts issued for dead rebels. I assume they have no idea what damage they've inflicted.

NULLFLIX

My Netflix fail continues.

I actually had a nice online chat with someone who spent about 40 or 50 minutes with my trying to address the issue.

In the end they could not help me and suggested I try talking to my ISP to see what they are doing regarding the wifi signal.

Which makes no sense.

Drawing up long-dormant Signal Corps skills, the signal flow points to a problem with Netflix programming.

Basically, I can watch Netflix with no problem on my hard-wired desktop computer.

But no, hardwiring my game consoles to the modem is not an option given the distance across the room. That would be some expensive cabling snaked across my ceiling.

But I cannot watch it--except for once a couple days ago after 10:00 p.m.

The Netflix rep did note that at peak times it can be difficult to get in, period. But it didn't work just now. So just when is non-peak time? 3:00 a.m. to 4:15 a.m.?

But that doesn't make sense, either. If it is access to Netflix, why can I watch Netflix on everything I own but my game console connections and my toaster?

Anyway, back to signal flow and wifi.

Using wifi, I can watch Netflix on my laptop. And on my phone. And iPod Touch. And my daughter can use her tablet. So wifi magically works there.

Aha, you say. But that's not through the Wii and XBox 360 on my TV! Clearly, there is a problem with the TV, right?

No. I test connections and they work. I even watched YouTube on my TV, after searching. So there is two-way communication from game consoles to and from my router that allow my TV to show videos from over the web.

The only place the signal flow breaks down is through the Wii and Xbox 360. And the consoles connect to the Internet so it isn't a problem with the consoles themselves.

It simply has to be the programming for the consoles in the Netflix apps.

Really, I once had no problem at all--until a few months ago--in just turning on a console and getting Netflix no matter what hour of the day it was. But now it is all gummed up.

I like Netflix. I do. But this is entertainment, for Pete's sake. I should turn it on and watch. Not spend a half hour troubleshooting every time I want to watch with no assurance it will work.

So I'm edging for the exits. When I feel I have a good option for an alternative, I'll take it.

Or maybe I'll just decide the service just isn't worth it on top of a cable TV bill. Netflix is lucky my daughter loves the service and likes to watch it either on my computer or her tablet. If she grows tired of it, I may run for the exits under the current service situation.

Television shouldn't be this annoying.

UPDATE: Wow. They're just effing with me at this point. My desktop won't work for Netflix with a totally new problem. Apparently I need to close all my open brownser windows, uninstall Microsoft Silverlight and then reinstall it when prompted while trying to use Netflix again.

Kudos. Really, bravo. This totally took me by surprise.

Poor Belarus: So Far From God. So Close to Putin

Belarus is feeling worried these days. With Putin pining for Soviet glory days, the last "Soviet" republic is a prime target for Russian territorial ambitions:

Many have asked: if Russia could take Crimea, then why not Belarus? Of Belarus’s 10-million strong population, 15% are ethnically Russian. Belarus is far more Russian than Ukraine: the language ubiquitous, the culture almost indistinguishable. Lukashenko said recently that he saw his country as “the most pro-Russian province” – an admission akin to the Austrian chancellor declaring his country to be a loyal subject of Germany – and agreed that Crimea was part of Russia.

Yet he has also come to Kiev’s defence. In the face of prolonged, pro-Russian separatist violence in eastern Ukraine, he has been vocal in saying the country must not be split apart, and pledged his support for the newly elected western-backed Ukrainian president, Petro Poroshenko.

Lukashenko maintains Russians are Belarusians’ best friends, but warned: “No matter who comes to Belarusian land, I will fight. Even if it is Putin.”

Yeah, befriending the bear seemed wise while the bear hibernated. But as the bear wakes up, it's hungry. And Belarus is conveniently close, similar, and flat.

And as a dictatorship, the ruler Lukashenko would have trouble gaining sympathy in the West if the Russians move.

Of course, Russia would advance a long distance west, which would rightly freak out Poland and the Baltic NATO states. Germany might even become worried about the nearness of Russian tanks and the tiny size of Germany's army. And we'd have to think of putting significant ground troops into Poland rather than just equipment, as I've long suggested.

Unrest in the Empire?

I admit I missed this drama in Abkhazia:

Last week's hair-trigger uprising in Abkhazia, the Georgian breakaway region supported by Russia, ended in a matter of days. It was over before it could be properly understood or even noticed by the outside world.

It isn't clear whether this is an opportunity for Russia to formally annex the former Georgian territory that Russia put out of reach of Georgian authority in the 2008 war; or if it is a sign that locals want more democracy and opportunity.

Perhaps Russia will find they need those Chechen "volunteers" sent to Ukraine closer to their home region.

UPDATE: Thanks to Stones Cry Out for the link. I'm not the only one who missed this.

The PLA Budget

China's official military budget buys more than it appears since China buys much of their military on their local market, where purchasing power parity (PPP) magnifies the dollar-denominated budget comparison with our spending. In addition, China's "defense" budget includes more than the People's Liberation Army (PLA).

This information from the 2014 DOD China report is interesting:

China’s internal security forces primarily consist of the People’s Armed Police (PAP), the Ministry of Public Security (MPS), and the PLA. The PAP is a paramilitary organization whose primary mission is domestic security. It falls under the dual command of the CMC and the State Council. Although there are different types of PAP units, such as border security and firefighting, the largest is internal security. PAP units are organized into “contingents” in each province, autonomous region, and centrally administered city. In addition, 14 PLA divisions were transferred to the PAP in the mid- to late- 1990s to form “mobile divisions” that can deploy outside their home province. The official budget for China’s internal security forces exceeds that of the PLA.

These would have secondary national defense missions. Note that part of the PAP consists of old-style infantry divisions of the PLA transferred to the PAP.

And note, too, that China--which doesn't really distinguish between foreign and domestic threats to their control they way we do--considers their armed military power to have a mission of defending the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) from all threats, foreign and domestic.

So with other agencies and PPP considerations, China's defense budget in defense of the CCP is much larger than is often discussed. And there's the "civilian" Chinese coast guard, too, that is always prominent in sea disputes.

China estimates their defense budget at $119.5 billion. We estimate it as over $145 billion.

And this doesn't include foreign military purchases. If you apply PPP to China's defense budget as we estimate it, you could pretty much double it to $290 billion equivalent.

And if paramilitary internal security spending is more than the official defense budget, we can call it a cool $600 billion equivalent.

Plus foreign arms purchases.

If I see something that indicates my back-of-the-envelope math skills are lacking in this assessment, I'll revisit this.

Compare this to about $640 billion in American defense spending in the same year. Which includes operations in the ongoing war on terror. But you could add in some spending from the Department of Energy for nuclear weapons research and production costs, I imagine. I think Coast Guard budgets would be in Transportation, but unlike China's coast guard which would be available to fight us off China's coast, our Coast Guard will largely remain around our coast. So I wouldn't really add that in--unless China attempts to operate off of our coasts, too.

But don't tell me that China isn't building a credible military establishment--bolstered by geographic advantage in concentrating their power (they are close and we are far; and we have global responsibilities while China's are all local--not that I'd trade places with China, mind you).

If we can knit together all the separate military capabilities into a coherent military response, we and our allies retain superiority. But I don't assume China can't pick off weak ones from the herd.

Some People Just Didn't Get the Memo

Far be it for me to dispute the president's notion that the war on terror has been responsibly ended.

But:

Taliban militants disguised as security forces stormed into Pakistan's busiest airport on Sunday night, triggering an all-night battle in which at least 27 people were killed.

The assault on Jinnah International Airport in Karachi, Pakistan's sprawling commercial hub of 18 million people, all but destroys prospects for peace talks between the Pakistani Taliban and the government of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.

And:

Insurgents overran the headquarters of the provincial government in Iraq's northern city of Mosul late on Monday, making further gains in a fourth day of fighting in the country's second-largest city.

Governor Atheel Nujaifi was trapped inside the building but managed to escape while police held back an assault by hundreds of militants armed with rocket-propelled grenades, sniper rifles and heavy machine guns mounted on vehicles.

And here I thought the war against jihadis in Iraq was ended long ago; and the war on the Taliban that we fight in Afghanistan is scheduled to end in just a couple years.

Somebody is obviously unclear on the concepts of fighting and ending wars.

UPDATE: Seriously, send a memo to somebody about whether the war is on or off.

Iraq:

Militants from the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and their allies overran a military base and freed hundreds of prisoners early on Tuesday in a spectacular strike against the Shi'ite-led Iraqi government.

And Pakistan:

Pakistan's Taliban insurgents claimed responsibility for an attack on a security academy at Karachi's airport on Tuesday, less than 48 hours after an all-night siege by Taliban gunmen at Pakistan's busiest airport that killed more than 30 people.

The Iraq situation is particularly disturbing in that the enemy is able to mass large numbers of fighters to actually overrun a base.

That did not happen when we fought in Iraq. We atomized the enemy to prevent large attacks. Attacks above platoon-sized were rare and the enemy relied on IEDs and indirect fire to make up for their inability to attack our bases.

Iraq really needs our firepower and targeting ability to go after the enemy to keep them from being able to mass troops to overrun a freaking base.

As for Pakistan, every year I hope that the Pakistani government will stop treating jihadis as an asset and go after them like the murderous scum they are. Every year I'm disappointed.

Lots of memos need to be written.

UPDATE: Well, we have one address for the memo:

White House deputy press secretary Josh Earnest said ... that Obama and Clinton succeeded in “ending the war in Iraq [and] responsibly winding down the war in Afghanistan.” He also cited ”the success of our efforts to dismantle and destroy al-Qaeda core.”

Iraq is reeling under the recent al Qaeda seizure of Mosul, bolstered by the rise of al Qaeda in Syria which already aided them in seizing territory in Iraq's Anbar province.

And the Taliban in Pakistan are part of a broader Taliban jihadi movement (remember, that's where our forces killed Osama bin Laden) that spans the border with Afghanistan where our allies will still fight the jihadis when we are gone.

Yet apparently, after losing thousands of troops to defeat our enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan, an administration spokesman considers it a foreign policy achievement just to have left Iraq and to be getting ready to leave Afghanistan.

Our administration has no concept of victory in Iraq and Afghanistan, it seems.

But we'll get lovely "Participation" ribbons, I suppose.

Seeking the Rays of Adulation

As President Obama looks ahead to his last two years in office after the November elections, his thoughts are turning to establishing his legacy.

For a man who ran on the idea of "competence" rather than ideology--notwithstanding that he is the most left-wing president we've elected--the legacy of competence will be hard to burnish:

With 30 months to go, Obama still may have a chance to regain control of both the domestic and international agendas, but to do that he’s going to have to change his approach. He needs to focus on the nitty-gritty, day-to-day business of governing; six years into his administration, the public is fed up with promises and hungry for concrete accomplishments.

President Obama needs to show that he knows how to get things done, or increasingly the world will move on as if he wasn’t there.

This will be a problem.

I suggest President Obama settle on establishing a legacy of adequasivity:



To be judged adequate by history would truly be an honor at this point.

I'd honestly be relieved if things went adequately, at this point.

The PLA's Primary Mission

The Department of Defense China report is out.

China's military modernization remains focused on Taiwan:

Dealing with a potential contingency in the Taiwan Strait remains the PLA’s primary mission despite an overall reduction of cross-Strait tensions—a trend that continued following the re-election of Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou in January 2012. Should conditions change, the PLA could be called upon to compel Taiwan to abandon possible moves toward independence or to re-unify Taiwan with the mainland by force of arms while deterring or defeating any third-party intervention on Taiwan’s behalf.

"Deterring or defeating" third-party intervention ("third-party" means America, with a likely assist by Japan) is not a sufficient description of China's intent on this aspect of a Taiwan mission. Add a third "D": delay.

As I've droned on repeatedly here, China does not need to defeat America to conquer Taiwan. China needs to defeat Taiwan to conquer Taiwan. And to defeat Taiwan, China only needs to delay our intervention long enough to defeat and conquer Taiwan. This is a far less difficult mission than deterring America or defeating us.

The report goes into China's force modernization efforts. While many will dismiss China's efforts because their defense spending (in US dollars is way behind us), this is actually a situation where purchasing power parity (PPP) matters. China is purchasing most of their military on the local economy and not on the world market where dollar value matters.

In addition to continuing equipment modernization, China is devoting more attention to training their forces for war:

In 2013, the PLA emphasized training under “realistic combat scenarios” and the ability to execute long-range mobility operations. This type of training was highlighted by the MISSION ACTION 2013 series of exercises and the MANEUVER 5 PLA Navy exercise involving all three PLA Navy fleets. MISSION ACTION 2013 was a multi-week exercise led by the Nanjing and Guangzhou Military Regions (MRs) and the PLA Air Force. The exercise emphasized multiple PLA objectives including long-distance mobility and logistics, joint air-ground, and joint air-naval operations under realistic, high-tech conditions, and a series of amphibious landing operations.

Remember, China's military developments remain focused on Taiwan. Yet we are supposedly in a period of thaw in cross-strait relations. Other than Sun Tsu's advice to appear far when actually near, why would China appear to have cordial relations with Taiwan while focusing on Taiwan for their military development?

Denial and deception is one reason:

Contemporary PLA writings also indicate that the Chinese view D&D as a critical enabler of psychological shock and force multiplication effects during a surprise attack, allowing the PLA to offset the advantages of a technologically superior enemy and to reinforce its military superiority against weaker opponents.

Denying they intend to invade Taiwan and deceiving us about their capacity to invade Taiwan would help China overcome weaker Taiwan during the time they can buy by deterring, defeating, or merely delaying American intervention.

I find this amusing:

The PLA is capable of increasingly sophisticated military action against Taiwan. It is possible China would first pursue a measured approach characterized by signaling its readiness to use force, followed by a deliberate buildup of force to optimize the speed of engagement over strategic deception. Another option is that China would sacrifice overt, large-scale preparations in favor of surprise to force rapid military or political resolution before other countries could respond.

Yeah, China might forgo deception efforts that invite us to prepare to counter a Chinese invasion by a measured approach of signalling increased military readiness.

Or the Chinese might try to launch a fast invasion that overwhelms Taiwan before we can react effectively. Yeah, one of the two, no doubt.

We think we could detect Chinese preparations. And we probably could. But how would we interpret the preparations? Could Chinese D & D efforts convince us that the preparations that China can't hide from our surveillance are for a purpose completely unrelated to invading Taiwan?

That's why at one time I was focused on the 2008 Summer Olympics as a prime means of hiding intent.

Obviously, China did not invade. But the general notion isn't so odd. Russia perhaps masked Crimea invasion preparations through their efforts to secure this year's Winter Olympics in Russia, no? And Russia invaded Georgia during those 2008 Summer Olympics, remember. China could come up with a cover story, too, that reassures us that China has no intention of invading Taiwan even as China prepares to do just that.

So, after discussing other "more likely" military threats to Taiwan, I don't take a lot of comfort when this report minimizes the ability of China to hit Taiwan 100 miles off their coast:

Success would depend upon air and sea superiority, rapid buildup and sustainment of supplies on shore, and uninterrupted support. An attempt to invade Taiwan would strain China’s armed forces and invite international intervention. These stresses, combined with China’s combat force attrition and the complexity of urban warfare and counterinsurgency, assuming a successful landing and breakout, make amphibious invasion of Taiwan a significant political and military risk. Taiwan’s investments to harden infrastructure and strengthen defensive capabilities could also decrease China’s ability to achieve its objectives. Moreover, China does not appear to be building the conventional amphibious lift required to support such a campaign.

Jumping to the problems of urban warfare and counter-insurgency is getting ahead of ourselves, isn't it? Doesn't that assume Chinese advances to control Taiwanese population centers? If that's the biggest threat to Chinese victory, the war is over. I highly doubt we'd counter-invade Taiwan.

And if China had any doubt about that, our inability to really do anything to reverse Russia's conquest of Crimea has ended that thought.

Even if we assume that economic problems will punish Russia enough to liberate Crimea, China will surely believe that their superior economic power and integration in the world economy will allow China to brush off any attempts to punish China economically. And China does hold a lot of our debt, which might make us a bit vulnerable to counter-actions.

Sure, Taiwan might improve defenses enough to defeat the Chinese. I'm not saying Chinese victory is assured. Taiwan might fight hard. China might screw up. We and the Japanese might intervene quickly.

But I do not assume that the lack of Chinese conventional amphibious lift is as crucial as the report would like us to believe.

My invasion scenario--which relies on the historic ability of nations without dedicated amphibious warfare assets to do just that--doesn't restrict itself to what China wants us to see concerning their amphibious warfare capabilities. I see broader capabilities, like this "civilian" ship.

I cannot believe that the objective around which China's military is organized--the conquest of Taiwan--is something that the Chinese cannot attempt after years of military progress. I believe China can attempt to invade Taiwan. And if the Chinese are willing to endure the price, China could quite possibly defeat Taiwan before we can intervene in strength.

In the Long Run, We Are All Russian

Even as we think we've stopped Putin's recent run of conquests, Putin is continuing his campaign to absorb eastern Ukraine. Just where are Russia's Interior Ministry troops, anyway? And don't forget there is no easy option for reclaiming Crimea from Putin's grasp.

Planning for the long run, we're sending experts to help Ukraine rebuild their military:

Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez said senior U.S. defense officials met with senior Ukrainian officials earlier this week to discuss “ways our countries could strengthen our long-term defense cooperation to help Ukraine build highly effective armed forces and defense institutions.”

Lainez said that assessment is being viewed as a first step toward helping to “shape and establish an enduring program for future U.S. efforts to support the Ukrainian military through training, education, and assistance.”

This is all good. But in the short run, Ukraine is still fighting for their life--and what's left of their territorial integrity:

The Russian attempt to dismember Ukraine relies heavily on subversion tactics developed centuries ago by Russian explorers and adventurers and improved on by the communists as they replaced the imperial government in the early 1920s. This subversion involves using lots of blatant lies backed up by some muscle on the street, rather than the more conventional declarations of war and mobilizing armies. What the Russian government is doing is creating a series of outright but constantly repeated lies about what is going on in Ukraine to justify Russian paramilitary moves to annex Donbas and Crimea. Russia uses cash and a few hundred special operations and secret police personnel to recruit and organize pro-Russian rebels in Donbas. This sort of thing is nothing new, it’s been used for thousands of years and nearly every major nation has used it at least once. Russia, however, has been a particularly frequent user of this technique.

While we are looking to the long-term to build a better Ukrainian military that can fight (or better, deter) the next war, Ukraine has to cope with the fact that their existing military is not good enough to take on the Russian subliminal invasion of eastern Ukraine:

The Ukrainian military is also careful about who they send to fighting in Donbas. Basically, it’s only volunteers who go and even then the idea is to keep friendly (military and civilian) casualties as low as possible. Not all the Ukrainian troops in Donbas are active duty soldiers. A growing number are civilian (usually former military) volunteers from Donbas who are given a few weeks training, uniforms, weapons and sent in a “National Guard” battalions under their own leaders (with the help of some regular army advisors and specialists).

This also is nothing new. Iran's Revolutionary Guards (the Pasdaran) were created by the mullahs because they did not trust their armed forces. It grew into a parallel military establishment that could fight foreign enemies and make sure the military didn't get counter-revolutionary ideas.

Ukraine's military was gutted by pro-Russian efforts to infiltrate and defund the military. So Ukraine is sending in politically reliable troops despite the fact that the army still has the numbers, organization, and equipment. And even better training. But loyalty is what is needed in the short run. So the National Guard goes in--with support from regular and special forces no doubt checked for loyalty.

Luckily, only about 20% of the people in the two regions Russia has targeted--Luhansk and Donetsk--are pro-Russian, according to Ukraine's assessment. This is not to say that 80% are pro-Ukrainian. Many no doubt just want to get on with their lives and could live with either winning and letting them do it. But the result is that Ukraine seems to be winning the fight, although slowly.

But slowly winning is not the same as having won. Russia could settle for stoking unrest even if it can't win. But Russia seems like it is trying to win (or deny Ukraine a clear win):

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday ordered the border service to reinforce the state border with Ukraine, the Kremlin press service told Russian news agencies.

Putin can claim it is to stop illegal crossings and cope with refugees fleeing "fascists", but the real reason is surely to enable Russian men and supplies to enter Ukraine to participate in the fight.

And I do assume Russia is still trying to take the region. Yes, we've confirmed that most Russian army troops are leaving the border to go back to their bases. But where are the Ministry of Interior troops? Remember that in my pre-war scenario of how Russia would take eastern Ukraine and Crimea, I assumed that Interior Ministry troops would be the ones to move into eastern Ukraine from Kharkov to Donetsk:

Forty thousand paramilitary forces would head into eastern Ukraine, with half committed to cities from Kharkov anchoring the northern flank and points south; and the other half in the southern part, especially around Donetsk. These non-army troops would be the visible face in the cities of the intervention. ...

The 25,000 army troops in three motor rifle or tank divisions (or their brigade equivalents) would be divided into three groups, with one division near Kharkov, one near Donetsk, and one in reserve inside Russia able to move against Ukrainian counter-moves against either major city. This operational reserve force would also include 10,000 paratroopers.

So while the withdrawal of Russian troops from the border surely means that Russia is not planning a deep drive to link up with Crimea and push to Transdniestria by way of Odessa, the invasion option--against mostly National Guard units remember--could still work with paramilitary Interior Ministry troops in the lead.

In the meantime, Putin can see if his conquest of Crimea is overlooked in the rush to get back to business as usual with Moscow. If we do, taking small bites of Ukraine at a time might seem like a good plan.

Ultimately, Putin believes all of Ukraine will be Russian in the long run. And in the short run, seizing a little more territory is still an option.

But the UCMJ Would Help

I did not feel like running today. But I did.

Today was supposed to be a longer but slower run day. It's rainy and I just didn't feel like running.

It's frankly a miracle that I've been consistently running for the last 3 years. Indeed, I'm on a year+ straight (well, we won't speak of March when the winter that would not end finally got to me) of running without taking time off for the winter.

Man, spring hurt.

The last time I ran consistently and well was when the Army made me run. I liked to joke that it took the Uniform Code of Military Justice to get me to run. Without being chased, of course.

So running is a big deal for me, really. I hate running. But I like how I feel because I do run. Having the latter without the former just isn't possible.

But the Army did teach me that I can run even when I don't feel like it. I once set a new record on the 2-mile run when really hung over. I felt like emptying my stomach every step but feared that failing to make the run under those conditions would be really, really bad--UCMJ-wise.

So I ran today. I did not feel like it. I was ready to stop after less than half a mile. But I kept going. My goal was 3 miles on these "long" days. I kept going to 3.5 miles.

But I'll admit the UCMJ would have helped.

And when I run faster but shorter (2-mile) runs, it is easier after doing one long run per week.

Anyway. I was feeling bloggy after slogging through the latest Department of Defense report on China.

Make the PLAN Run a Gauntlet

India is reaching out to Taiwan on defense matters. This makes sense in so many ways.

This is good (tip to Mad Minerva):

With Modi at the helm, India looks to be setting sail directly into the stormy seas of East Asian geopolitics. Not content with poking China in the eye by increasing military and political ties to Japan, Vietnam, and other China rivals, Delhi appears to be reaching out to Beijing’s single greatest adversary—Taiwan.

It's about time.

If India is worried about China projecting naval power into the Indian Ocean, it makes sense to cultivate allies in Southeast Asia and in Taiwan in order to force the PLAN to run a gauntlet of observation and potential attack as they head toward India.

A stronger Taiwan keeps the Chinese looking in their own backyard even as they project power.

Indeed, why India doesn't work to sell submarines to Taiwan is beyond me. Perhaps the Indian government could use its buying power to persuade Russia to be of some use and sell subs to Taiwan.

Hasta la Vista, Baby

Say, are there any Mexican drug cartel terrorists in our prisons who we could trade to get Andrew Tahmooressi back?

You know the president's motto: Leave nobody few behind.

You'd Have to Have a PhD to Justify This Thinking

This is pretty much the best modern definition of "appeasement" I've read lately:

Maintaining peace in Europe requires tolerance, even in the face of flagrant provocations. Sometimes the punishment for bad behavior can be more destabilizing than the behavior itself.

Europe is right to resist American efforts (as minor as they are) to punish Russia for Putin's capture of Crimea and his subliminal war in eastern Ukraine, the author says.

You have to admit, he has a point. There probably would have been a lot fewer casualties if nobody had stopped Hitler and just tolerated his bad behavior until Hitler tired of behaving badly.

Really, the punishment we began in earnest on June 6, 1944, was more destabilizing than the bad behavior of Nazi Germany, right?

The Real "Real War"

Why do I get the feeling that in President Obama's perfect world, he'd be happy if Guantanamo Bay was filled with coal and emptied of jihadi prisoners?

I guess the jihadis are distracting us from the real "real war."

EXFLIX?

This is pretty funny, actually.

I've been writing about my problems with getting to Netflix via my Wii console. Lately, it just doesn't work.

To my relief, I now have access via the Xbox 360 here. Yesterday, just to test it, I even made it into the system. Success!

Or so I thought.

Today I tried to use Neftlix with the Xbox 360 and it tells me it can't connect to Netflix! What a hoot!

So as God as my witness, if this doesn't work by the time my next payment comes due at the end of the month, I'm abandoning Netflix for Amazon TV. Screw them. I've had enough aggravation.

I like Netflix. I really do. But going backwards to my computer or--God forbid--my tiny phone screen is unacceptable.

What is wrong with these people, anyway?

Where the War on Terror Rages

I'd just like to remind people that despite our failure to remain in Iraq to fully exploit our military victories over Saddam's military and the various Syrian- and Iranian-supported insurgents and terrorists who tried to reverse our invasion success, Iraq is today actually fighting al Qaeda rather than supporting terrorism against us or our friends:

Dozens of people including civilians were killed on Friday in fighting between Sunni Islamist insurgents and Iraqi government troops in the northern city of Mosul, a day after a curfew was imposed there.

The fighting erupted in Mosul a day after government forces used helicopters to bomb militants and retake control of the city of Samarra further to the south.

Iraq could still use our help to fight the terrorists. Iraq still lacks an effective air force to provide precision firepower, and lacks the logistics expertise and intelligence analysis abilities to really go after the enemy.

We could provide these capabilities without putting our combat troops on the frontlines (although private security contractors to help direct precision firepower would help).

We'd do that if we were serious about waging the war on terror rather than planning to figuratively string up the "mission accomplished" banner by the end of 2016 so President Obama in his farewell address can declare--in that short, quiet interlude--that he "responsibly ended" our wars.

Heck, we might have been so successful in the Iraq War that Iraq will still be fighting the war on Islamist terror long after we've declared "war over" and closed Guantanamo Bay.

Welcome Wagon

With Russia getting more Russia-like, as the Russians settle into their new Crimea conquest to expand their naval and air presence in an around the Sevastopol bases, our Air Force is welcoming the new owners.

Reach out and touch someone:

Two B-52 Stratofortresses bombers from Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana, and one B-52 from Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota — currently operating from Ellsworth Air Force Base, South Dakota — arrived at Royal Air Force Fairford, England, on Wednesday, where airmen will train and integrate with U.S. and allied military forces in the region, the Air Force said in a news release.

The article calls them nuclear-capable. But it makes no sense to send bombers equipped for nuclear missions rather than conventional missions. I assume the latter despite the description as "nuclear-capable" which is probably just a description of original purpose.

On March 1st, contemplating numerous security moves we should make to counter Russia's subliminal invasion of Crimea, I suggested:

Nine, practice moving B-52 bombers to the eastern Mediterranean or Balkans to carry out anti-ship strike missions or naval mine laying missions.

Our long-range bombers are capable of firing at ships and laying naval mines.

Add in anti-ship versions of Tomahawk cruise missiles, and B-52s could do a lot of damage to Russia's Black Sea or Baltic Sea flotillas without even leaving NATO air space.

Heck, the French might even tell us the best place to target those Mistral amphibious ships that Russia is acquiring from France.

This Will Work Out Swell

The Gitmo 5 may well spend some time fund-raising in Qatar before wandering off to do what they will.

The idea that the war is over and that we should release all prisoners anyway is so idiotic that I can hardly believe people make this argument in defense of the Bergdahl trade.

The Taliban do not believe the war is over. Heck, they say it was a morale-boosting deal:

"This gives the Islamic Emirates more legitimacy in front of the world. It shows we are able to deal directly with the Americans and also successfully," Maulvi Mubarak, shadow Taliban chief of the Shah Wali Kot district in Kandahar, said. ...

Mubarak said the deal would also boost morale among the Taliban's ranks, including the hundreds of men under his command in three neighboring districts.

Indeed, we'll still have troops in Afghanistan to help fight the Taliban until the end of 2015 even under the administration's idea of ending the war.

I guess the Taliban didn't think the war is winding down since otherwise they could have just waited for the general prisoner exchange.

No doubt they think they can grab more Americans for more swaps. Who they'll trade Americans for might be problematic because the administration apparently thinks we don't need to hold terrorist prisoners while they pose a danger:

A U.S. official says President Barack Obama is moving ahead with the effort to close the Guantanamo Bay prison despite the uproar over the exchange of five Taliban prisoners for a captured American soldier.

There's always cash. Or just snuff films to motivate the jihadis and their donors. They'll adapt.

I'd have held those scum in Gitmo until they needed hip replacements.

Look Who's Voting, Now

Syria's Assad announced that he won reelection. Apparently, in the not-ready-for-democracy Arab world, elections are a sign of legitimacy.

I hope nobody stayed up late waiting to see if late returns from Aleppo would swing the election in Syria:

Syria's parliament speaker, Jihad Laham, announced the final results from Tuesday's election, saying Assad garnered 10,319,723 votes, or 88.7 percent. Assad's two challengers, Hassan al-Nouri and Maher Hajjar, won 4.3 percent and 3.2 percent respectively. The Supreme Constitutional Court put turnout at 73.42 percent.

Sure, the election was a farce.

But the point is, Assad bothered to engineer the farce. For all those who say that the Arab world is not ready for democracy, they sure do largely (outside of Gulf monarchies) operate as if elections are the way to legitimize governments.

So even though they need to learn about the importance of rule of law (and we need reminders, too, of late) in promoting real democracy beyond the high profile voting aspect of democracy, the fact that Arab governments keep holding elections should at least tell us that they are valued and respected.

When Arab Moslem states stop holding even rigged elections and start holding old-style mass meetings of tribal elders to validate (with rigging, of course) the choice of who sits in the palace, I'll believe that democracy promotion in the Middle East is mistaken.

A Crash Course in International Relations

So many people on the left blamed George W. Bush for our problems abroad and assumed that the anti-Bush--Barack Obama--would cure all our ills. Yeah, about that:

The world of June 2014 is not a world the Obama Administration wanted or foresaw. The plan was that six years of no-drama, no-stupid-stuff diplomacy would repair the damage of the Bush years, isolate jihadis in a democratizing Middle East, develop a new relationship with Iran, build a businesslike relationship with Russia, and pacify East Asia. Europe would sleep, the Middle East would cool, and by pivoting to Asia the United States would stabilize the world’s most dynamic economic region and enhance American prestige even as it slashed defense budgets and stepped away from the global front lines. It was a beautiful plan, but it hasn’t worked out.

Tip to Instapundit.

We have to deal with a lot of bastards and evil people--as well as people who simply want to do what is best for them. Speeches have little effect on them.

Oh, crowds of young people eat it up. But funny enough, they tend not to be the ones in charge.

So here we have the Obama presidency in year 6 of assuming that it takes two to make war, that enemies are just misunderstood potential friends, and if only we cared a little bit more we could make lions lie down with lambs and order the sea levels to recede.

Thus ends Foreign Policy 101. We'll see how the president is graded in the advanced classes being taught by Russia, China, the Taliban, al Qaeda, Hamas, Syria, Iran, and Hezbollah.

I'm thinking the president might want to switch to art history.

Today in History

Just so you know, today is the 70th Anniversary of the day that General Dwight D. Eisenhower Tweeted #StandWithOccupiedFrance, complete with a serious but sad-faced selfie, in order to eject the German occupiers.

Wait. What?

Oh yeah, he ordered a massive Allied armada of 5,000 ships to land 160,000 Allied troops backed by 13,000 aircraft in what he feared could be a suicidal failure if things went wrong.

Once on the ground, the invasion force kicked ass and took names.

So we actually liberated Nazi-occupied France and other points east during the drive into Germany.

But really, what difference does that make, anyway?

Just a Moistened Bint

The notion that China will obey international law if America joins the Law of the Sea Treaty is nonsense.

China ignores the Law of the Sea Treaty right now:

China on Wednesday rejected an arbitration tribunal's ruling giving it six months to respond to a case filed by the Philippines over disputed waters, saying it has no plans to take part.

China signed the treaty yet doesn't think it is important to obey.

In what world do you have to live in to think our joining the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) would have any positive effect on Chinese thinking?

Given Chinese thinking, if we join they'll conclude that we must go along with China's interpretation of the treaty. Otherwise, why would we join? Clearly it would be ratification of Chinese views.

A strong United States Navy is the best defense against China ignoring international law--not some farcical aquatic ceremony.

Getting What You Wish

Grant me that this is funny:

“I have voted for every park, every library, all the school improvements, for light rail, for anything that will make this city better. But now I can’t afford to live here anymore. I’ll protest my appraisal notice, but that’s not enough. Someone needs to step in and address the big picture.”

The big picture is that she kept voting to make her housing more expensive by increasing her property taxes, yet somehow she assumed somebody else would pay the bill.

It's almost like actions have consequences.

I concede that one issue is one of rising appraisals that would raise taxes even without an increase in tax rates. So voting for tax increases isn't just--and possibly not even the major--cause of her rising taxes. It's rate times value. She contributed to the former.

But she did contribute to pushing her home's taxes up. And she should recognize her role in the big picture.

Eating Grass Not Optimal

Iranians increasingly think that if the choice is nuclear weapons or economic growth, they'd actually prefer economic growth.

The Dickens, you say!

After years of tough sanctions over Iran's nuclear program, many in the country now say they want the government to make compromises that could satisfy world powers and allow a semblance of prosperity to return.

Although many Iranians still fervently believe in their country's right to all aspects of a civilian nuclear program, including those regarded with suspicion in the West, they are increasingly tired of the high economic price.

I noted this a couple weeks ago.

And I've been saying for a long time that despite the popularity of getting nukes, that Iranians could well decide they have higher priorities if they didn't have to defer to the mullahs who think the people should sacrifice in order to go nuclear:

Iran under non-nutballs might actually decide that the cost of the nuclear program is too high given Iran's other problems and limited money to address them. Pride is one thing. Providing for your family might be preferable to eating grass and having nuclear weapons. Iranians might want to ask Pakistanis how that bargain is working out for them.

It's the regime, stupid. Deals with the mullahs, who are dangerous with or without nukes, count for little.

NYETFLIX: Day ... Whatever

NETFLIX continues to find new ways to be unavailable.

Just when I'd come to terms with needing to turn off my wifi every friggin' time I want to watch NETFLIX on my TV, I get a new problem.

Once in NETFLIX, where I can click on a show to watch, the system just sits there and tells me that it is unable to connect to Netflix.

Oh, the little boxes continue to flicker left to right as if it is working on the connection even as I sit and fume.

But, no. There is no streaming happening.

And this after confirming the connection when it initially denied access.

This is awesome. Really, guys. Super. Way to make me want to continue using this service.

UPDATE: Wonderful. I give in and accept I must use my computer, and their website says they are experiencing difficulties streaming on all devices.

That's nice.

UPDATE: Okay, Wii just doesn't seem to work. But now the XBox360 is up and running (since Mister has an account, I didn't have to go through the annoyance of setting up a Microsoft account--although I might have one--and then setting up an XBox Live account just to download the app) and seems to work for my TV.

I love NETFLIX. I really do. If I can just get into it without raising my blood pressure every time I try to use it, I'll be much calmer about the whole thing.

The Devil They Know

Perhaps with a wary eye on Syria for what happens when a Devil you know is seriously threatened, Israel is apparently relieves that General Sisi won Egypt's presidential election.

I noted that Sisi's win means the revolution is finally complete, having come back to the starting point.

Strategypage provides the details of the journey:

Egypt is again ruled by a military man (Abdel Fattah al Sisi), much to the relief of Israel. Many Egyptians (especially Moslem Brotherhood fans) boycotted the recent voting. Thus only 47 percent of registered voters turned up and 97 voted for the former general. In 2012 deposed (a year ago) presided Morsi won with 51.2 percent of the vote (by 52 percent of registered voters). ...

Sisi becoming president brings the revolution full circle as the long-time dictator Mubarak, ousted in 2011, came out of the army, as have so many other corrupt and long-serving Egyptian rulers. The army has recovered nicely since the 2011 unrest and is now grabbing control of even more of the economy.

Israel can be excused for being relieved that one front is quiet.

But the problems that led to both Islamist revolt (and Mursi's electoral victory) and the Arab Spring pro-democracy revolt that brought down Mubarak have been made worse, if anything.

I had hoped that we could ease Egypt into rule of law, exploiting the Arab Spring hopes of overturning autocracy without turning to Islamists.

Maybe the next Arab Spring.

Godwin's Administrative Rule?

George Will notes that once again President Obama is violating the rule of law to do what he wants. This time on the Bergdahl deal:

Obama did not comply with the law requiring presidents to notify Congress 30 days before such exchanges. Politico can be cited about this not because among the media it is exceptionally, well, understanding of Obama’s exuberant notion of executive latitude but because it is not. Politico headlined a story on his noncompliance with the law “Obama May Finally Be Going Rogue on Gitmo.” Politico said Obama’s “assertive” act “defied Congress” — Congress, not the rule of law — in order “to get that process [of closing Guantanamo Bay prison] moving.” It sent “a clear message” that “Obama is now willing to wield his executive powers to get the job done.” Or, as used to be said in extenuation of strong leaders, “to make the trains run on time.”

The 44th president, channeling — not for the first time — the 37th (in his post-impeachment conversation with David Frost), may say: “When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.” Already the administration says events dictated a speed that precluded complying with the law.

I can't even believe that Will is questioning President Obama. President Obama did issue a signing statement about that notice law that he didn't think it was constitutional, after all.

And like much else, actions that our left wing would have considered "shredding the Constitution" had the 43rd president done them are now understandable given that the 44th president is doing them.

As an aside, I appreciate the effort to avoid violating Godwin's Law by invoking Mussolini rather than Hitler. There's no Godwin's Administrative Rule, I assume.

The Next War

We're going to help Ukraine rebuild their military to try to deny Russia an opening to grab territory while Ukraine gathers their forces.

Ideally, Ukraine shifts the center of gravity of their 6th Corps east to cover eastern Ukraine; shifts their 8th Corps guarding Kiev to also defend the northeast part of Ukraine; and shifts their 13th Corps north to cover the Belarus border east to the Kiev region.

I'd create a fourth corps (really division-sized units) to cover the region from Transdniestria through Odessa to access point to the Crimean peninsula.

But if there is no money for that, the existing corps will have to cover the same ground.

In wartime, 6th and 8th Corps' jobs would be to fight a delaying action while falling back intact to the Dnieper River where they would try to halt the Russians; and where they would attempt to support special forces stay-behind teams and local irregular fighters in resisting the invasion and occupation of eastern Ukraine.

13th Corps would need to hold fast to prevent encirclement of 8th Corps from the west and to keep lines of supply open to NATO.

The new "fourth" corps would have the job of preparing for offensive action in addition to holding terrain.

Plan A would be to launch an offensive into Crimea to recover that territory.

Plan B would be to launch an offensive into Russia's Transdniestria to have a bargaining chip for negotiations after a ceasefire.

And Plans A and B would include plans to launch surface-to-surface missiles at Sevastopol bases while a rebuilt navy uses small combatants with anti-ship missiles to raid Sevastopol and lay mines around the port.

And if NATO has better infrastructure and more military capabilities in eastern NATO, the threat of NATO intervention won't be hollow the next time, possibly deterring Russian adventurism.

The Putin is in the Details

Japan clearly sees Russia as a potential counter-weight to China. Good in theory, Putin may make friendship tough.

China is powerful and Russia has the potential--even if only through nukes now--to worry China. So this is obviously worth a shot:

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, hours after joining fellow industrial powers in threatening further sanctions against Russia, said on Thursday that he wants to maintain good relations with Moscow. ...

"I want Russia to be involved in various issues concerning the international community in a constructive manner. That’s what the world desires too. To this end I’m hoping to continue dialogue with President Putin.”

But look who Putin is courting as a friend:

Angry with the West's response over Ukraine and eager to diversify its options, Russia is moving rapidly to bolster ties with North Korea in a diplomatic nose-thumbing that could complicate the U.S.-led effort to squeeze Pyongyang into giving up its nuclear weapons program.

North Korea is a loose cannon threatening Japan. So this balancing act will be tough.

Unless Russia manages to completely replace China as North Korea's protector and get North Korea to view China as their primary enemy, Putin isn't going to be the ruler to create a Japanese-Russian entente in Northeast Asia.

Maybe when the old Soviet hands pass from the scene, there will be potential.

In the Short Run, the Hashtag is Not Mightier Than the Sword

Apparently, sending MREs and camping gear to Ukraine's armed forces isn't enough American aid to make a difference.

Are we serious about helping Ukraine get through the crisis that is not yet over in eastern Ukraine?

Pro-Russian insurgents in eastern Ukraine have taken two government bases in battles around Luhansk, seizing quantities of ammunition and explosives from a border guards post and taking another installation after National Guard forces ran out of ammunition.

Yes, we may not need to ship in small arms ammunition. But assistance in figuring out how to protect the ammunition already there and how to distribute it to those who need it when they need it would be helpful.

On top of Syria, are we letting Russia demonstrate that their help is superior to our help? On top of keeping some troops poised on the border, Russia is helping the astro-turf separatists:

U.S. Air Force General Philip Breedlove, NATO's supreme allied commander Europe, also said Russian irregular forces, Russian-backed forces and Russian financing were very active in eastern Ukraine and "this has to stop".

You can be sure that Russian help to their side isn't restricted to socks and war surplus dehydrated pork patties.

President Obama may be prematurely declaring "mission accomplished," but Putin doesn't agree that the war is over.

UPDATE: Seriously, we need to help Ukraine win the current war against Russia for eastern Ukraine before we get too focused on preparing for the next war:

Pro-Russian insurgents captured three government bases in eastern Ukraine in a series of humiliating defeats for the beleaguered armed forces on Wednesday, as the president-elect promised new initiatives to help end the mutiny in the country's industrial heartland.

This war isn't over. I hoped that the election would be a decisive turning point in convincing Russia of the futility of fighting to pry eastern Ukraine from Kiev's control, but the Russians don't seem to be giving up.

Perhaps this is Russia's lesson from Syria. It wasn't too late to help Assad and it isn't too late to win the war for eastern Ukraine.

Unified Threat Perception

China doesn't just expect their neighbors to do as they're told, China expects their people to fall in line, too.

Today is a touchy anniversary for China's rulers. Just shut up and move along, people:

China deployed its vast security apparatus on Wednesday to snuff out commemoration of the suppression of pro-democracy protests around Tiananmen Square 25 years ago, flooding the streets with police as censors scrubbed the Internet clean of any mention of the crackdown.

"Suppression," as in the killing of hundreds or perhaps thousands of peaceful protesters by PLA troops on June 4, 1989:

China has never released a death toll for the crackdown, but estimates from human rights groups and witnesses range from several hundred to several thousand.

Troops shot their way into central Beijing after demonstrators had clogged Tiananmen Square in Beijing for about six weeks. There were also protests in many other cities.

Just so we're clear as time passes.

And when things get rough internally, neighbors should check their ammo supply.

Because threats to Communist Party rule of China are a continuum of threats from America to Japan to the Philippines to silent protesters to online commentary critical of the party.

So when a threat on one part of that continuum arises, who knows where China will strike back to defend party rule?

A Made-for-a-Movie Moment?

I think the Bergdahl story actually demonstrates something good about my blogging.

Many on the left insist that those on the right reflexively oppose President Obama. When they are being charitable to the right, the left doesn't insist it is based on racism.

I find those claims repulsive and simply intended to shut down debate, but no matter.

When the news of Bergdahl's release came out, my reaction was guarded but I gave the administration the benefit of the doubt, was at least glad we had a soldier home (ignoring for the moment the unclear nature of how he fell into Taliban custody), and looked for good things about the trade.

Sure, the dad in full Taliban-style beard gave me pause to wonder if something was amiss. But still, his son was held prisoner. Who am I to judge that? I'm sure lots of fathers of our troops held by Germany in World War II grew little black moustaches in solidarity with their child POW, right? So I let that go.

Then I heard about who we released to get Bergdahl--5 hardened terrorists those in the know did not want released.

And the president violated statutes to make the deal.

And the events of Bergdahl's disappearance made it clear that he left on his own.

And let's not forget that 6 American troops may have died in missions directly related to finding Bergdahl.

And Bergdahl himself looks less honorable:

Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl left a letter the night he disappeared from his base in Afghanistan saying he wanted to renounce his citizenship, according to sources, and previously expressed his disillusionment with the Army, telling his father in an e-mail he was "ashamed" to be an American.

The story the administration wanted started out as Saving Private Ryan.

Now the question is whether the story will be The Execution of Private Slovik or Man Without a Country.

I like to believe that I largely succeed in looking at events coolly and analyzing them without regard to political party in power. I built a career on that ability.

I like to believe that I look at events as an American and as someone who pretends--by education and interest--to be able to offer intelligent commentary on foreign policy, war, and defense issues, and not as a political partisan.

My commentary on the evolving story of Bergdahl, I think, shows that I do try to reach my idealized image of my analysis. I gave the benefit of the doubt at first but new information required me to adjust my view of the deal.

I just want the right story to be told. You may disagree with my assessment. As is your right, of course.

UPDATE: I will say that the deal might not turn out bad despite the bad foundation. One, as I mentioned in my first post, if we can discredit the terrorists we released, the jihadis might not trust them at all. heck, they might kill the 5 for us.

Or we might kill them, I suppose. Or arrange a lot of unfortunate accidents.

And I do think that it is good for all our troops to know we will get them back if they are lost--even if we think they defected. What might a prisoner feel if he was wrongly portrayed as defecting and so knew he would not be rescued?

This article in defense of the deal raised both issues as positive aspects.

Of course, one component of this working out okay is that Bergdahl should face court martial for surrendering to and working with the Taliban, to clarify what happened.

Coincidence

The trade of 5 Taliban for Sergeant Bergdahl makes the "outing"of the CIA station chief in Afghanistan during President Obama's trip to Afghanistan a little more interesting, doesn't it?

Was this revelation punishment for opposing the trade, as the consensus in our intelligence communities seems to have been?

Or was it simply a reflection of interest by the president's team in talking to the station chief in light of plans to make the trade and then stupidly revealing his status as collateral damage?

Or was the trade even known at the time of the visit to Afghanistan?

Don't know. But it is an interesting coincidence of timing.

UPDATE: Intelligence and military people blocked the release of those 5 Taliban in the past. Tip to Instapundit.

UPDATE: You remember the comparison to the Plame Affair, right? I even brought it up not too long before the station chief outing.

Annals of the Most Transparent Administration in History

If you are worried that the White House will be unable to find a liar as accomplished as Jay Carney to be its new press secretary, I give you Stephanie Harf of the State Department.



I've long been impressed with her clear ability to replace Carney.

And if I'm somehow confusing her for Marie Harf, also of the State Department, I apologize. Whoever is on screen is a piece of work, no doubt.

UPDATE: I'm confused. For yucks I thought I'd treat myself to some more BS moments from this woman on YouTube. I see videos of her calling her Marie Harf.

So I Google and find pictures of the same woman whether I search Stephanie Harf or Marie Harf. Mind you, I can understand if she has aliases. I'd want to hide my identity, too, with her performances.

Or is one an evil twin? This is really confusing. Harry Mudd would have trouble with this model, I think. It would be inhuman.

UPDATE: Okay, apparently this is Marie Harf. I see lots of references to Stephanie Harf online but they must be in error. So look forward to Marie Harf moving over to the White House. Because we get who we deserve, it is clear.

Mathematical Certitude

The Obama administration is sure that trading 5 deadly al Qaeda leaders in exchange for one of our soldiers is a fine deal. We shouldn't worry about the terrorists released into Qatari custody escaping and seeking to kill Americans.

Why? It's the math, stupid.

One in six Gitmo releasee returns to terrorism.

The Obama administration only released five terrorists.

Ipso facto, the sixth who would return to terrorism remains in custody.

UPDATE: I know the president's defenders keep bringing up the fact that Bush released hundreds of detainees. Screaming "Buuuuusshhhh!!" never gets old, eh?

One, they were lower level terrorists. I thought one of the defenses of President Obama's failure to honor his promise to immediately close Guantanamo Bay during his first year in office was that the hard cases are the ones remaining. I guess not.

And two, not very many war supporters backed their release. Do you really think President Bush would have released nearly as many if not for the constant attacks by our Left and the international so-called human rights lobbies to release those poor captive poets languishing under conditions of cruel and unusual rice pilaf?

KNOTFLIX: Day 3

Once again, I could not connect to Netflix after turning it on.

So I went right to turning off my wifi and Wii. After letting the wifi reset, I was able to untangle whatever gums up my connecton and get in to use Netflix. Elapsed time: about 10 minutes.

I used to be able to just turn on Netflix. Now I count it a victory to have to reset Internet and spend ten minutes. Yet I don't even get free 2-day shipping for orders with it.

This isn't what I expected the 21st century to be like.

Stone Cold Killer

The Bowe Bergdahl saga could enter new terrain.

The Obama administration touted their prisoner exchange that brought Bergdahl home as leaving no American behind.

But the details coming out are making a trial rather than a parade the more likely outcome (via Instapundit):

Asked if the process of repatriation would include questioning of Bergdahl geared towards determining whether he engaged in any forms of collaboration with the enemy, the counterterrorism official replied: "Of course. ... It's there. This is extremely untidy."

I read elsewhere that Bergdahl may have trained Taliban--not that he had anything special forces-worthy. But the effort alone is damning, if true.

Perhaps President Obama has decided to improve his street cred in the world, shaken about his resolve.

After all, if President Obama moved Heaven and Earth to bring back one deserter in order to put him on trial and execute him after standing on stage with his parents, that beats firing a bunch of air traffic controllers, rep-wise, any day.

Because There Will Be a Next Time

Russia's military will be stronger the next time they take on Ukraine. Ukraine had best be ready.

NATO will discuss needed reforms in both the Ukrainian and Georgian militaries:

A senior NATO official says alliance defense chiefs will meet on June 3-4 with defense officials from Ukraine and Georgia to discuss reforms in the two countries' militaries and the security implications of Russia's actions in Ukraine.

I'm thinking special forces and lots of anti-tank and anti-aircraft weaponry. And know how to use them.

Preparing to Screw the Pooch Three Times as Fast?

I have no idea what the Israelis are thinking when it comes to dealing with Hezbollah.

I thought Israel screwed the pooch in 2006 by failing to go in for the kill with ground troops and instead trying to rely on air power.

Although I will grant that Israel did pound Hezbollah enough to keep them quiet, Hezbollah endured to deny Lebanon a chance at a normal future and is currently an important component of Assad's military effort to fight the rebellion. And Hezbollah's arsenal of rockets is far larger when they decide to no longer be quiet.

The 2008-2009 Gaza Winter War seemed to validate my hopes that Israel had learned a lesson.

So a drive on Baalbek is the way to go, right? I've long thought that a multi-division push is in order.

Whether Israel's firepower focus is to support troops or try 2006 again is in question.

The latest news seems to indicate the latter:

“We can destroy [Hezbollah’s] military capabilities and the infrastructure that supports its activities on a scale that would take decades to rebuild,” [Maj. Gen. Amir Eshel] told a conference on national security, “an unimaginable scale”. ...

By the end of this year, the air force will be able accomplish in 24 hours what it took three days to accomplish in the war with Hezbollah eight years ago, Eshel said.

Wonderful. The Israelis think they need more cowbell.



Air power hope springs eternal. And in the meantime, the pooch is looking rather worried.

I'll admit that this could all be misdirection to lull Hezbollah into thinking all they need to do is hunker down and endure another bombardment.

But usually when I hope that apparent idiocy is cover for deep cleverness, I'm disappointed. Remember, don't fear rely on the Reaper.

NOTFLIX: Day 2

So ends day 2 of NETFLIX NOTFLIX with my Wii system telling me it is unable to connect to Netflix.

I know the Wii works. The friggin' free YouTube connection worked fine.

So no, it is just NOTFLIX that won't let me connect.

So fine, I'll go to the help page--again--and go through their troubleshooting just to do what should be as normal as turning on a light--turning on a service I pay for.

Really. What the Hell?

UPDATE: Glory be. After only 40 minutes of trying, I got in. Shutting down my wireless got me in where I had to add my email and password again.

I had to resort to a cold brew to keep from blowing a hole through the screen. Noise ordnance violation or some such thing, I'm sure.

Now I have to stay up later than I planned to watch something ...

I will blow a gasket if this doesn't solve the problem.

Wow, Susan Rice Really Will Say Anything

National Security Advisor Susan Rice really will go in front of cameras and say anything she's told, won't she?

Bowe Bergdahl increasingly looks like a deserter who indirectly caused the deaths of half a dozen American soldiers who searched for him. How we don't court martial him is beyond me.

Under the circumstances, this is just an astounding statement (again) from Susan Rice about that Bergdahl:

He served the United States with honor and distinction.

Yeah. Benedict Arnold served America with honor and distinction--right up to a certain point. No?

I can hardly wait to hear Ms. Rice explain that Bergdahl's desertion was caused by some lousy anti-Islam Internet video.

Really, one more such appearance and Ms. Rice will rival Andrei Gromyko in loyalty and obedience.

UPDATE: Related thoughts.

And remember, when Bergdahl apparently walked into Taliban captivity of his own free will, he turned against a war that was still the "good war" that President Obama was in the process of escalating for the first of two escalations under his command.

Send In the Tanks

Reinforcing eastern Europe seems important to NATO these days.

No doubt:

NATO defense ministers will discuss temporarily reinforcing forces in Poland when they meet in Brussels this week, a spokesman for the German defense ministry said on Sunday, a move that would be aimed at reassuring countries nervous about Russia's intervention in Ukraine.

But what's with this "temporarily" stuff?

At the risk of droning on, how about REFORPOL?

Because this alone makes me want Abrams tanks in Poland:

Russia says deployment of significant NATO forces close to Russia would violate the 1997 Founding Act, an agreement between Moscow and the alliance.

Really? Those vodka-addled psychopaths in charge of Russia really want to argue that NATO is unreasonably worried about eastern NATO security after Russia violates the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Ukraine's sovereignty? Not to mention the UN charter on not invading member states?

Reinforce Poland. Permanently. Russia is not to be trusted.

The Longest Tweet

President Obama will be in Europe for the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings. While there, he will have a go at explaining his policies to people on the front line of Putin's aggression:

In Europe, Obama gets second chance to explain his Russia policy

What? Post-election "flexibility" wasn't clear enough? Crimea is part of Russia now, no?

But I do wish the president good luck. Although the anniversary of the D-Day landings might not be appropriate for an administration that would have thought the hashtag campaign #NaziOccupationofFranceSucks would have done as well as boots on the ground to wrest control of France back from the Nazis.

NETFLIX is Pissing Me Off

I am truly getting tired of not being able to log in to my NETFLIX account through my Wii console.

I just spent 40 minutes trying and failing to get in. It's been this way for months now. Sometimes it is fast. Sometimes it is like this.

I did the troubleshooting. I uninstalled and reinstalled. Still, I get this. Reset. Retry. Turn off and on. Screw you guys.

I can get in easily on my computer. So it isn't my incoming signal. It is something about the Wii interface for my TV.

I will seriously consider Amazon TV if this keep up. This is way worse than childhood memories of endlessly fiddling with an antenna by adding foil and moving it around until it is just in the zone to get that signal.

UPDATE: Until this, I've had not a moment of complaint about the service. I've sung praises of NETFLIX.

But if I have to wait this long, maybe switching back to discs is the way to go if I want to keep the service. Then, waiting is understandable. Or is Orange is the New Black for theoretical streaming only?

At least I have a couple alternatives. We'll see. Mister told me that NETFLIX is supposed to start free access through XBox this summer. If so, I'm good. Perhaps NETFLIX just doesn't care to maintain their Wii access anymore.

When Plans Fail

So I went downtown to have a quiet lunch at my favorite Irish pub. With a couple pints, naturally.

But the Taste of Ann Arbor was filling the streets and there was a marathon race earlier.

So I had a not-so-quiet lunch. Then wandered around. I might actually try the ToA next year.

And let me just say that a woman dancing alone to the music treads a fine line between sexy appealing and scary crazy. Just sayin'.

Laboratories of Autocracy

As Putin begins rebuilding the Russian Empire with a grouping of Russia, Khazakhstan, and Belarus--with the addition of Ukraine's Crimea as a placeholder for the eventual absorption of all of "the" Ukraine--Putin's men can treat their new provinces as laboratories of autocracy.

Say, isn't the 19th century way of doing things over?

The FT's Isabel Gorst reports Belarus will no longer allow farm laborers to leave their jobs if they want to move to the city.

Serfdom, eh?

Putin no doubt would love to be able to get away with this. Let's see how Belarus makes it work.

Tip to Instapundit.

That First Cup of Morning Self Esteem

Whatever you need to do to sleep at night after paying so much for freaking coffee, I guess:

We got a champion barista to rank the sub-par coffee your parents drink[.]

When I got to this, I re-checked the URL to see if this was a story by The Onion:

So to see if any of these coffees are actually good to the last drop, we asked Lorenzo Perkins, certified coffee instructor at Cuvée and executive council member of the Barista Guild of America [...]

One, "certified coffee instructor?" Two, "Barista Guild of America?" Not a "union?" Not an "association?" A "guild?" What's next? The Order of the Blessed Virgin Beans of Seattle to wage holy war on Dunkin Donuts and Tim Horton's?

Wait. There's more:

Coffee testing ("cupping") is an exhausting process. Using a direct pour-over method, five cups of each roast are brewed in order to account for irregularities within a batch of beans.

"Cupping?" Are you kidding me?

This simply has to be a parody article, right? It's just too funny to be real people really this worked up about coffee and so into it that they actually can't bear to drink any more store-brand coffee during the course of the test.

But it isn't. I checked.

There really are people who want beans organically processed through the colons of rare mammals and ground on the spot by guild-certified baristas who, 7 years after graduating from college, are still making coffee for a living.

Which has a certain logic, you have to admit. After paying so much for a college degree that they can't use to get a job, they do kind of need people to pay $10 per cup of coffee to make those minimum student loan payments, eh?

But what's your excuse for paying so much? For coffee. Is your self-esteem really so low that you need the approval of certified coffee instructors to start your day?

Me? Time to get another cup from the pot of Kroger brand coffee I brewed two hours ago. The whole pot probably cost me 30 cents (including energy and water costs). Although I admit there is no frothy hot milk on top.

I just need caffeine in the morning.

Tip to Instapundit.

Back Home

The only American soldier held by the Taliban is back home:

Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl was handed over to U.S. special operations forces by the Taliban Saturday evening, local time, in an area of eastern Afghanistan, near the Pakistani border. Officials said the exchange was not violent and the 28-year-old Bergdahl was in good condition and able to walk.

Later reports say that we sent 5 jihadis held at Guantanamo Bay to Qatar, where our enemies surely assume they will "escape" from in due time. Qatar will eventually send them to fight Assad, I'll guess.

I don't think I mentioned Bergdahl since there was nothing to know. I assumed we were working on this and there was no point to complaining about lack of success.

In addition, there is a question of the circumstances of Bergdahl's capture. Was he captured or did he desert? His return thus presents a dilemma for the military in whether to prosecute if he walked.

Although if he walked, 5 years in Taliban captivity is surely a good chunk of time served. I assume he came to regret walking away--if that is what he did. I sure hope he was captured and can at least receive an enthusiastic welcome home.

There is of course controversy over trading 5 of the enemy for our soldier. Yes, yes. We don't negotiate with terrorists. I agree. But this is not that clear cut since a soldier was captured by enemies we also fight on the battlefield. My view is that we've released others for nobody in the past, so why not get one of our guys back? I count this as a prisoner exchange.

And even if Bergdahl went AWOL and surrendered, and regrets nothing, I think his release is a good thing for our troops who will know that we really won't give up on anybody in captivity regardless of circumstances. What might a soldier captured in a war think if press reports wrongly speculate he went AWOL and so doesn't deserve rescue?

Obviously, it would have been better if special forces had rescued Bergdahl and killed his captors. But we got our soldier back. Told all our troops that we won't leave them behind. And with luck we'll kill those 5 guys we released if somehow they manage to walk away from their Qatar captivity.

UPDATE: If we lost troops looking for a deserter, that changes Bergdahl's fate quite a bit:

"I was pissed off then and I am even more so now with everything going on," said former Sgt. Matt Vierkant, a member of Bergdahl's platoon when he went missing on June 30, 2009. "Bowe Bergdahl deserted during a time of war and his fellow Americans lost their lives searching for him."

Vierkant said Bergdahl needs to not only acknowledge his actions publicly but face a military trial for desertion under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

That goes beyond a moment of stupid.

We punish if you abuse civilians. We should punish if you desert your unit. Even if he gets "time served" for his stay in Afghanistan and in US custody until tried, if Bergdahl deserted, he should be convicted.

UPDATE: The five jihadis we released weren't just ordinary Joes. They are very dangerous terrorist leaders:

There are good reasons why the Taliban has long wanted the five freed from Gitmo. All five are among the Taliban’s top commanders in U.S. custody and are still revered in jihadist circles.

The deal is looking less acceptable as more is known. I guess this explains why the Obama administration violated the statutes and failed to provide Congress with advance notice of the trade.

Unless we surgically implanted tracking devices in those we released, I'm not sure what new information could make me less uneasy, as I've become, about the trade. Maybe we can convince the Taliban through leaks that they gave up a deserter and we did, too--giving up guys who cooperated and told us everything they knew. Perhaps we can put enough doubt in their reputations to make some jihadis suspicious of them. Suspicious enough to kill them. Who knows in that world?

I guess I'll hold judgment for now. Maybe I'll be shocked and the Gitmo 5 remain under control in Qatar until they die. Stranger things have happened, I suppose. But do hold the "hero" talk.

UPDATE: Military opinion is apparently conflicted, too. Out.