Friday, August 24, 2012

Springtime for Egypt

             Mr Lukyanov is a noted Russian political commentator. Writing in "Russia Beyond the Headlines/Gazeta.ru", he speculates on Egypt's post Arab Spring role in the Middle East. I've contributed my own thoughts in an essay following his article. 
=======================================================================

Russia Beyond the Headlines/Gazeta.ru
www.rbth.ru
August 12, 2012
The world ignores Egypt at its own peril
While the major global players are focused on Damascus, a power play is going on in Cairo that could have a more significant effect.
By Fyodor Lukyanov, Gazeta.ru

While the world's eyes are riveted on the Syrian cities of Damascus and Aleppo, Egypt is witnessing developments whose significance for the regional and global future is much greater than even the civil war in Syria.

President Muhammed Mursi, who has just been sworn in, has set about redrawing Egypt's political map with incredible speed. The sacking of the heads of the Egyptian junta ­ Defense Minister Hussein Tantawi and chief of the general staff Sami Annan ­ coupled with the canceling of constitutional amendments granting broad powers to the army, indicate that the Muslim Brothers are in no mood to seek a compromise with the former authorities.

With 80 million residents, Egypt is the Arab world's most populous country and Cairo has historically been one of the region's leading capitals. What happened there, as a rule, while not exactly setting a model for the political development of the entire community, made a strong imprint on it. It was the toppling of Hosni Mubarak a year and a half ago and not the earlier events in Tunisia that really triggered the Arab Spring.

That is why everybody wondered from the very beginning what model would take root in Egypt. Three variants were proposed: the Turkish model (power of the military plus a modernization agenda or moderate and relatively progressive Islamists), the Iranian model (a radical Islamic state) and the Algerian model (brutal suppression of democratically elected Islamists by the military).

The Kemal Ataturk model of the 20th century was quickly cast aside because the conditions for it are not present in Egypt. In Turkey, the military acted as a force for renewal after the collapse of an empire, while in Egypt they embody the former regime, even though they have tried to dissociate themselves from Mubarak.

The Iranian scenario was also dismissed as irrelevant early on, because Iran's system is intimately linked with Shiite Islam. Even if Egypt opts for an Islamic state, it will be a different one.

An Islamic but essentially democratic model still has a chance, according to the Muslim Brothers, but in reality, an Algerian scenario is more likely.  Everyone is waiting with bated breath to see how the military top brass react to Mursi's attack. In 1991, the Algerian army annulled the results of elections that were set to deliver victory to the Islamic Salvation Front and thus plunged the country into a 10-year-long civil war that claimed more than 100,000 lives, but prevented the Islamists from gaining power.

Even if the Egyptian military decide to do this, success is not guaranteed. The world has changed greatly in the last 20 years. In 1991, the Algerian generals could count on a quiet solution ­ they knew no one would care about their actions or interfere in their methods. Today, however, should Egypt take this path, both the Islamic world and the West would react extremely negatively. Besides, Egyptian society, as the parliamentary and presidential elections have shown, wants democratic procedures and change, so a military regime would have little support.

If the Muslim Brothers and Muhammed Mursi consolidate their power, there could be the start of a profound realignment of forces and influence in the Middle East. To give one example, the current situation with Israel will not endure, although Cairo is likely revise its policies over time rather than sever the agreements abruptly.

It is unlikely that any of the current Middle Eastern leaders would risk provoking a war with the Jewish state, even if it is a popular idea on the Arab streets. However, the overall erosion of rules of conduct might trigger a series of incidents on Israel's perimeter, engendering a response that might potentially drag it into a confrontation with everyone.

Washington, of course, has leverage in the shape of the $2 billion it has channeled to Cairo since its accords with Israel were reached. Because the Egyptian economy is in free fall, the Muslim Brothers' government would be loath to forego that money.

Yet the process of general geopolitical change might lead to a change of sponsors. The key players in the Arab Spring are the Gulf monarchies, whose influence has soared in the last year and a half. The oil kingdoms' financial clout enables them to support Egypt as strongly as the United States does.

The most acute collision in the near term is connected with Iran, because eliminating the menace of a nuclear Tehran and reducing Iran's influence is, for all the regional players, the main goal and one element of achieving it is confrontation in Syria.

As long as the Iranian problem exists, the interests of the conservative monarchies, the revolutionary regimes, the United States and Israel coincide. But if that problem is resolved one way or another, the common agenda will fall apart and the tacit temporary accord between Saudi Arabia and Israel will come to an end. And then much, if not everything, would depend on Egypt, its inner state and orientation in the world.
=======================================================================
            I was fortunate enough (or unfortunate, depending on one's point of view) to be at American University in Cairo during the Arab Spring. Egyptian's refer to these events as "The Revolution of 25 January". Lukyanov's article provided a starting point for an essay on my own thoughts on the subject.


Springtime for Egypt
William Tombaugh
24 August 2012

            The eyes of the world are fixed on Syria. Western incursion into Syria may be just around the corner. Escalating violence in Syria is capturing the headlines. However, Fyodor Lukyanov believes the more peaceful seismic power shift reverberating in Egypt will also produce fault lines which re-shape the Middle East.  
            
             Lukyanov suggests that Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood (MB) led by President Morsi may be able to wrest control from the military junta and consolidate power within Egypt, resulting in a “profound realignment of forces and influences in the Middle East”. With the recent firing of defense minister Tantawi along with six other high ranking military officials by Morsi, the reversal of a constitutional declaration limiting presidential powers and the end of the veto power of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, and with celebratory chants from the Egyptian Arab Spring of “Go Away Field Marshall” still echoing in Tahrir Square, the military’s role as interim government caretakers may soon be over. Lukyanov predicts a likely last gasp attempt by the military (the "Algerian" model) to assert control, but agrees that conditions in today's Egypt make it unlikely that the military will succeed in such an attempt, considering the deep momentum for democratic reform in Egypt, not to mention the international condemnation that such an action would immediately provoke.  

             The lack of concrete reforms during the 18-month military led transition period, recent instability in the Sinai Peninsula and Egyptian-Israeli border, and the advanced age of the falool General Tantawi ("falool" is colloquial Egyptian Arabic referring to the ancien régime) have offered President Morsi the political excuse he needed to more fully grasp the reins of power. The continued acquiescence of the military to this transition suggests coordinated effort between the military and the MB. The Egyptian military has dominated Egyptian politics since the Nasser era and is widely perceived by Egyptians as a protector of the people. It is too early to predict the withdrawal of military involvement in Egyptian politics, but it is clear that a sea change on the political scene is occurring.

Additionally, the factor of economics keeps the military quiescent. The United States provides $2 billion per year in aid to Egypt, which goes towards the purchase of American grain and to the military. After re-structuring its economy to meet IMF conditions, Egypt is no longer self-sufficient in food. It is speculated that the military establishment holds upwards of a 20% stake in the Egyptian economy (see “Inside Story...”). This financial interest is represented in the numerous military owned clubs, hotels, restaurants, factories, and other commercial ventures that are present throughout Egypt. A coup attempt would have devastating effects on Egypt's already-teetering economy, endangering military economic interests as well as the already enfeebled tourism industry. 

With the ouster of military rule, the lack of an Egyptian constitution, and the non-existence of a parliament, it appears that both legislative and executive powers are being drawn into the hands of Morsi. The military seems to be cooperating with Morsi, but there is growing opposition among Egyptians who were the original participants of Egypt's Arab Spring, liberal democratic Egyptians who favor democratic reform. Morsi is obviously aware of these concerns and responded to Egyptian Copts, emphasizing tolerance and inclusiveness, and assuring Copts they would remain part of the fabric of the Egyptian nation (see Malah, Nadia).

It is interesting to observe that the leaderless spontaneous protests which began the Egyptian revolution and which were fronted largely by young Egyptians interested in liberal democracy, have been co-opted by the well entrenched MB. Perhaps a lesson is that protest movements without leaders and organizational support are likely to be ephemeral. Lenin famously insisted that the masses need a vanguard (the Party) to lead the revolution to eliminate the old social order and build anew. The gradually increasing assertion of power by the MB has led to fears of an oppressive Islamist state. An example of this concern is the recent call for mass protest against the "Brotherhoodization" of the state (see Shukrallah, Salamah).

The MB’s short-term intentions in Egypt remain opaque. A decade earlier, the MB was rumored to have made a deal with the Mubarak regime to withdraw from politics and not to publicly protest against the dictatorship (see “Egypt: Islamism…”), although individual MB members would often go off the reservation by organizing public protests or running for parliament. Ironically, the MB was absent at the outset of the Egyptian revolution, and advised their followers not to participate. However, when it became clear that the demonstrations had widespread support, the MB dived headlong into the fray. Clearly, the MB made an opportunistic calculation that the demonstrations were about to achieve escape velocity. The MB initially stated they would not field a presidential candidate (see “Egypt’s Brotherhood may…” and Lynch, Marc). However, they later changed their mind and submitted two candidates. The MB has shown itself to be pragmatic, opportunistic, cautious, and ambitious. A political chameleon. 

The MB has historically been consistent in its long-term goal: the establishment of an Islamic Sharia state (see “Profile: Egypt’s…”). In the short term they are unlikely to embark on a hasty program of radical change that would fracture Egyptian society-- religious, sectarian or otherwise. This would also hold true for its current relationships with foreign countries, including Israel. Lukyanov is correct that over time, a change in the relationship with Israel seems inevitable. There are issues that have the potential to spin out of control, such as the border in Sinai and Gaza. As Egypt and other Arab states develop their technology and economies, there will be ongoing tensions with Israel, unless a comprehensive peace is achieved. Over the longer term there is no certainty that the alliance between Egypt and the U.S. that has existed since the Camp David Accords will continue to exist. At present there is no stable status quo. Nothing is certain in the ME-- except change. 

 Iran is perceived as a threat by Israel, Saudi Arabia/the Gulf States, Europe, and the United States. Egypt as well as other countries are less concerned with Iran (see “Egypt’s Morsi to make…”). The Syrian conflict is a part of a larger effort against Iran and does of course influence alliances and policies that affect Egypt. For example, political developments in Syria, Turkey, Lebanon, Gaza, and the West Bank may strongly affect Egypt’s relationship with the United States and Israel. Instability has repercussions that are hard to predict.

             Egypt accounts for almost 40% of the total population of Arab countries, and has historically viewed itself as the natural leader of the Arab nation. It is easy to agree with Lukyanov that Egypt will play a major role in Middle Eastern affairs, with or without the largesse of the United States. He also raises the possibility that there could be "a change of sponsors" in the ME. Saudi Arabia may be able to offer some support to Egypt in the short term for opportunistic issues such as Palestinian aid or security measures, but there is historical animosity between Egypt and Saudi Arabia that is likely to influence ongoing relations between the countries, even with the advent of a MB regime in Egypt. In the early post-war years, during the Cold War, Russia supplied Egypt with military and economic aid. The Aswan Dam is a memorial of Russian aid to Egypt. Russia is now re-asserting itself in the ME, and may be an alternative to the United States. China has very aggressively expanded her presence on the African continent and is another potential sponsor.

              The only certainty is change. The Arab Spring is its harbinger.

English Sources:

“Egypt’s Brotherhood may bid for President.” The Jerusalem Post, (March 21, 2012). Retrieved August 22, 2012, from: http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=262807
“Egypt: Islamism and the State.” The American Foreign Policy Council’s World Almanac of Islamism. (n.d.). Retrieved August 22, 2012, from: http://almanac.afpc.org/Egypt
“Egypt’s Morsi to make historic trip to Tehran.” Al Jazeera English, (n.d.). Retrieved August 22, 2012, from: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/08/2012818182526548301.html
“Inside Story: Can Morsi break the military’s hold on Egypt?” Al Jazeera English, (n.d.). Retrieved August 21, 2012, from: http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestory/2012/08/2012813135019322491.html
Lukyanov, Fyodor. (August 21, 2012). “The world ignores Egypt at its own peril.” Russia Beyond the Headlines. Retrieved August 21, 2012, from: http://rbth.ru/articles/2012/08/21/the_world_ignores_egypt_at_its_own_peril_17539.html
Lynch, Marc. (April 2, 2012). “The Muslim Brotherhood’s Presidential Gambit.” Foreign Policy. Retrieved August 22, 2012, from: http://lynch.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/04/01/the_muslim_brotherhoods_presidential_gambit
“Profile: Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood” BBC News, (n.d.). Retrieved August 22, 2012, from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12313405
Shukrallah, Salamah. (August 23, 2012). “Egypt revolutionaries to steer clear of Friday’s anti-Brotherhood rally.” Ahram Online English. Retrieved August 23, 2012, from: http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/51025/Egypt/Politics-/Egypt-revolutionaries-to-steer-clear-of-Fridays-an.aspx
 “Empire: Egypt: A second republic?” Al Jazeera English, (n.d.). Retrieved August 21, 2012, from: http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/empire/2012/07/2012711163519717268.html

Arabic Sources:

“Egypt: Presidential coup overthrows the rule of the military.” The Ambassador, (n.d.). Retrieved August 21, 2012, from: http://www.assafir.com/Article.aspx?ArticleId=1218&EditionId=2228&ChannelId=53429
Khalifa, Abdel Raouf. (August 23, 2012). “Mahmoud Alsharef: Demonstrations tomorrow aim to embarrass the president elect and prevent the implementation of his programs.” Ahram Digital. Retrieved August 23, 2012, from: http://digital.ahram.org.eg/Policy.aspx?Serial=1002503
Malah, Nadia. (June 27, 2012). “Doctor Louis Grace: Morsi’s letter reassuring the Copts they are a part of the fabric of the nation.” Ahram Digital. Retrieved August 22, 2012, from: http://digital.ahram.org.eg/articles.aspx?Serial=944240&eid=1218
“Morsi’s decisions change the political landscape in Egypt: Absolute power for the president not available to Mubarak!” The Ambassador, (August 14, 2012). Retrieved August 21, 2012, from: http://www.assafir.com/MulhakArticle.aspx?EditionId=2235&MulhakArticleId=604966&MulhakId=4261


Friday, April 20, 2012

Book Reviews


Zhao, Suisheng.    Nation-State by Construction: Dynamics of Modern Chinese Nationalism.   Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2004.   xii + 355 pp. ISBN 0-8047-5001-7.

This book provides a comprehensive account for the development of Chinese nationalism throughout modern Chinese history (from the late nineteenth century to the beginning of the twenty-first century). In this work, Zhao takes a primarily historical approach to the study of Chinese nationalism as a multi-faceted and multi-layered phenomenon. This book is composed of seven chapters, covering topics from the historical context for understanding Chinese nationalism to the different forms of Chinese nationalism, and from a case study of the patriotic education campaign of the 1990s to the foreign policy ramifications of Chinese nationalism.
Zhao seeks to present his readers with a comprehensive picture of Chinese nationalism as well as the studies on this topic. The great amount of information provided and the way this information is presented constitute both the major strength and weakness of the work. On the one hand, the book is extremely informative. In terms of content, Zhao not only provides historical context for understanding the origins and rise of Chinese nationalism, but also illustrates the characteristics of various forms of Chinese nationalism, including Chinese liberal nationalism, state nationalism, and ethnic nationalism. In terms of theoretical paradigms of nationalism, Zhao employs “primordialism with a careful measure of instrumentalism” (7). On the other hand, to accommodate all of this information into a 300-page book, the author does not have enough space to delve into each subtopic in depth, and thus, this text lacks a strong focus. Moreover, as Zhao tends to present the arguments of different sides in the theoretical debates on the issues of Chinese nationalism, the analysis in this book does not provide support for any coherent theory, and Zhao’s own position on certain controversial issues in the study of Chinese nationalism, such as its origins, content and ramifications, is unclear (12).
Another gap in this study is that no systematic quantitative fieldwork has been carried out to specifically examine contemporary Chinese nationalist views. Zhao’s book is largely based on extensive reading of primary sources and scholarly literature, and derives its ideas and arguments mainly from descriptive content analysis of these sources. However, no convincing quantitative evidence on Chinese public opinion in regard to Chinese nationalism is provided. For example, in Zhao’s chapter on the patriotic education campaign in China of the 1990s, although the author does an excellent job in analyzing the content of the instrumentalist campaign, his evaluation of the effects of the patriotic campaign is supported only by several examples that are representative to a limited extent (238), based on which a comprehensive understanding of Chinese public opinion toward nationalism during the campaign cannot be accurately determined.
There is no doubt that Zhao’s work is a historically comprehensive essential reading for all students of Chinese nationalism. Nevertheless, it does not contribute much to the theoretical debates on this topic. Ideally, it ought to be further completed and strengthened by possible quantitative evidence.



Gries, Peter Hays.    China’s New Nationalism: Pride, Politics, and Diplomacy.   Berkeley and Los Angeles, California: University of California Press, 2004.   215 pp.   ISBN 0-520-24482-6.

This book is an in-depth case study on what Peter Gries defines as the “fourth generation” of Chinese nationalists, who “seek to make sense of their experiences in the ‘Liberal 80s,’ ” and the rise of Chinese mass nationalism in the events of China’s confrontations with external powers, particularly the United States and Japan, in the 1990s and early 2000s (4).
In order to avoid the controversies in the academic definition of nationalism and national identity, Gries resorts to social psychology theory, making this book a very innovative study of contemporary Chinese nationalism. It is insightful and inspiring for both western and Chinese readers because Gries provides a refreshing analysis of the perceptions and misperceptions of people from China and from other countries toward each other from a psychological perspective, “relying on a deep immersion in the historical and cultural context of Chinese politics today” (9). In particular, Gries emphasizes the concept of “face” in Chinese culture and its role in Chinese nationalism (21). According to the author, in Chinese culture, the “face game” is “a battle over the zero-sum resource of social status”, and is thus “fundamentally political” and closely related to Chinese national pride and foreign policy (26).
Another valuable contribution of this book is that Gries challenges the conventional western view that Chinese nationalism is a state-centric construction based on top-down Party propaganda. Instead, he argues that nationalist politics in China today should be seen as an interaction between the Chinese people and the China Communist Party (121). In support of his argument, he used the Diaoyu Islands protests in 1996 and the Belgrade bombing protests in 1999, as examples of bottom-up nationalist movements in China that involve “both Chinese people and their passion” (Gries, 19, 121, 133).
However, as a possible weakness, this book’s heavy reliance on social psychology might have resulted in an overestimation of the psychological explanations for the rise of Chinese nationalism while overlooking other independent variables. For example, Gries sees the psychological void of the “fourth generation” of Chinese nationalists and the historical grievances between China and other states as the main explanatory factors in the rise of Chinese nationalism in the 1990s and 2000s. But, in the absence of a systematic quantitative study, he presents no control over other variables affecting people’s attitude toward Chinese nationalism and national identity, such as education, sources of information, and occupation, and thus cannot account for the exact role and position of psychological factors, in relation to other factors, in the process of the formation of Chinese national identity.
This book is an important reading for those who are interested in understanding the recent rise of Chinese nationalism within the cultural and historical contexts in China from a psychological perspective. Particularly, this work contributes to more comprehensive interpretations of Sino-US and Sino-Japanese relations.  

Thursday, April 19, 2012

Favela Gangs: Threats to Brazilian Security

The gangs and criminal networks that have historically occupied Rio de Janeiro’s favelas are classified by some as criminal insurgencies. The gangs operate in small and organized units, patrolling and defending their favela territories. The patrolling and defending is done in an effort to maintain autonomy from the Brazilian government and security forces in order to maximize profits from the drug trade. This is their main objective. Limited, yes; but becoming more and more difficult to achieve. The gangs have the capabilities to employ guerrilla tactics and warfare techniques to achieve their goals and control territories. These territories, which have a highly complex structure, are the operating grounds for Brazil’s drug commerce.

“At the local level, each favela is controlled by a senior leader or dono. Under the dono is the general manager who manages the gang operations including drug sales and military activities. Under the general manger, there are sub-managers for cocaine sales, marijuana sales, and security. Each drug distribution point, called a boca de fumo, has a manager and security force. Finally, guards are employed to protect the perimeter of the favela from police or rival gang incursions.”

The members of these gangs generally have access to assault rifles, grenades, and heavy machine guns. While many speculate that the control and power of the drug gangs has been overestimated, one security analyst explained, “To survive, they have to be intelligent, clever, and ruthless.” The attacks in December of 2006 demonstrate the gangs’ capabilities. On December, 28 2006, drug gangs launched a synchronized attack against buses and police stations. It has been speculated that this was coordinated to intimidate Rio’s new government. In October of 2009, a police helicopter was shot down just one mile away from the Marcana Stadium in Rio, where the opening and closing ceremonies for the 2016 Olympics are to take place. The helicopter was attempting to descend upon the Morro dos Macacos favela when criminal gangs began to fire. Two officers were killed during a forced emergency landing. A similar attack happened in November of 2010, when buses and cars were set on fire and improvised explosives were detonated. The attacks, which left over 35 people dead, were understood to be a reaction to the pacification program.

While there are clear similarities between insurgents and the criminal gangs of the favelas, the central demands of the gangs are not political. The underlying tensions are a result of conflicting social interests and a lack of opportunities for residents. The youth within the favelas are raised in this culture of violence where the gang leaders run the communities.

A nongovernmental organization in Rio determined that around 20% of the guns seized in the country are foreign produced. Others, which are produced in Brazil but cannot be legally sold there, are exported and then smuggled back in to Brazil. Within the last year, Brazil has started working together with neighboring countries Bolivia, Paraguay and Peru to monitor terrain and track drug traffickers and arms smugglers. Brazil initiated the operation, and has the rights to enter the other countries’ air space. Recent reports, however, show an increased use of maritime routes to smuggle in arms. Even if Brazil is able to reduce maritime smuggling, the country still borders ten other nations, much of which are densely forested and remote areas. Brazil needs to focus its efforts on border security, specifically in the state of Mato Grosso do Sul. One report determined that Mato Grosso do Sul, which borders Paraguay and Bolivia, was the location of 30% of the export and re-importation of illegal weapons. Youth and impoverished residents of the favela would be much less likely to enter the drug world if they did not have access to the tools necessary to survive.

SOURCES

Boyle, Christina. “Brazilian Drug Gangs Shoot down Police Chopper Near Rio De Janiero; 2 Officers Dead.” NYDailyNews, October 17, 2009. http://articles.nydailynews.com/2009-10-17/news/17937622_1_drug-gangs-rio-drug-traffickers.

“Brazil Unmanned Aircraft Hunt Drug Gangs.” UPI, n.d. http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2011/07/13/Brazil-unmanned-aircraft-hunt-drug-gangs/UPI-44691310596620/.

Burgoyne, Michael. “The Right Tool for the Job: An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Counterinsurgency Principles Against Criminal Insurgency | Small Wars Journal”, n.d. http://smallwarsjournal.com/resource/the-right-tool-for-the-job-an-evaluation-of-the-effectiveness-of-counterinsurgency-principl.

Killebrew, Robert. “PRISM 2, No. 3: Criminal Insurgency in the Americas and Beyond”, n.d. http://www.ndu.edu/press/criminal-insurgency.html.

Stone, Hannah. “Brazil Police Say Sea Is New Arms Trafficking Frontier”, n.d. http://insightcrime.org/insight-latest-news/item/1242-brazil-police-say-sea-is-new-arms-trafficking-frontier.

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Chinese Commentaries on Foreign Affairs

Sino-US Relations

A Chinese Foreign Ministry official wrote a commentary on Sino-US relations, where he pointed out that the biggest mistrust in Sino-US relations are their suspicions of each other's intentions to change their own regime types. According to him, the mistrust between China and the US, to a certain extent, should be attributed to the conflict between a superpower and a rising power. To improve mutual trust, this Chinese official suggests that the US should provide answers for the following questions: Is the US's increase of military bases around China aimed at partially encircling China? Has the US considered what impacts its high-profile return to the Asia-Pacific has on the feelings of Chinese, the Sino-US mutual trust, and regional stability? When will the US reduce its arm sales to Taiwan? Will the US stick to protectionism in regard to Sino-US trade frictions, or the US hope to strengthen the cooperation with China? How will the US explain its particular concern over Chinese dissidents, if it is not the US's intention to change the regime type in China? What does the US mean by "being responsible" when commenting China's policy toward Iran and North Korea nuclear crisis?

North Korea Satellite

Regarding the North Korea nuclear crisis, China always holds that it is in the common interests of all parties to continue to push forward the Six Party Talks and the denuclearization of the Peninsula and to maintain peace and stability in the region. China believes that practice has proved that dialogue and consultation is the only correct choice to solve the problem. China hopes that different parties can work together to properly handle the issues through contact and dialogue. China is willing to work with the parties to actively promote the six Party Talks and make unremitting efforts for the realization of the long-term stability of the Peninsular and Northeast Asia.

Sino-Russian Military Exercises

From April 22 to April 29, Russia and China will conduct joint naval exercises in the Yellow Sea water codenamed "maritime collaboration 2012". This will be the largest joint military exercises at sea between China and Russia in recent years. During the exercise, the North China Sea Fleet will send a guided missile destroyer to the Russian Fleet to form a mixed fleet to enter Yellow Sea water across the Strait of Japan, and hold joint exercises near Qingdao. According to the Russian Defense Ministry, the purpose of this joint exercise is targeted at anti-piracy and counter-terrorism operations. The Chinese side stressed that the exercise is to deepen the strategic partnership between China and Russia and to safeguard peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region and the world. The Russian side also stressed that this exercise is not against any third party.

China-Philippines Water Disputes

With regard to the China-Philippines disputes over Huangyan Island in the South China Sea, a commentary from Global Times claims that the Philippine military does not know its limits, and that it is very easy to destroy their naval forces. According to this commentary, the strongest of the Philippine Navy warships is only a quasi-warship of the U.S. Coast Guard, while their other warships are mostly from the United States and Britain eliminated ships. In addition, due to the limited remote capacity of the Philippine Navy, Marines cannot really play a significant role.

A spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in the Philippines on the 16th said that China urges the Philippine side to immediately withdraw all vessels in the waters of the Huangyan Island and restore the status of pease and tranquility of the area. China holds that Huanyan Island waters is a traditional fishing ground of Chinese fishermen.


Sources:

"外交部官员:中美最大猜忌己方政权性质被改" (Foreign Ministry official: China and the United States' biggest concerns are the danger of changes in regime types)

"中方与国际社会达共识 强烈谴责朝发射卫星" (China and the international community reached consensus on a strong condemnation of the DPRK's decision to launch a satellite)

"中俄海上军演:将组成混合编队穿越日本海峡" (Sino-Russian military exercises at sea: will form a mixed formation across the Strait of Japan)

"菲国挑事属自不量力 消灭其海军不费吹灰之力" (Philippine does not know its limit, it is easy to destroy their navy)

"中方:菲仍留20余船并在我南海考古令人惊讶" (China: It is surprising that the Philippines still keep more than 20 archeology boats in the South China Sea)

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

War Within Brazil

There is a common perception that there is an undeclared war in Brazil that is taking place between the favelas, military police, paramilitary groups and drug traffickers. The situation has been described in comparison to US troops in Afghanistan and to the Brazilian presence in Haiti.

Rio’s diverse terrain and portions of extreme concentrated poverty have contributed to and reinforced these war-like perceptions. The terrain ranges from mountains to jungles which provide a dangerous patrolling environment much like that in Kabul.

Rio is home to around 1,000 favelas, which are generally built on the mountain sides and home to poor migrant workers. Brazil’s conservative middle class has been characterized as criminalizing the poor, and supporting any and all military operations to invade the favelas. The physical wall that has been built around 13 favelas has further segregated them, and was referred to by one professor as “a fascist fence around the poor.”

The favelas are being increasingly inhabited by military bases. General Enzo Martins Peri, a commander of the Brazilian Army, compared the operational base being set up in the Alemao favela Complex in 2010 to the operations taking place in Haiti. The army, which had already previously been involved in police actions, had the support of the State Civil Police in forming a military command center within the Alemao Complex. Army installations were set up and conducted under the same regulations as those in Haiti, with power that not even the police was given.
Like in Haiti, the troops had the right to use force in order to impose peace, often by entering properties without warrants and shooting to kill. The director of the UN Information Center in Brazil explained, “In Haiti, the military can fight back with gunfire, not only as a form of self defense.” In Haiti, the Brazilian military (as part of the UN Stabilization Mission in Haiti--MINUSTAH) had to clear Haiti’s streets and perform combat engineering, strategies which were originally used in Brazilian favelas.

In November of 2011, special police force and navy commandos invaded Rocinha and Vidigal, two of Rio’s largest favelas. After these security forces invaded the favelas at the crack of dawn, they hoisted the Brazilian flag in them to show that government authority had been restored. One journalist posed the question, “Where have we gone wrong if it is necessary to hoist the Brazilian flag in Brazilian territory, as if this signified the conquest of foreign land?” Military occupations of favelas are treating them as if they are foreign territory.

The media has further reinforced the war with favelas by using war-like language. For example, a hurt man is referred to as “a wounded bandit,” and the people arrested are referred to by their favela nicknames instead of formal names. This language paints a more gang-like picture of all of the favela residents, the majority of whom are not directly involved in the drug trafficking. For example, statistics of the Alemao Complex show that only .05% of the 200,000 inhabitants are actually involved in the trafficking.

SOURCES

Auler, Marcelo, and Tania Monteiro. “Brazil: Army to Be Peacekeepers and Police at Rio De Janeiro.” O Estado De Sao Paulo Digital. Sao Paolo, December 4, 2010.

“Police Wrest Control of Rio’s Largest Favela to Expel Drug Traffickers.” The Daily Star. Beirut, November 14, 2011.

Slater, Russell. “Brazil: Why Raiding Rio’s Favelas Is Not as Good as It Looks.” Brazzil (August 21, 2009).

Toledo, Renato Godoy de, and Claudia Santiago. “Brazil Police Use Press Coverage as Green Light to Kill and Invade Houses in Rio.” Brazzil (November 10, 2009).

Zibechi, Raul. “In Stretch to the Olympics Rio Becomes Lab for Genocide and Social Control.” Brazzil (January 20, 2010).

Sunday, March 11, 2012

Chinese Commentaries on Foreign Affairs (Mar 5- Mar 11)

Chinese Maritime Defense Strategy

March 9, while attending China's Eleventh National People's Congress, the former commander of a naval test base, Major General Cao Dongshen, commented on the issue of China's maritime rights and interests. He believes that china's national sovereignty must be defended at all expenses. With regard to some media's report that the Chinese aircraft carrier Varyag might start its military service this year, Cao said that the carrier is still only used for training and research. He also repeatedly stressed that modern warfare is systematic, where the aircraft carrier is not the determining factor. As for the Chinese navy's ocean escort operations, Cao Dong Shen said that because the situation is not stabilized yet, the convoy will need to continue.

Also responding to the "China Threat Theory" stirred up by China's aircraft carrier, Vice Admiral Wang Dengping recently said in an interview that China will change its defense strategy merely because of the carrier, and it is ungrounded to see China as a threat to others. Regarding the North Sea Fleet's escort mission in the Gulf of Aden and the Somali waters, Wang said that this glorious mission is of important responsibility. Wang also emphasized that the training of Chinese navy is consistent with international law and international convention, and is not targeted at any specific country. Therefore, he argued that the outside world should not make unnecessary speculations or fuss about Chinese navy's training and exercises in relevant waters.

Chinese Military Expenditure

As the fuss about the increased Chinese military spending continues, a commentary came out on Global Times this week. The title of this commentary says that China is not as belligerent as Japan, otherwise Asia would not be peaceful as it is today. According to a report produced by a British think tank, Asia's military expenditure could for the first time surpass that of Europe, and that China's defense budget accounts for 30% of Asia's military spending. The Global Times commentary responds that this report is deliberately misleading. First, there no arms race between Asia and Europe. Second, the percentage of China's military spending in Asia is not a result of an arms race in the region either. Instead, this article argues that, what really matters is the difference between China's military spending and the US's military spending. In 2011, China's military spending is about 1/8 of the U.S. military. It is this big difference that will have the most important impacts on Asia's geopolitical and military situation. The increase in China's military spending does not mean that China is belligerent. Rather, it is an insurance for China's future.

Sino-Russia Alliance?

Some Chinese experts believe that as the US shifts its strategic focus to the Asia-Pacific, it is imperative for China and Russia to reinforce and promote the Sino-Russian strategic partnership. Accordingly, China needs to reformulate its "no-alliance" principle to adjust to the changing global power balance.


Sources:

"少将:瓦良格号航母服役后仍用于训练研究" (Major General: Varyag aircraft carrier is still used for training and research)

"海军中将:中国不会因有航母改变现防御战略" (Vice Admiral: China will not change the current defense strategy because of the carrier)

"中将:中国海军要以实际行动来维护海洋权益" (Vice Admiral: Chinese navy needs to take concrete actions to safeguard maritime rights and interests)

"中国不是日本 若涨军费是好战亚洲岂有今天" (China is not as belligerent as Japan and is not a threat to other Asian states)

"中国不能孤独对抗美国 中俄军事结盟势在必行" (China cannot confront the US alone, the U.S. Sino-Russian military alliance is imperative)

Friday, March 9, 2012

Chinese Commentaries on Foreign Affairs (Feb 27- Mar 4)

South China Sea

Major General Luo Yuan, executive director of the China Military Science Society, believes that unexpected events are likely to outbreak in the South China Sea in 2012. According to him, the US has made up its mind to move its military focus to the Asia-Pacific region to contain China, which reflects the residue of the Cold War thinking. Luo considers the US's move as a potential strategic mistake, because the US picked a wrong rival at a wrong time in the wrong place. By wrong time, he means that peace and development are the themes of this era. By wrong place, he means that while there still is threat to US's metropolitan territory and situation in the Middle East is still unstable, it is not a wise choice to move to the Asia-Pacific. By wrong rival, he means that China is an undefeatable and indomitable opponent. In addition, Luo suggests that China should keep a close eye on Japan, since Japan has gradually got rid of its post-war shackles.

In response to U.S. Pacific Command Commander Robert Willard's remarks that China is the only country claiming sovereignty over the entire South China Sea, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said at a regular press conference on the 29th that China does not claim sovereignty over the entire South China Sea. Instead, Hong stated that the core of the South China sea disputes is about the Nansha Islands and the demarcation of part of the South China Sea waters. According to Hong, China has indisputable sovereignty over the Nansha Islands. Therefore, it is illegal for the Philippines to exploit oil and gas resources around the Nansha Islands with foreign investors.

Diaoyu Islands

In response to Japan's naming of the Diaoyu Islands, China has released standard names and descriptions of the Diaoyu Island and its affiliated isles, according to sources with the State Oceanic Administration. The Diaoyu Island is named as "Diaoyu Island", with its Chinese pronunciation reading "Diao yu Dao". It is described as an island "about 356 kilometers from the city of Wenzhou, 385 kilometers from the city of Fuzhou and 190 kilometers from the city of Keelung." The country has also released names of Diaoyu's 70 affiliated islands, the names in pinyin and description of locations. In the meantime, China demands that Japan immediately cease unilateral survey in disputed waters. Major General Luo Yuan suggests that Coast Guard should be established to cope with the grim situation in the East China Sea and the South China Sea.

Chinese Military Expenditures

Li Zhaoxing, the spokesman for the National People's Congress, announced on Sunday the overall figure for China's 2012 military spending. China's 2012 defense budget is 670.274 billion yuan, with a 11.2 percent increase compared to the number of budget execution of the previous year. Li stresses that China adheres to a defensive national defense policy, and that Chinese military spending is transparent. China's limited military capabilities is geared at safeguarding national sovereignty and security and territorial integrity. China will not pose a threat to other countries. Responding to the China Threat Theory, some Chinese military officials point out that the increase in Chinese defense budget is consistent with China's overall development, and that Chinese military expenditure is much lower than that of some western countries. Specifically, Major General Luo Yuan states that China might build more aircraft carriers in the future if needed.


Sources:

"罗援:2012年南海很可能爆发一些突发事件" (Unexpected events could outbreak in the South China Sea in 2012)

"外交部:中国并未对整个南海提出主权声索" (Chinese Foreign Ministry: China does not claim sovereignty over the entire South China Sea)

"外交部:菲律宾拉外资开发南沙油气是非法的" (Chinese Foreign Ministry: It is illegal for the Philippines to exploit oil and gas resources around the Nansha Islands with foreign investors)

"中方要求日方立即停止在争议海域单方面调查" (China demands that Japan immediately cease unilateral survey in disputed waters)

"抽日本人耳光 我公布钓鱼岛附属岛屿标准名" (Slapping Japan, China released standard names of the Diaoyu Islands)

"少将:须设海岸警备队应对东海南海严峻形势" (Coast Guard should be established to cope with the grim situation in the East China Sea and the South China Sea)

"2012年中国国防费预算6702.74亿 增长11.2%" (China's 2012 defense budget is 670.274 billion yuan)

"李肇星接受英记者采访:涨军费为维护世界和平" (Li Zhaoxing: increased military spending is to safeguard world peace)

"少将谈我未来航母:若有需要多建几艘有可能" (Major General talks about aircraft carrier, might build more if necessary)