Stanford University Press Blog

New Missile Defense: What future will Obama's decision hold?

President Obama’s recent decision to eliminate a missile defense system plan has stirred up quite a controversy in domestic and international politics.  Instead of setting up a limited missile defense system in Poland to intercept potential long-range nuclear missiles from Iran – which, at present, haven’t been developed there – Obama has decided that the US should arrange a shorter range missile interceptor near Iran for the medium range missile threat. Some say that this decision is a concession to Russian complaints that the longer range set-up would provide the U.S. with an opportunity for a first-strike.

In a recent op-ed in the Short Stack column for the Washington Post, Thomas Graham co-author of Preventing Catastrophe: The Use and Misuse of Intelligence in Efforts to Halt the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction,  gives his opinion on Obama’s decision to change the strategy from the Bush administration’s more aggressive stance on missile defense.  He explains that after a long history of unsuccessful nuclear defense plans, a more realistic plan has now been introduced. Some fear that a new wave of nuclear proliferation could soon develop, leading to more dangerous and paranoid international relations. Graham points out that by changing our missile defense plan, the Obama administration is hoping to “reset” relations with Russia while also defending from the very realistic possibility of Iranian medium-range missiles.  It will be interesting to see how this decision plays out: Will it buy us more cooperation with Russia for future nonproliferation and help us to defend from the very real threat posed by Iran? Or, in terms of defending its NATO allies in Eastern Europe, is it dangerous and unwise move for U.S. foreign policy?

Confronting the Bomb: Can individuals make a difference?

Can ordinary citizens really bring change to international politics? We may think this question applies only to current times when we talk of Gov 2.0 and governments outsourcing ideas from citizens on Twitter. As the nuclear disarmament campaign shows, grassroots movements have had an impact in previous decades as well.

Larry Wittner, author of Confronting the Bomb, A Short History of the World Nuclear Disarmament Movement, provides a brief look at the history of the anti-nuclear movement and how it affected world leaders. In an interview with Marshall Poe of New Books in History, Wittner draws on his book to explain how nuclear disarmament has developed and how it has been affected by public movements. 

Wittner's book includes many interesting quotations from world leaders that evidence just how excited international leaders initially were about the advent of the Bomb. Winston Churchill loved the bomb and saw it as a way to win wars and maintain international influence. Eisenhower viewed the bomb as a positive addition to the U.S. arsenal, saying "My administration looks on nuclear weapons as no different than a bullet." The general consensus among leaders was that bigger and better weapons lead to better defense and therefore a safer environment.                                                         

As Wittner goes on to explain, the public saw nuclear weapons in a different light. From the early 1970's to its height in the early 1980s, an anti-nuclear movement had people all over the world protesting the Bomb. As Marshall Poe himself reminisces, he never thought that his small protests really had a big impact.  However, Wittner explains that the  growing anti-nuclear campaign had a huge influence on world leaders' decisions, from small protests to gatherings of almost 1 million people. At the beginning of Ronald Reagan's term as president, he made clear that  nuclear weapons  were a positive addition to U.S. defense.  But as time went on and as the disarmament campaign grew, the nation watched Reagan make a complete turn around. He began to consider the call for disarmament. Even leaders of other countries began to change the way they viewed nuclear weapons. After 1985, Nikolai Gorbachev said "new thinking" was needed. Gorbachev and Reagan met many times and were able to come to agreements for lessening the nuclear arsenals in their countries.

As leaders began to heed the requests of the public, people of the anti-nuclear movement became comfortable and complacent. The movement has since died down. Toward the late 1990's, the anti-nuclear movement became less prolific.  As a result, nuclear weapons began to increase again. In 1996, a Republican Senate rejected a nuclear test ban treaty, and later, during George W. Bush administration, the President began to pursue the creation of new nuclear weapons. Free from the pressure of the nuclear disarmament campaign, the government is at liberty to pursue nuclear weapons -- but, as Wittner explains, the movement is reviving.

Wittner's book goes into a brief history of the advent of bomb and a more detailed  history of the movement against it. Though the movement has had its ups and downs, Wittner is confident that it is resurging and as history shows, ordinary people can make a big difference.
    

Warshaw delivers tell-all on the Bush-Cheney Co-Presidency

Shirley Anne Warshaw, Professor of Political Science at Gettysburg College and author of the recently published The Co-Presidency of Bush and Cheney is already receiving rave reviews from media.

A recent review in Publishers Weekly states that the book is “thoroughly researched and insightful.” The book outlines how the presidential office from 2000-2008 was split into two thrones. Warshaw explains, in detail, how Cheney was not the puppet master of Bush, but instead his accomplice in creating what Warshaw, and others, refer to as an “Imperial Presidency.” By stacking the White House with his supporters and making key appointments, Cheney succeeded in leading his business-friendly portion of the presidency while leaving Bush to his faith-based policies.

According to the Publishers Weekly review, Warshaw’s book “offers and engaging look at the most controversial presidency since Nixon’s.”

Southern California as a Blueprint for Obama's Administration

Smile Southern California, You're the Center of the Universe a recent book by James Flanigan, with its sunny cover and celebration of the prosperity of the region, is at first glance wildly at odds with our current economic recession and California’s enormous budget deficit (somewhere around $16 billion, at the latest estimate). James Srodes, a financial journalist at the Washington times, points out in a recent review that at first it may seem as if this book was only relevant before economic crisis; because in the time it has taken to be written and published, California has suffered the same downfalls as all the other states and in fact currently has the worst budget deficit of all the states. He goes on to say that this is not a negation of the importance of Flanigans work. In fact, the book can act as a  sort of blue print for how a society can rise and prosper within the quickly changing international arena.

"First, there is international trade, which is now a leading contributor to the U.S.  GDP in a world economy swelled by billions of new participants — principally the enormous populations of Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe. In today's world, however, industries and countries do not merely exchange goods and services but collaborate in producing them. This is a new paradigm and a richer exchange.” (Flanigan)

No matter what criticisms may come to southern California, Flanigan makes clear that the region is a picture of globalization and flourishing trade; not to mention the fact that Southern California has become a modern “Ellis island” in terms of immigration.

"Southern California became the new Ellis Island and reaped economic energy as immigrants started businesses.” (Flanigan)

California has transformed from having a base of government funded science and technology research centers to relying on a knowledge-driven economy supported by the many world-class research universities of California; and the author shows that the research provided by these institutions can pave the way for the new administration in its quest to come out of this economic slump. Flanigan’s research itself certainly warrants national attention, and, as Srodes points out, can be used to “offer a direction that Mr. Obama and his planners would do well to consider — and promptly.”

Getting Inside Iran's Mind

Gordon Barrass, author of the recently published book The Great Cold War, wrote an intriguing article in the The Guardian entitled Inside the Minds of Foes. Gordon draws on his knowledge of the Cold War while assessing the current situation in foreign affairs that President Obama now faces.

Barrass addressed the fact that Obama will have to reshape US foreign policy; and he cannot do so without good intelligence. Looking back upon the lessons of the Cold War, it is crucial that a leader can get into the mind of his adversary. An excerpt from the book, which Barrass also includes in his article, tells us:
"One of the things that kept the cold war scary," secretary of defense Robert Gates recalled in 2006, "was the lack of understanding on each side of the mentality of the other."

The challenges that Obama’s administration faces now are, of course, fundamentally different then those of the Cold War; but Barrass informs us that “getting inside the mind” of the enemy should remain an important concern and guiding principle in foreign relations.

When seeking efforts to deter a nuclear Iran, or even in worrying about the possibility of terrorists acquiring nuclear or biological weapons within the next 5 years, the US must know more about the fears of their enemies and work toward a better intelligence system with new technologies.  Barrass believes that the history of the Cold war reveals just how important intelligence is.

 “There is another lesson the US will ignore at its peril - the need to grasp an adversary's culture. After Khrushchev shattered American self-confidence by putting Sputnik into space, Congress swiftly approved the National Defense Education Act. Soon many young Americans were studying Soviet affairs. They learned to look at what was really happening, rather than accept preconceived notions, especially the one about the Soviets being unfathomable. Now there is an equally urgent need for young Americans to comprehend the intricacies of more difficult languages and complex cultures.”

Using the insights from his work as a British diplomat during the Cold War, Barrass skillfully lays out what he thinks will be essential intelligence policy not just for the government, but for the people as well.

James Fallows On What Obama Should Read

In a recent article in the  Washington Monthly James Fallows named America's Defense Meltdown: Pentagon Reform for President Obama and the New Congress as a report President Obama should read.  If I had to suggest a sequel for the president's reading list, I would pick Military Reform: An Uneven History and an Uncertain Future, coauthored by Winslow Wheeler who has contributed to both these books. 

In making a case for comprehensive reform (as opposed to "cosmetic dabbling") of the US military, the book begins by citing the little known fact that while America's budget is now larger than at any point since the end of the World War II (and almost half of the combined world total, see source), the army has fewer combat brigades than at any previous time, and the navy and the air force have fewer combat ships and aircraft at their disposal. The effectiveness of all the hi-tech weapons at the disposal of the armed forces does not make up for these reduced numbers.  And, even by this measure the new, hi-tech weapons acquisitions programs have been badly mismanaged by the Pentagon and have proved to be unreliable in delivery. According to the authors of Military Reform, a bloated, declining military structure with a reduced combat capacity has been the result.

Underlying these tactical issues are important questions about our national security strategy in Afghanistan and Iraq.  The book uses Operations Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom—and the subsequent insurgency in Iraq—to outline key areas for reform in the US armed forces and the Department of Defense.  

However, Winslow Wheeler remains pessimistic about President Obama's ability to reform the military.  In an interview with Andrew Cockburn for CounterPunch, Wheeler remarks:

"He campaigned on "Change We Can Believe in" and his transition almost immediately switched to "Continuity We Can Believe In." The people so far selected, especially Robert Gates, have a track record, and that track record is basically to keep things the way they are. Gates will do what he's told on issues like Iraq and Afghanistan. He's already made it clear that as far as managing the Pentagon is concerned he thinks he's been doing a competent job. But during his tenure things have only gotten worse. The budget's going up faster than ever before in recent history; the size of our forces is going south; the equipment continues to get older."

Diamond Brings CIA History to the Political Forefront

  John Diamond, former USA Today national security reporter and author of The CIA and the Culture of Failure U.S. Intelligence from the end of the Cold War to the Invasion of Iraq, has been featured in several media outlets, an interview on NPR's Talk of the Nation, an interview on Insight, and an article in USA Today's Opinions Editorial, for his expertise in the area of CIA history and operations.

      The CIA and the Culture of Failure is Diamond's analysis of the CIA's role in history from US-Soviet relations at the end of the Cold War to the failures and successes that occurred during the hostile and confusing political environment in the years following 9/11.

     Diamond brings his expertise to the current political situation in his Opinion article in USA Today entitled, "The Right Guy for the CIA?" The article addresses President Obama's recent decision to appoint Leon Panetta as the head of the CIA, and that decision's implications for the agency's image and intelligence provisions to the President.

    “The concern surrounding President-elect Barack Obama's choice of Leon Panetta to head the agency is that the new administration is placing greater weight on the CIA's image and reputation than on the intelligence the president needs to lead effectively. Addressing that concern will be Panetta's first order of business, both in his confirmation hearing and after taking over at CIA.”

    In the article Diamond uses some of the historical insights from his book to place the current CIA situation in context. He also addresses how the new President and newly appointed CIA head might tackle the challenge of overcoming past failures, specifically regarding torture, and the war on terrorism.

 "The formidable challenge facing Obama and Panetta will be to see whether they can halt the controversial intelligence policies they oppose while improving the quality of intelligence that goes into the president's morning briefing."

Media Takes on Iran's Sexual Revolution

Pardis Mahdavi, author of Passionate Uprisings: Iran's Sexual Revolution , has been featured in numerous articles and reviews recently, including appearances in The Nation, Financial Times, and The Australian.

Laura Secor's article in The Nation takes an extensive look at Mahdavi's research which includes 7 years of visiting, observing, and interviewing upper-middle-class youth in Tehran. The article discusses Iran's strict laws surrounding sexuality (i.e. unfaithful wives may be subject to public stonings) and how some younger Iranians are secretly circumventing those laws through orgies and cruising for anonymous sex partners. Despite the increase of sexual rebellion and promiscuity among Iranian youth, Mahdavi learned that sexual health education and knowledge was startling low.

"The birth control method of choice among Mahdavi's informants is withdrawal. Women who take the pill frequently lack the most basic information and take it only erratically, depriving themselves of almost all of its effect. Condoms are considered so filthy and embarrassing that even people who share florid details about their sex lives with Mahdavi blush at their mention, and no one wants to be seen requesting them at a pharmacy. AIDS, educated young Iranians tell Mahdavi, is transmitted through visits to the dentist or hairdresser, and other STDs come only from a certain unsavory sort of woman. While wealthy women can obtain abortions — illegal in most cases but common, thanks to poor contraception—from sympathetic doctors at vast expense, poorer women acquire on the black market pills or injections meant for animals."

Luke Slattery's opinion piece in The Australian notes the political underpinnings of Iran's sexual revolution, saying "the embrace of a liberal sexuality profoundly at odds with a repressive theocracy—make no mistake, this is a society where dissidents still disappear for their beliefs — is a gesture layered with deeper significance." Though Slattery remains realistic, referring to the increased sexuality as more of a rebellion than a revolution and contending that "this is a cruel regime, loathed by its young citizenry, but it will not prove easy to dislodge," while Mahdavi "is optimistic, nevertheless, that this passion for sexual self-expression will lead to greater liberalisation and, ultimately, real social change."

Ray Fair Predicts Obama Will Win At Least 52% of the Two-Party Popular Vote

Professor Ray Fair who published Predicting Presidential Elections And Other Things has called the winner for every election since since he started predicting in 1978 (with the exception of 1992).  So we should listen carefully to what he has to say this time around.

In an email earlier today Fair writes, "My work explaining voting behavior suggests that the economy has an important influence on votes for president. If the economy is good, voters are more likely to vote for the incumbent party, and vice-versa if the economy is bad. For the current election the Republican party is the incumbent party and the economy is bad. Not surprisingly, my vote equation predicts that McCain will lose. It predicts that he will get about 48 percent of the two-party vote. The economic data that the equation uses for this prediction end in September, and the economic news in October has been really bad. This suggests that McCain may do worse that the vote equation is predicting he will do, since voters may be influenced by the October events."

Brittan praises After War

In Financial Times, Samuel Brittan discusses influential foreign policy literature which has warned against "moralistic-legalistic" approaches to U.S. intervention in other countries. He tips his hat to writers George Kennan (The Realities of American Foreign Policy) and Herbert Butterfield (Christianity, Diplomacy, and War), whose books were published in the 1950s. In the aftermath of WWII, these writers criticized ideological crusades and favored humble approaches to U.S. military interventions, assessments which could be seen as a prophetic warning considering the current American democracy efforts in Iraq.

While Brittan laments that these two books have been relatively forgotten in recent times, he mentions that Christopher Coyne's After War: The Political Economy of Exporting Democracy (2007) picks up where Kennan and Butterfield left off. In his book, Coyne looks at the success rate of 25 instances of installing democracies after U.S. military occupation, defining 'success' as holding free elections, guaranteeing civil liberties, and establishing "institutionalized constraints on the executive." Coyne shows a success ratio of 28% after five years and 36% after twenty years.  Brittan writes,

"Prof. Coyne is obviously a dove rather than a hawk. But he accepts the case for occasional intervention for humanitarian reasons or to protect US citizens. His main suggestions are to avoid nation-building types of intervention and adopt free trade, if necessary unilaterally by the US...peace and welfare may depend on how far the next US president accepts the main lines of his analysis — a subject even more important than the current credit crunch."