By yours truly, in The Federalist. Read the whole piece here.
First, the US and Western Counter insurgency operations are failure, because frankly, in simple words, we are too good and pussyfooted. We are not brutal enough.
I have previously written why Western strategies fail, and stated that in the last 20 years, only two Counter Insurgency operations succeeded, and that’s in Sri Lanka, and Chechnya. It was brutal, but it brought on stability.
Latest research proves, the only way to succeed in a COIN op, is to be insanely heavyhanded.
Few days back, I wrote about Dr Cheryl Benard’s excellent article on Afghans unleashed on Europe, and why it’s not a migration, but an invasion. It was accused of xenophobia. Facts are not xenophobic, even though xenophobes often usurp facts to their nefarious purposes. Nonetheless, it is the duty of an academic to seek truth, rather than be subservient to any ideology.
I have previously written about why the argument of Jews fleeing Nazis and Syrian refugees being similar is flawed. I have also written why Europe is undergoing an insurgency, which includes a fifth column within European society. Paper by Thomas Hegghammer supports my view. I have also written in 2015, how it will invite justifiable ethno-nationalist backlash, especially from insular East Europe.
Here are the graphs from Germany. Foreigners (in orange) here mean European Non-Germans, as opposed to Asylum Seekers (in red) who are from Middle East and Africa.
This is not a blog post. More like a record.
Joy Reid, MSNBC host, and prominent “Resistance” leader tweeted this.
When corrected, she doubled down, and made a pig’s breakfast out of it.
Not only is this a colossal mistake, historically and geographically wrong, it’s borderline xenophobic. Only tweeted to her rabidly ignorant followers in a modern version of 2017 red baiting. It doesn’t matter where Trump’s wives are from, but hey ho.
A recent important essay by Dr Cheryl Benard cannot come at a more appropriate time. She writes for The National Interest in a must read essay, where she highlights something so obvious that it barely needs any debate. Europe is undergoing a categorical invasion, in the form of unarmed, military aged men, looking to destroy the society from within. A few highlights from this essay:
If there’s one thing you need to read, it is this essay.
Dr Benard is no right wing nutty Islamophobe. She’s married to an Afghan American diplomat, Dr Zalmay Khalilzad, and has a stellar record of working with refugees for over a decade, and producing scholarship on the concept of Honour in Islam.
Unfortunately, I have been saying this for quite a while.
Cathy Young analyses Trump’s pivotal Warsaw speech, and critiques, alongside many others, my Quillette piece.
Here’s my original.
For the sake of balance you should read both, and I applaud Quillete, and my editor Claire for being so balanced, which is rare in these days of hyper-partisanship, and of course Cathy, who I admire, exceptionally passionate as she is, for the spirited response.
This debate is crucial, for the future direction of US (and UK/Western) FP.
And I hope it continues.
Radio Sputnik, Scotland, interviewed me.
Most of you know that I am not very optimistic about a German-led EU in the long run.
That said, it’s more complicated than a simple yes or no answer.
Here are my thoughts, have a listen.
Who is a conservative? Burke or Buckley? Is Bill Kristol a conservative or Victor Davis Hanson? David Cameron or Peter Hitchens? Or are they all conservatives? Will Narendra Modi of India be considered a conservative? Is Vladimir Putin’s vision of a society conservative, or Rodrigo Duterte’s forceful authoritarian law and order imposition against deviant drug addicts a conservative approach? In that case what is conservative? How can it be defined and charted for this new young century?
For those of you paying attention, two of my colleagues recently started this topical and timely debate. Ben Sixsmith, critiquing Noah Rothman’s Commentary piece, stated that #NeverTrumpers are pseudo-conservatives. Mitch Blatt countered that they are indeed conservatives, because there isn’t any fixed definition of conservatism.
For a non-European/non-American reader of politics, the arguments of both sides might seem odd. Both are correct, both are circular and axiomatic. Both, in some ways, logically contradictory. And both, never tries to define what it tries to critique. Without summarising the aforementioned pieces, (readers can read them, in their due time) let me highlight the contradictions.
A month back, Indian hyper sensationalized news media was jingoistically pointing out how much Indian government is correct in not taking part in the OBOR initiative, while every serious political commentator with half a brain was saying, how terrible a mistake that was. From boycotting a summit on the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in May, to being hosted by Chinese President Xi Jinping, to the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation’s (SCO) summit it looks like a total 180 turn for Indian foreign policy.
This is not baffling. Here’s what is happening.
Questions about the rift between liberal institutionalism and sovereignty became deeper with US President Donald Trump unilaterally announcing withdrawal from the 2015 Paris Climate agreement. Trump’s argument is that the deal wasn’t fair, and disadvantages US businesses and workers. Trump also mentioned that this deal throws a spanner in American oil and coal industries, even when the world is cutting down on coal. The opposition to this move has been global so far. The Paris agreement commits US and other countries to keep global temperature rising to pre industrial level. While there are valid questions about the implementation of the deal, it is widely accepted as a necessity for the planet by every country and every major powers of the globe. US now stands essentially against the entire world when it comes to climate change.
Trump stated that his goal was to renegotiate the treaty. It is understood that’s an impossible task, to have 193 different bilateral treaties and then ass them with Senate. Already, Italy, Germany, and France, the big three have jointly stated that this decision was regrettable. “We deem the momentum generated in Paris in December 2015 irreversible and we firmly believe that the Paris agreement cannot be renegotiated, since it is a vital instrument for our planet, societies and economies,” Germany’s Angela Merkel, France’s Emmanuel Macron and Italy’s Paolo Gentiloni stated in a joint statement. Japan hasn’t signed the statement, but has echoed similar sentiment, while May of UK said that while it is regrettable it’s a decision by Washington and not London. Canada’s Trudeau has also regretted the decision. “The US decision can’t and won’t stop all those of us who feel obliged to protect the planet” the chancellor added. Her counterpart, Macron of France, went on even further, stating there’s no Plan B, as there’s no Planet B. And invited US businesses to France, potentially starting a small scale trade war initiation.
According to Daily Mail reports, a planned U.S. pullout from the Paris climate deal would be a further 0.3-degree Celsius rise in global temperatures by 2100. However, Deon Terblanche maintained that due to other factors, that might not happen. However, hidden in all the outrage, a simple thing is lost. This is not about climate. Trump’s withdrawal was purely geopolitics.
Who’s next? #MeToo concerns women who care about the men in their lives
January 14, 2018
Keep Transgender mania out of schools and changing rooms
January 12, 2018
Time’s Up for Feminist fads, it’s time for #NotMe
January 12, 2018
James Damore plays race card, files “discrimination” suit
January 9, 2018
On this day, Kim Jong-un was born (and Zhou En-lai died)
January 8, 2018
The Iran protests and American journalistic hackery
January 3, 2018
4 words that should be banned in 2018
December 27, 2017
Chinese Constitution Day: “Study the Party Congress”
December 23, 2017
Republicans investigating political enemies, defending power
December 23, 2017
Latinx is bullshxt
December 22, 2017
Just a reminder: Trump is unhinged – Bombs and Dollars
"[…] Just a reminder: Unhinged attacks are something of a hallmark for Trump. ..."
Just a reminder: Trump is unhinged – Bombs and Dollars
"[…] Halperin, Louie CK, and so many others were fired or forced out. ..."
James O’Keefe: a Political Activist Posing as a Journalist – AREO
"[…] own personal claims of having sexually assaulted women. “Let’s get this straight,” ..."
Kim: Trump Korea trip highlights ties, Moon wins over conservatives – Bombs and Dollars
"[…] his behaviors towards Trump and the United States. I have to apologize ..."
"It's hard to be enterprising if you feel your are owed something. Mehta's romanticizing ..."