… nuclear deterrence theory . I’m sure you are all dying to be my friend now, huh?.  Plutonic, perhaps?

Sometimes one forgets their interests, and deterrence theory vanished into my archives…but has resurfaced with the large media coverage of Obama’s recent START (new) nuclear reduction agreement with Russia.  The agreement has been getting some flak for the notion that each country will still be holding on to about 1500 bad boys each.  Fair enough, but Obama is merely following a well established theory.  He’s also built upon it slightly by modifying US nuclear policy by limiting the option of nuclear weapon release only on nations that do not comply with the non-proliferations treaty.  You sign, you are safe from Betty up there.  You don’t…well, that sucks.  As we say in planning "some carrot and a big frackin’ stick”.  

Taking it to the backpack crowd is also now apparently on it’s way into US nuclear doctrine.

When completed next year, the Nuclear Posture Review will order the entire government to focus on countering nuclear terrorists — whether armed with rudimentary bombs, stolen warheads or devices surreptitiously supplied by a hostile state — as a task equal to the traditional mission of deterring a strike by major powers or emerging nuclear adversaries.

Deterrence theory has always had problems with nuclear terrorism and the idea of the bee-sting.  A bee-sting is a situation in which a nuclear armed organization obtains one or two devices and assumes that would be enough to deter a US attack.  Confidence upon acquiring such devices may increase the probability of their use.  They may even have been acquired solely for offensive purposes.  In a situation like this, a nations own deterrent may be of little use.

I have a few posts from way back about Chinese nuclear deterrence here , something about the deterrent policies of other countries here and little something about North Korea here . 

Beware, as I’m hardly a scholar.

Maintaining large numbers of nuclear weapons always seem to go hand-in-hand with uber-conservative views on the world.  I struggle with the above because it is only rational to hold on to a good chunk of devices to ensure your deterrent.  I then struggle with that statement because why would one want to hold onto 1500 warheads?  How is that sane? Besides, I’m not a neocon. If I say nukes are good…what does that say about me? That is probably why I find nuclear deterrence theory so fascinating.  That, and because I think  that a whole school of theory which has developed around an idea that assumes that  a winner will emerge in a nuclear exchange is outrageous.  Is that a reflection of the cold, hard rationalism that dominated the nuclear age?  That rationale people actually believe it?  I would say that I (a sane and somewhat rational fellow) could be thrown into that category as I’ve read some of it and admittedly find considerable amounts of it quite reasonable.  That’s freaky.  Reminds me of the famous explanation of sanity from Catch-22.

"There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one’s own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind.  Orr was crazy and could be grounded.  All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions."

The assumption that insanity is actually the way of a rationale mind.  Like with nukes…you would be bloody crazy to use them, but that’s normal.

What about that one genuinely crazy dude with his backpack?  Strategy seems to be get him before he gets the backpack.    

Stupid theory.

The one thing that always holds me back from dreams of a nuclear free world is that it is only feasible if everyone with a nuke … even buddy with the backpack…agree to get rid of them at the same time.  

People are just too rationale.

Technorati Tags: bee-sting theory, catch-22, military, nuclear, nuclear bombs, nuclear deterrence theory, obama

Related posts:

1. Chinese Nuclear Policy
2. World Deterrent
3. Nuke Theory and the Crazy North

I’m going to use Cape Vincent as an example of some of the places Street View has documented.  Cape Vincent is in the US, just south of Kingston.  Some friends and I cycled there in October via Wolfe Island .  Cape Vincent is quite rural and while not really in the middle of nowhere, it probably won’t make the any 1000 places to see before you die lists (although it is a nice, quaint example of rural America…apparently wealthy too, I might add).

Canadian street penetration remains very limited.  However, if US rural coverage is any indication, in a few years one will be able to drive the Alaska Highway without ever stepping into a vehicle. 

Street View Greenland would be cool too.

Technorati Tags: google, google street view, maps, travel

Related posts:

1. Japanese Onsen July 2008

Like most Generals, Vance is well-read, well-educated, well-spoken and very rationale and pragmatic when it comes to discussing the situation in Kandahar.  He provided an brief outline of the events of previous strategies employed from 2006-2009 and spoke about General McCrystal’s (apparently General Petraeus’ protégé) new approach to the situation.

He discussed the immense complexities of the conflict, the fragmented and under-strength efforts of past ISAF/Alliance initiatives and where Canada wants to be/accomplish by 2011.

Some interesting items that I took away.

• ISAF made friends with the wrong folks in 2006.  Friends with people the local population wasn’t friends with.  The war waged was counter-terrorism, not counter-insurgency.
• The Taliban is a player, but not nearly as large a player as one might think.  The stage is opaque with a myriad of actors, gangs, corrupt officials, tribalism and narcotics among others.   
• 85% of the population of Kandahar province is centered very close to Kandahar City.  As the core of counter-insurgency is to protect the people, this is where ISAF/Alliance efforts must concentrate on holding Kandahar and it’s suburbs.
• This leads to the Canada’s deliverable by 2011 – A stabilizing Kandahar city and surrounding suburbs (I wish I had a map of their goal).
• This stabilizing area consists of the city proper and surrounding suburbs/villages.  Villages are targeted for heavy infrastructure investments beginning with large, visible signature projects like water canals and wells.
• Low home front support for the mission is a product of media failure to properly convey a detailed overview of the Canada’s 2011 goal.
• The Canadian battle-group is the best equipped, most agile force in Afghanistan and is the only organization to have US forces under direct command.

I like the last point.  I follow our folks in Afghanistan and while I’m aware of McCrystal’s much vaunted urban strategy, there has been nothing regarding what Canada is planning to accomplish by 2011.  Vance outlined it in less than 10 minutes.  A simple map.  A simple strategy, and based on his opinions, it is apparently working.

I built up enough courage and asked a question about the stabilizing (model) villages being invested in regards to types of infrastructure being constructed, how they were being built.  I sort of have a latent interest in post-conflict urban planning.  Actually, luxury interest is a more appropriate term as it is an interest that is quite far from the task at hand (ie. Canadian planning, finishing my report, and getting a job).

I got a “good question” response :-p

Apparently the Canadian military is the only organization willing to tackle mosque repair and reconstruction.

Proper water facilities is of main concern, as is adequate roads and transportation networks.  One thing I found interesting was the addition of solar-powered lamp posts in the markets to extend their business hours.  Micro-loans to women for poultry farms is another. 

I still have concerns regarding the sustainability of the strategy.  I still believe that Greg Mortenson’s (Three Cups of Tea fame) efforts represent the golden standard of development in conflict stricken areas. Mr. Mortenson can travel and operate in areas no other western organization (government, military, NGO) can based solely on his 20+ solid years of building relationships in the region.  He is completely trusted.

Canada rotates new guys in every 10 months or so resulting in a substantial number of new faces that have to be introduced.  I’m skeptical about building a meaningful relationship in that area of the world in 10 months.  Even if a unit is rotated back into country, they will have been absent for about a year…and they won’t be keeping in contact via Facebook.

I’m curious about how they maintain relationships within the transient nature of deployment.

Best question goes to a fellow who drilled Vance about what ISAF/Alliance is doing on a regional basis (think Pakistan, Iran, India) and the notion that Pakistan, for example, is not too inclined to take the fight into Waziristan because of the perception that ISAF won’t stick around.

Really good presentation, although there was an element of government spinning at work. 

*General Vance was commander of Joint Task Force Afghanistan from February to November 2009.

Technorati Tags: afghanistan, canada, general jonathan vance, ISAF, kandahar, military, military planning, queens university

Related posts:

1. Should we be in Afghanistan? II
2. Should we be in Afghanistan? III
3. Should we be in Afghanistan?

It seems with large natural disasters becoming annual event that hit the most vulnerable countries, it might be time to develop a dedicated international disaster response organization that would form a command hierarchy that all aid/rescue/security groups would fall under and take orders from.  It wouldn’t be a standing disaster response army, but rather a command&control unit delegated with the task of efficiently moving and allocating international resources throughout the affected area.  There would be no maverick organizations or individuals in the disaster area.  While the Sichuan EQ in 2008 is not a very good comparison, one of the issues affecting response was the flood of well-intentioned, yet naive volunteers into Beichuan.

Obviously there would be sovereignty issues and command concerns regarding military units (the US armed forces usually doesn’t place it’s troops under non-US command).

Maybe there already is something like this.

Interactive before and after satellite images .

Technorati Tags: disaster response, earthquake, haiti, natural disasters

No related posts.

Essentially, one will browse through potential clients on the Kiva.org webpage and choose whom you believe is worthy of your loan.  Clients share their loan goals, credit history, loan amount wanted and present loan acquired.  Clients are expected to repay loans within a year, thus returning ones initial loan.  The partnered microfinance institution takes an interest cut and you are returned your initial loan.  

There is a better synopsis on their webpage .

After reading a Slate article detailing the process a few years ago, I opened up an account.  Given that I wasn’t in a solid financial position to front any cash at the time, I just used the account as a medium with which to browse client projects and get a better feel for what micro finance is all about.  The projects seemed quite promising and I decided that it was something I would like to jump into when my financial position was better.  I was keenly interested in donating to countries that I had travelled too, namely Mongolia, Vietnam and Cambodia.

Today I ran into another Slate article regarding Kiva.  But this one took a dramatically different approach and questioned the high interest rates and the impact of microloans in alleviating poverty.

This led to another site detailing what has apparently become quite the  debate regarding the honesty and transparency of Kiva practices and the rationale of Kiva lenders (a kind of ‘pat yourself on the back’ approach vs. altruism).  I haven’t read through half of it year, but the debate is good with both sides weighing in. 

I was thinking about dumping a hundred or so dollars into Kiva.  However, aside from questions regarding the use of my own student loan as a loan for someone else…there appear to be other issues regarding the concept of microloans.

Technorati Tags: developing world, development, ethics, kiva, microfinance, student loans

No related posts.