Atlantic Review

U.S. Generals Indicate No Quick Withdrawal from Afghanistan

nospam@example.com (Kyle Atwell) — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 02:35:37 +0200

Recent statements from top U.S. generals are dashing hopes in the US and among European Allies that the war in Afghanistan will wind down in the next year, despite President Obama's stated intentions to begin troop reductions in July 2011.

Consider comments from the top U.S. Marine in Afghanistan, General James Conway, reported by Daily Times:

In recent months, US officials have played down expectations of any large withdrawal of troops in July 2011. Conway echoed those sentiments, saying he believed Marines would remain in the south for years. He said that Afghan forces would not be ready to take over security from US troops in key southern provinces for at least a few years.

“I honestly think it will be a few years before conditions on the ground are such that turnover will be possible for us,” he said, referring to Marines deployed in the provinces of Helmand and Kandahar. Conway said some Afghan units somewhere might be able to assume the lead for security in 2011 but not in the south.

Further statements by General David Petraeus regarding the Afghanistan drawdown make it clear that the July 2011 date does not signal a hard end of the war, writes GlobalSecurity.org:

Petraeus also repeated his view that the drawdown in U.S. and NATO forces, scheduled to begin in July 2011, will not result in a swift withdrawal.

"July 2011...is the date when a process begins. It is not the date when the U.S. forces begin an exodus and look for the exit and a light to turn out," Petraeus said.

General Petraeus discusses the July 2011 drawdown in a video interview with the BBC, found here.

In the article "Why Europe Fears Petraeus's Urge to Surge", Financial Times argues that European leaders not only desire a more expedient withdrawal from Afghanistan, but also want to pursue a different strategy for ending the conflict based on negotiations with the Taliban:

In discussions with European generals, diplomats and officials – each involved in their government’s Afghan policy – a common fear emerges. That US president Barack Obama will not be able to refuse demands from Gen Petraeus to extend the surge well beyond July 2011; that the general will continue to push for a continuation of military strategy; and that he will decline any suggestion of opening negotiations with the Taliban – something that many Europeans are very keen on.
...
European officials are coming to the consensus that they would like the Nato summit and Mr Obama’s Afghan policy review – both at the end of the year – to reach a position where negotiating with the Taliban is the political strategy around which military strategy is determined.

Troop withdrawals, which Mr Obama says will start next July, would then take place according to the pace of talks between the US, the Taliban and the Afghan government; not on the basis of hard-to-gauge battlefield success. Europe also wants the US to press Afghanistan’s neighbours not to interfere in its affairs.

Gen Petraeus wants to convince Washington, Nato and Europe to do just the opposite, determining withdrawals on the basis of the military, not the political, situation.

"Superman is wearing black, red and gold this year"

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 19:46:32 +0200

When was the last time the New York Times front page featured a headline with the words "German Surge"? I bet never since WWII.

Well, today's headline might only be at the top of the online edition and only for a few hours.

The good economic news come as quiet a surprise on this side of the Atlantic as well. I got the impression that most folks here don't expect it too last. Thus, consumer spending is not likely to increase, and in consequence our neighbors and the US are likely to continue to complain about our "selfish" economic policy.

Though the NYT points out: "German consumer spending, which tends to be tepid even in good times, contributed to the growth spurt, as the number of people working grew 0.2 percent from a year earlier to 40.3 million, the Federal Statistical Office said."

Bloomberg writes about record German growth (HT: David)

The increase in German GDP was the strongest quarterly gain since records for the reunified country began in 1991. First- quarter growth was also revised to 0.5 percent from 0.2 percent. Euro-area GDP rose 0.2 percent in the first three months of the year.

Continue reading ""Superman is wearing black, red and gold this year""

Preventing History from Repeating Itself

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 23:32:45 +0200

Spiegel International:

German police on Monday closed a mosque that had been a meeting place for the 9/11 terror cell. They believe the mosque continued to promote jihad and may have been a staging site for Islamist extremists living in Germany who have traveled to Afghanistan and Pakistan to participate in militant camps.

Iraq War Enhances US Image as a Colonial Power?

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:46:00 +0200

Joe Klein in Time Magazine:

Our attempt to construct an Iraq more amenable to our interests will end no better than the previous attempts by Western colonial powers. Even if something resembling democracy prevails, the U.S. invasion and occupation will not be remembered fondly by Iraqis. We will own the destruction in perpetuity; if the Iraqis manage to cobble themselves a decent society, they will see it, correctly, as an achievement of their own.

There are other consequences of this profound misadventure. The return of the Taliban in Afghanistan is certainly one. If U.S. attention hadn't been diverted from that primary conflict, the story in the Pashtun borderlands might be very different now. The sense of the U.S. as a repository of tempered, honorable actions may never recover from the images of the past decade, especially the photographs from Abu Ghraib prison. The idea that it was our right and responsibility to rid Iraq of a terrible dictator - after the original casus belli of weapons of mass destruction evaporated - turned out to be a neocolonialist delusion.

The US is now seen as a former colonial power just like France and Britain? Is a more positive legacy of the Iraq war imaginable?

Thousands of Classified Reports on the Afghanistan War Leaked

nospam@example.com (Kyle Atwell) — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 02:34:06 +0200

An extensive series of previously classified reports on the Afghanistan war effort titled the Afghan War Diary (AWD) has been made public by the website WikiLeaks.

The NYT, Guardian and Der Spiegel were leaked the reports several weeks ago. Each has spent the past month analyzing the reports and writing articles with their key deductions. According to the New York Times editors' note:

The articles published today are based on thousands of United States military incident and intelligence reports — records of engagements, mishaps, intelligence on enemy activity and other events from the war in Afghanistan — that were made public on Sunday on the Internet. The New York Times, The Guardian newspaper in London, and the German magazine Der Spiegel were given access to the material several weeks ago. These reports are used by desk officers in the Pentagon and troops in the field when they make operational plans and prepare briefings on the situation in the war zone. Most of the reports are routine, even mundane, but many add insights, texture and context to a war that has been waged for nearly nine years.

The NYT, Guardian and Der Spiegel have all vetted the reports and come to the conclusion that the material is authentic.

You can download the full set of reports from the WikiLeaks website, here.

New York Times coverage is found here.
Guardian coverage here.
Der Spiegel coverage here.

"Support Our Troops" - The German Edition

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 16:29:55 +0200

What is common in the United States, is rather rare in Germany: Expressing support of our soldiers in Afghanistan.

While most US critics of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan make extra efforts to distinguish between criticism of the strategy/purpose of the wars and the service of the troops, such differentiation usually is not made in Germany. I have never seen a car with the bumper sticker "Support our Troops."

The Bundeswehr troops do not get much support from citizens, media, celebrities or politicians. Instead many soldiers are concerned about the opinion polls that indicate popular disapproval of the Afghanistan war.

Therefore the Atlantische Initiative (my day job) has teamed up with Germany's biggest daily newspaper and started the campaign "Feldpost für unsere Soldaten!"

We encourage our readers and members to write short personal messages of support for the Bundeswehr troops. We will then forward the best ones to the various bases in Afghanistan. Several hundred messages have already been published by our partners at the tabloid Bild.

Anti-European Schadenfreude Rising?

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 13:36:58 +0200

When Foreign Policy featured an article on Anti-Europeanism in the United States as "Today's FP" cover, I got intrigued, but I was disappointed when I read this article Guardian columnist Simon Tisdall, which currently is FP's most read piece of the week. Old arguments about the Iraq war debate and last year's Obama trips to Europe.

Here are the more interesting paragraphs regarding the reason for Anti-European attitudes:

Fear, envy, anti-colonialism, anti-imperialism, cultural inferiority-superiority complexes, trade, political and military rivalries, and America's quest for identity all fed anti-European feeling as the new country sought to differentiate itself from the old countries whence most of its people came. Many of these phenomena remain relevant today.

"Expressing one's anti-European sentiment can be a way of building up and displaying one's American identity and patriotism," said Patrick Chamorel in a European University Institute study published in Italy in 2004. "Anti-Europeanism has always been part of American exceptionalism, which defined itself in contrast to European history, politics, and society."

It would be easy for Europeans to shrug off America's Europhobic generalizations and mischaracterizations if they were exclusive to would-be-intellectual neoconservatives, Bible Belt evangelists, and provincial Midwest xenophobes. But ever since the European Union dropped the ball in the Balkans in the mid-1990s, a potent mix of influential American thinkers, policymakers, and commentators have given anti-Europeanism a new respectability that cannot be dismissed out of hand. On the major issues that preoccupy Americans -- defense, security, terrorism, intervention, free trade, sovereignty, and nationalism -- the argument that Europe has lost its way has gained in influence. And as a debt-laden European Union stares at the fiscal abyss, one can almost feel the schadenfreude emanating from across the pond.

"Almost feel the schadenfreude emanating"? Does it get any more vague than that? Read the FP article Venus Envy and come back here to comment, if you like.

Will Soccer Bring an End to American Exceptionalism?

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 23:39:00 +0200

We discussed American exceptionalism during the 2006 world cup: Soccer in German-American Relations and Soccer is for Losers?

Soccer is getting increasingly popular in the US, which some conservative Americans don't like. Is America becoming less exceptional now?

Or is it the other way round: Americans need to feel less exceptional before soccer becomes more popular and they win the world cup? A Brazilian paper translated by Watching America concludes with such a pretty loaded question:

If Americans are able to abandon the idea of being chosen by God to save the world, if these citizens are open to the fact that they are identical to all other human beings and therefore do not have a clear target or are not necessarily superior or virtuous, then could it be possible for America to someday soon join the rest of the species and celebrate the most beautiful sport of our time with the rest of the world? Or is it inconceivable that within a few decades, this country could finally win the World Cup?

"Let's Cut Defense Spending"

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 13:57:58 +0200

Strange world: Atlantic Review is not just as a reference in an MA thesis, but is also referenced by E.D. Kain of the neoconservative (?) National Review Online to make the argument that the US should cut defense spending. He is linking to our blog in this paragraph:

Americans provide defense for Europe and much of Asia, allowing Europeans to spend almost nothing on defense while spending lavish amounts on generous entitlement programs. And it is not at all clear that these countries actually want our military bases anymore. Europe has largely put war behind it with the advent of the European Union, and save for the Korean peninsula, Asia is largely moving toward a peaceful, global economy as well. Refocusing our defense priorities into regions that have more direct implications for our own national security, such as Africa and the Middle East, would force Europe to take into account not only the defense of its own soil, but the vast expense associated with that defense. Governments already burdened with extraordinarily high rates of taxation will be forced to make cuts in their welfare programs in order to shore up their defense apparatus.

I disagree. I bet that Germany will not increase defense spending, if the US closes another military base. Previous closures did not lead to increase either. Many Americans like to think that US military bases abroad are protecting the host countries, while majorities (?) in the host countries see the bases as serving primarily US interests.

Whatever the US does, German defense spending declines for domestic reasons. Last week, the German legislative even voted to shorten military service down to six months for budgetary reasons. To me that sounds more like a military internship than part of national defense. Quite a few politicians want to maintain the military service since it supports recruitment for professional soldiers. In the 60s and early 70s the military service was three times as long as it is today.

An interesting statistic that the National Review Online author did not get from us: "Each troop we send to Afghanistan costs the public $1 million per year. That's $1 million siphoned out of the U.S. economy and shipped overseas to the mountains of Afghanistan and the Iraqi deserts." Aha! Since this is the National Review I am tempted to ask the author whether the economy is more important than security? They seem to be moving towards the European position on war versus economy. Is America becoming a post-heroic society just like Europe, this was actually the topic of the blogpost to be referenced in an MA thesis.

Taliban Recruit Monkey Terrorists

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 23:55:00 +0200

Oh, no. "Taliban trains 'monkey terrorists' to attack U.S. troops," writes the People's Daily from China (via FP):

Taliban forces have taught monkeys how to use the Kalashnikov, Bren light machine gun and trench mortars. They also teach them how to identify and attack soldiers wearing U.S. military uniforms. Ironically, the idea of training monkeys to fight was first invented by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency.

Will NATO prevail against the monkeys? Is it April 1st in the Chinese calendar?

Atlantic Review Used for MA Thesis

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 13:31:15 +0200

An Irish student emailed me that he his going to reference an Atlantic Review blogpost in his MA thesis: Are Americans More Willing to Make Sacrifices Than Europeans?

It was one of my better blogposts, written in 2007, but still up-to-date. I was discussing transatlantic attitudes towards war and sacrifice and concluded that Americans are more optimistic than Europeans and that Americans are moving towards a post-heroic society, in which Europeans already live.

On the one hand, I am honored that this blog post will be referenced in an MA thesis, even though the reason might just be that I was discussing an issue with the prefix "post." Academia loves terms like post-constructivism, post-Cold War era, and now post-heroic. On the other hand, I am not sure, if it is a good sign for academia if blogposts are used as references. Next, someone will use a tweet to argue that the Pope is Catholic.

Two Gitmo Guys Go to Germany

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 22:56:20 +0200

The German government agreed to resettle a Syrian and a Palestinian Guantanamo detainee. AP quotes a State Department spokesman saying: "We greatly appreciate Germany's decision to resettle these two detainees." I think it is too little too late to really to impress Obama.

ENDNOTE: The German soccer team attacked the Spain too little too late as well in today's semi-final. That damn octopus Paul was right again in predicting the winner. Congrats to Nanne for the Dutch victory over Uruguay. I will certainly cheer the Dutch team in the upcoming final.

US, France and Germany: Divisions and Lack of Professionalism Everywhere

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 00:50:08 +0200

We all need more team spirit. Obama's Afghanistan team is in disarray. Their egos seem to be as bloated as the ego's in the French soccer team.

While President Obama is angry with McChrystal's frank comments and perhaps insubordination, President Sarkozy is reportedly furious over the national team's behaviour inside and outside the soccer stadiums. It was not really a "team." He even cleared his schedule for a one hour meeting with the captain on the day of a general labor strike. That shows how important the soccer team is for France as a symbol of national integration and unity.

Germany's coalition government has been in disarray for months as well with some calling each other "wild pigs" and "gherkin troops" (rank amateurs). (There are also rumors that one cabinet member called the defense minister "rumpelstiltskin.") Though, thanks to the national soccer team's victory over Ghana today, Merkel's government won't collapse yet. ;-)

If Germany had failed to make it into the round of sixteen for the first time in history, it would have been a national fiasco. Let's do not forget that the German coach is not called "Trainer der Nationalmannschaft," but goes by the official sounding name "Bundestrainer," just like the top government titles "Bundeskanzler," "Bundespräsident" etc.

On Sunday, we will play against England. One British fan said on TV that the world cup was invented for England and Germany to play against each other. Good point. Still, it is regrettable (but not at all surprising) that the British tabloid The Sun uses military language to describe the upcoming match. Come on, guys. It's just soccer. The real war is in Afghanistan.

Continue reading "US, France and Germany: Divisions and Lack of Professionalism Everywhere"

What's Worse? Debt or Frugality?

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 07:59:20 +0200

"Bashing Germany is the new favorite sport for policy makers and economists who want a more balanced world economy," writes The Wall Street Journal and points out: "That Germany's economy is unbalanced is clear. Household incomes and consumer spending have stagnated for a decade, and economic growth has come almost entirely from exports and related investment. Consumption is set to drop 1.4% this year, even though the overall economy will grow 1.9%."

The WSJ explains the German position very well, even though it does not quite agree with it:

German Chancellor Angela Merkel argued in an interview last week that balancing the budget could even unlock consumers' wallets-whereas deficit spending might only lead to even-higher household saving. Germans save because they are worried the public pension and health-care systems will run out of money, and would save less if they had confidence in sustainable public finances, she argued.

Ms. Merkel's first term doesn't offer good evidence for that view, however. Germany cut its budget deficit from 4% in 2005, when she took office, to nil in 2008, before the financial crisis struck. In that time, Germans' household savings rate rose rather than fell-to 11.2% of disposable income, from 10.5%. The core problem is lack of growth in Germans' disposable income, not high savings rates which are largely justified for an aging population, say most economists.

Endnote: Does Obama sound French, when he says that he is "concerned by weak private-sector demand and continued reliance on exports by some countries with already large external surpluses."? He was clearly asking Germans to buy more American stuff. (Hey, nearly everyone is walking around with iPhones and the city is full with huge iPad advertisements. Or are that Chinese products?)

Finance Minister Schäuble hits back at Obama by saying: "Governments should not become addicted to borrowing as a quick fix to stimulate demand. Deficit spending cannot become a permanent state of affairs." Oooch. I think most Germans agree. According to polls a majority of Germans are even against tax cuts. Can you believe it?

Austerity and Regulation vs. Stimulus: The Latest Transatlantic Squabble

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 00:31:07 +0200

Ahead of the G-20 summit we are witnessing rising German-American disagreements. Germany wants to reform the financial markets and deal with the debt crisis, while US academics and the president prefers economic stimulus plans and criticize the teutonic export champion. Spiegel International:

Krugman is far from alone with his concerns about German and European austerity packages. Last week, US President Barack Obama sent a letter to other G-20 countries in which he fired a not-so-subtle shot across Berlin's bow. "I am concerned about weak private sector demand and continued heavy reliance on exports by some countries with already large external surpluses," he wrote in a clear reference to Germany. He also warned against reversing economic stimulus policies too soon. "We worked exceptionally hard to restore growth," he wrote. "We cannot let it falter or lose strength now."

Germany and France were hoping that the G-20 summit would focus on measures aimed at reforming global financial markets. In particular, Merkel would like to see an international tax on financial transactions as well as a mandatory bank levy, which would go towards a fund to be used to bail out banks in future crises. But opposition to both proposals has been stiff. And the US, in particular, is hoping to use the G-20 to push for more economic stimulus rather than less, given ongoing high unemployment at home.

Personally, I am not sure, if the US and Europe really need and can afford more stimulus plans right now. They make the long-term debt crisis worse. Besides, tax cuts do not lead to more consumer spending, when citizens are smart enough to realize that the economy and government finances are in trouble and consider tax cuts for what they are: desperate measures to stimulate growth. In those cases citizens use the tax cuts to save more money to prepare for the worst. Of course, stimulus is more than tax cuts.

ENDNOTE: I am sorry for the lack of blogging. In the last six weeks, I learned quite a lot of stuff the hard way: First, a new bike with strong front wheel breaks is not necessarily a good thing. Second, I cannot fly. Third, a broken elbow joint requires two surgeries, the second one kept three doctors over four hours busy. Fourth, doctors and nurses are nicer and more caring than I thought. Even the hospital food was good. Our health care system is still okay. Fifth, even if only the elbow is broken, fingers don't work (typing etc.) very well. Regaining full flexibility apparently takes months. Sixth, one can get quite a lot done with just one functioning arm. Now "I'm a graduate of pain." Yeah.

NATO's Niche

nospam@example.com (Andrew Zvirzdin) — Thu, 20 May 2010 21:23:55 +0200

How will a military alliance continue to function if many of its members are opposed to armed interventions and if modern security threats have moved beyond concerns over territorial integrity?

Answer: Turn the military alliance into something completely different.

That at least seems to be the conclusion of the group of experts tasked with creating a draft of NATO's new strategic concept. Their findings, released this week, envision a NATO defined by a host of new responsibilities from multilateral weapons procurement to cyber defenses to expeditionary actions. In her presentation as the group's chairperson, Madeleine Albright said "NATO is more than a military alliance; it is also a political community."

I would agree with Albright's perspective on NATO. Since NATO's efforts in the 1990s to encourage democratization in Eastern Europe, the alliance has assumed greater responsibilities in political, economic, and security fields. NATO's scope has certainly expanded beyond preserving the territorial integrity of its members, though this remains a central aspect of the organization's DNA. In this sense, the group of experts are merely highlighting what is already the case: NATO is no longer simply a defensive alliance.

But what is NATO exactly? If not a military alliance, then what? Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen has said that NATO should become the "the forum for consultation on global security." Secretary Albright sees the alliance developing "partnerships" with key countries, with Russia on the top of that list. And some EU leaders simply hope that NATO can act to help member states streamline military expenditures and reduce redundancies. I believe NATO must be careful to not try to be everything to everyone. It must seek to focus only on those areas where it can provide real added value to its members states and the international community.

What do you think? What is NATO's niche in the international community? How should the forthcoming strategic concept envision the future of NATO?

The Euro Comes of Age

nospam@example.com (Andrew Zvirzdin) — Tue, 11 May 2010 03:30:49 +0200

Sixteen months ago, I began to grow worried about Greece's debt problems and its implications for the euro. At the time, I wrote,

The euro area has yet to demonstrate its cohesiveness when confronted with the growing economic divergence of its member states and even the specter of a sovereign debt default....Leaders will have to act together to show their commitment to preserving the single monetary policy in the euro area.

Yesterday, EU leaders rose to the challenge and solidified the euro's position in world monetary affairs. The announced $1 trillion package does more than provide indebted countries with a source of funds during periods of crisis; it demonstrates the commitment of leaders to the concept of European integration. In so doing, European officials have significantly increased the credibility of the EU in the eyes of their American counterparts and taken the first step towards some degree of fiscal integration.

A few details of the announced aid package are particularly noteworthy:

Continue reading "The Euro Comes of Age"

Who Are the Major Players in Transatlantic Relations?

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 18:55:00 +0200

TIME Magazine has just published its annual list of the world's most influential people. Some strange results.

I think we should come up with our own list. Therefore I am asking at atlantic-community.org: Who are the biggest movers and shakers in transatlantic relations? Who is setting the transatlantic agenda right now? Who are the most influential leaders and thinkers? I would appreciate your suggestions.

Anxiously Waiting on a Trojan Horse

nospam@example.com (Editors) — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 18:50:27 +0200

Guest post by Joe Joe Noory is an Architect, investor, and independent observer of news and opinion:

Somewhere between the emotional populism of wanting to burden the higher performing European states with guilt over resisting to bail out the Greek government, and the risk investors are being offered to take are the hard truths of bailing out of the broke Greek government by investing in their bonds: they might not just default on ?8,5 billion in obligations to bond purchasers due on 19 May, but run the risk of never being paid back for future bond offerings (of perhaps two years or less), much in the way depositors in an uninsured failed bank will never see a red pfennig of their invested savings on a default.

Ifo's Hand-Werner Sinn indicated that very same sentiment on Wednesday morning, according to this wire piece:

The warning came as a new poll showed nearly two-thirds of Germans were opposed to helping Greece, with a majority believing that membership of the EU brought more disadvantages than advantages. Asked on MDR radio if Berlin would ever get its money back, Sinn, who heads the Ifo institute and is one of the top economic advisers to the government, said: "To tell you the truth, no."
Greece "will not be in a position to carry out the necessary budgetary rigour" and will eventually have "to ask for Germany to waive the debt," he said.
He warned that bailing out Greece could set a precedent for other euro area countries labouring under high debt and public deficits. "It would be understandable if the Italians or the Spanish put pressure on us to pay up now because it is an important precedent for them," said Sinn.

Before you react, take the statement for what it is: a warning. It isn't a characterization of the ur-Greek citizen, or a nationalistic reflection, or a cultural issue, but a warning that the discipline to raise revenue and cut budgets in face of the street protests and strikes of civil servants and dependants on entitlements. It isn't a characterization of what they did, but a warning of future events, one which prices them and tells us what something is really worth, just as watching those who short an equity or commodity does.

Continue reading "Anxiously Waiting on a Trojan Horse"

DOD Releases Afghanistan Report

nospam@example.com (Kyle Atwell) — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 23:36:34 +0200

The US Defense Department delivered a report to Congress this week providing an update on progress in Afghanistan from the period October 2009 to the end of March 2010. Titled "Progress Toward Security and Stability in Afghanistan", the congressionally mandated report is extensive at 152 pages and covers everything from troop numbers in country to the details of ISAF counter-narcotics policy.

I have not read the entire report yet, but here are some highlights from the Executive Summary:

---

Violence is up but Afghanis feel more secure

“Polls consistently illustrate that Afghans see security as improved from a year ago. At the same time violence is sharply above the seasonal average for the previous year – an 87% increase from February 2009 to March 2010.” The report says that while violence has increased, this is largely due to increased ISAF activity.

US, partner-country, and Afghani force levels are increasing

US presence:
“On March 31, 2010 there were approximately 87,000 U.S. forces and approximately 46,500 international forces in Afghanistan… force levels expected to approach 98,000 by August 2010.”

"The President’s strategy is dependent not only on the application of military capability, but also on increased civilian capacity. Since January 2009, the Department of State (DoS) has more than tripled the number of civilians on the ground in Afghanistan to 992. The increase in civilian personnel is a reflection of the President’s strategy to increase civil military cooperation at all levels of operations."

Continue reading "DOD Releases Afghanistan Report"

Progress in the Balkans

nospam@example.com (Andrew Zvirzdin) — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 20:17:47 +0200

There has been a lot of positive news coming out the Balkans recently. Some of the highlights include:

(1) Albania and Bosnia-Herzegovina will soon be approved for visa-free travel to Europe. According to a recent EU report, the two countries have made significant progress and could be cleared for unrestricted travel in the Schengen area as soon as October.

(2) Two weeks ago, Croatian president Ivo Josipovic apologized for his country's role in the Bosnian wars. The apology followed Serbia's apology for the Srebenica massacre one month ago. Serbian President Boris Tadic has taken a decidedly more conciliatory tone, promising to work towards reconciliation between the nations in the region.

(3) In a historic summit, presidents from Turkey, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Serbia met in Istanbul this weekend and agreed to intensify efforts to resolve border disputes and encourage greater regional cooperation. The meeting was an unprecedented show of cooperation between BiH and Serbia, and the presidents emphasized their desire to continue the cooperation in the future.

(4) NATO continues its tentative expansion into the Balkans with Bosnia being offered a Membership Action Plan (MAP) during the recent summit of NATO ministers. Significantly, Serbia has stated it supports Bosnia's NATO aspirations. NATO also discussed "militarily disengaging" from the country, removing the remaining peacekeepers.

All is not perfect in the Balkans of course. Serbian fugitive Mladic remains at large, unrest continues in Kosovo, and significant minorities in Croatia and Serbia continue to vociferously deny any wrongdoing in the Balkan wars. But all things considered, there are many reasons to be optimistic. Personally, I believe the lure of membership in the European Union and NATO are valuable catalysts in motivating the needed reforms. The progress in the Balkans is incremental and slow but it is substantive. That should offer some assurance to NATO officials struggling with Afghanistan and to EU supporters wondering about the long-term relevancy of the Union.

Who Wants to Dream?

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Sun, 25 Apr 2010 21:56:00 +0200

"Germany in Need of a Dream" is the headline of John Kornblum's op-ed, that I discussed earlier in: Has Germany Changed to the Worse? The former US ambassador to Germany adds to the mantra that 200,000 young fans of Obama attended his campaign speech in Berlin in 2008:

But as Germans will themselves often tell you: They have forgotten how to dream. Younger Germans feel this lack of inspiration as well. Dreams were what 200,000 of them were waiting to hear when they rallied to hear Barack Obama in Berlin two summers ago.

I was there. The crowd was a mix of all generations, not just young people. Not just fans, who "rallied". A few thousand Obama fans came hours before the speech and were able to stand in the front and smile and cheer into the TV cameras. Not just people in need of dreams came to see the new global superstar. Most folks were just curious, I think.

My atlantic-community.org colleague Ben Heine and I interviewed quite a few attendees after the speech:

Read Ben's article Obama in Europe: Continuity We Can Believe In: "Generally favorable towards Obama, many of the attendees we spoke to during the rally indicated they had come to hear the speech out of curiosity and interest in politics, rather than a specific desire to admire the presidential nominee."

Anyway, is Germany in need of a dream and are Germans waiting to hear dreams, as Kornblum is saying? I tend to disagree, but I agree to the extend that we need to overcome political cynicism and revitalize politics at the grassroots level. This requires much more than a charismatic leader, who would raise suspicions for historical reasons.

Related posts: Germans Learned Nothing from Obama and Campaign Slogan in Germany: "Yes, Weekend". Favorite quote from another post: "Obama might be as popular as Elvis, but even the King couldn¹t wean Germany off of Russian energy." And don't forget to read Nanne's analysis of what Obama said in Berlin: Obama Keeps it Global

Why Afghanistan is More Complex than Iraq

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 19:23:00 +0200

According to NATO Secretary General Rasmussen a comprehensive approach is needed in Afghanistan. He has been very impressed by General McChrystal's understanding of the complex situation:

As soon as I arrived, General McChrystal took me into his briefing room in ISAF Headquarters, and put up onto a big screen a graphic display of all the factors, military and civilian, we had to take into account if we are to succeed, and all the interconnections between them. There were hundreds of lines, going in every direction. It looked like someone had dumped a huge pot of cooked spaghetti onto the projector.

MSNBC has published the truly fascinating graphic about all the factors influencing Afghanistan's stability and the Counter Insurgency dynamics. Winning in Iraq seems to be much easier, if you look at the smart and straightforward briefing "How to Win the War in al Anbar," which Capt. Travis Patriquin, 32, created in 2006. It is according to RealClearPolitics "so simple (with stick figure drawings) that even the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee could understand it." He rebelled against the Pentagon's PowerPoint culture, which seems to be so bad that the Armed Forces Journal felt the need to publish an article titled "Dumb-dumb bullets." The NY Times writes today: We Have Met the Enemy and He Is PowerPoint.

Seriously, I guess many points from the stickfigures strategy for Al Anbar could work in Afghanistan, while McChrystal's graphic includes some universal truths that are relevant for Iraq as well. There are obviously many other issues that explain why winning in Afghanistan is more difficult than winning in Iraq. I just thought it was interesting to compare Chrystal's complex graphic with Patriquin's simple one. I guess we need both to explain military strategies.

I pay tribute to Captain Patriquin, who was killed by an IED on December 6, 2006. I think he deserves a lot of credit for the progress in Al Anbar.

Unrelated Endnotes: Presidents Obama and Medvedev issued a joint statement on April 25, 2010 to mark "the 65th anniversary of the legendary meeting of Soviet and American troops at the Elbe River, which became a striking symbol of the brotherhood-in-arms between our nations during World War II."
Moreover, I am happy that the world survived the boobquake and the Iranian cleric is proven wrong. Well, according to McChrystal's graphic everything is related, so maybe these endnotes are related as well. ;-)

Iceland's Long Shadow

nospam@example.com (Andrew Zvirzdin) — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 20:21:20 +0200

The recent eruption of Eyjafjallajökull is not the first time Iceland has thrust itself upon the European and global stage.

Indeed, this small Nordic country with only 315,000 inhabitants has played a remarkably prominent role at important junctures of history. Four of these periods come to mind:

1) The Icelandic eruption of 1783 led to "the year without summer" for much of Europe and the resulting famine contributed to the civil unrest in France. Some historians go so far as to say the French Revolution was a direct result of the volcanic eruption on Iceland.
2) The invasion and occupation of Iceland in World War II marked the transfer of naval power from the United Kingdom to the United States. While Great Britain invaded the island in 1940 to preempt a German invasion, the British quickly recognized they were unable to maintain their occupation force on the island. By 1941, American forces were occupying the island, and the new hegemon in the neighborhood was quickly recognized.
3) The Cod Wars between Iceland and Great Britain was one of only two major conflicts between NATO countries and nearly led to a full-fledged war between the two island nations. The conflict centered on fishing rights in Iceland's coastal waters and eventually led to international law regarding fishing rights and the EU's Common Fisheries Policy. Lingering concern about Icelandic fishing rights continues to be the biggest reason why Iceland remains outside the EU.
4) Beginning in 2003, Icelandic banks and investors were on the cutting edge of a global financial sector that used complex models, leveraging, and financial products to make enormous profits. But by 2006, it was already becoming apparent that the incredible explosion of the Icelandic banking sector was not sustainable and the island was on the leading edge of the global economic meltdown.

And now, citizens on both sides of the Atlantic have again remembered the island in the middle of the North Atlantic. It is just unfortunate that the lovely mid-Atlantic country always seems to remind us of its presence in such unpleasant ways.

Has Germany Changed to the Worse?

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Sun, 25 Apr 2010 11:21:14 +0200

John Kornblum, a former American ambassador who has lived for nearly four decades around Germany, responds to the many articles that question Germany's commitment to the European Union:

Germany has changed very little, but Europe and the world have changed a lot. Therein lies the dilemma.

Unfortunately, his NY Times op-ed does not elaborate this dilemma sufficiently for me to understand it. However, he reminds us that Germany pursued self-interests in the past as well. Though, I don't think Germany pushed for NATO enlargement like this:

Many important postwar accomplishments were conceived and pushed by Germany, sometimes over the opposition of others - including the United States. Ostpolitik was controversial for years, as was NATO enlargement. Germany pushed them with determination. Helmut Kohl did not consult before promulgating his 10 points on reunification. He agreed to French desires for a common currency, but only if it could be a mirror of the Deutsche mark, for decades the European monetary standard. The euro stability pact, now the object of so much controversy with Greece, was the result. After 1990, the E.U.'s eastward expansion was Germany's way of firming up its Eastern flank. Slowly and without fanfare, Germany has been remaking the European Union in its image. At each step of the way, Germany made its wishes more palatable by paying more than its share. Part of today's misunderstanding is caused by Germany's success in using its contributions to build an image of selflessness.

It's a great analysis, but it would be even better, if Kornblum would get into more detail regarding these remarks: "Most maddening for most thinking Europeans is the knowledge that the Germans are right." and "European fecklessness seems to worry Washington officials these days." Any readers with interpretations?

Mutual Disappointment

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:35:07 +0200

Chancellor Merkel is traveling across America this week. She loves the United States, but she is still having trouble connecting with Barack Obama, writes Spiegel International (HT: David). The media loves to personalize politics. I think at the end of the day the problem is not the personal relationship between Obama and Merkel, but its structural. After long descriptions of the well-known differences in Obama's and Merkel's style of politics, Spiegel comes to the same conclusion in the end:

At the moment, the partners on both sides of the Atlantic are disappointed with each other. Whenever the Americans want something from the Germans, they are guaranteed to be turned down: on prisoners from Guantanamo, on sending significantly more soldiers to Afghanistan and on new economic stimulus programs.

Merkel, on the other hand, was repeatedly appalled last year at how inconsiderate the Americans were of German or European interests. Whenever she spoke to Obama about climate protection, he was only concerned with the consequences for the United States. When the Americans settled on a new strategy for Afghanistan, they didn't ask their allies first. Merkel also suspects that the United States is not interested in reining in the financial industry.

She is forced to look on as America becomes more and more enmeshed in a duel with China. Nothing is done that could impair Washington's position toward China, which is why the United States doesn't want to take on the burdens of a strict climate policy or a more tightly controlled financial market. German interests are of little importance, because Germany has little left to offer the Americans.

Europeans Are "a Pack of Pagan Losers"

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 11:03:15 +0200

"A spectre is haunting Europe-the spectre of Communism." Those were the words of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in 1848 and their predictions turned out to be highly accurate, as we all know. Now the spectre of communism is haunting America and the end of the world is near.

The conservative media is scared shitless by this spectre and accuses Obama of turning the land of the free and the home of the brave into Russia/Europe/communism/socialism. For instance, Jonah Goldberg, editor-at-large of National Review Online, writes in Townhall (via No Pasaran): "The recently passed health-care legislation is the cornerstone of the Europeanization of America." Like "Amerikanische Verhältnisse" (American conditions) in Germany, the "Europeanization of America" is an increasingly popular catch phrase for fear mongering ("The Europeanization of America", Atlantica: A Threat to American Freedom, "If It's From Europe, Forget It" and Other Comments on Health Care).

Apparently the US conservative media needs to resort to fear mongering in order to attract an audience and advertisements from big companies. Capitalism is the excuse to exaggerate and insult. Americans live in the harsh reality of a free market economy and are not living the sheltered lives of 7 year old kids as we Europeans do, according to Goldberg:

We can't become Europe unless someone else is willing to become America. Look at it this way. My 7 year-old daughter has a great lifestyle. She has all of her clothes and food bought for her. She goes on great vacations. She has plenty of leisure time. A day doesn't go by where I don't look at her and feel envious at how good she's got it compared to me. But here's the problem: If I decide to live like her, who's going to take my place? Europe is a free-rider. It can only afford to be Europe because we can afford to be America.

Continue reading "Europeans Are "a Pack of Pagan Losers""

Obama Does Not Have International Friends

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:08:23 +0200

President Obama thus far has failed to strengthen relationships with historic allies, focusing instead on a fruitless search for improved relations with adversaries, writes Robert Kagan in the Washington Post (via Atlantic Community):

The president who ran against "unilateralism" in the 2008 campaign has worse relations overall with American allies than George W. Bush did in his second term.

Israelis shouldn't feel that they have been singled out. In Britain, people are talking about the end of the "special relationship" with America and worrying that Obama has no great regard for the British, despite their ongoing sacrifices in Afghanistan. In France, President Nicolas Sarkozy has openly criticized Obama for months (and is finally being rewarded with a private dinner, presumably to mend fences). In Eastern and Central Europe, there has been fear since the administration canceled long-planned missile defense installations in Poland and the Czech Republic that the United States may no longer be a reliable guarantor of security. Among top E.U. officials there is consternation that neither the president nor even his Cabinet seems to have time for the European Union's new president, Herman Van Rompuy, who, while less than scintillating, is nevertheless the chosen representative of the post-Lisbon Treaty continent.

Before you dismiss these observation because the author is a neocon, check out the Roger Cohen's NY Times article, which describes Obama's disconnect with traditional allies in much stronger words:

Continue reading "Obama Does Not Have International Friends"

Debt Will be More Manageable with Smart Tax Cuts

nospam@example.com (Editors) — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 20:32:34 +0200

Atlantic Review appreciates that two Wall Street Journal contributors respond to our blog post on their article.

George Pieler and Jens Laurson took issue with the French finance minister's claim that German productivity ails Europe's economy. Joerg Wolf agreed with their criticism in Atlantic Review's post Germany as Maya the Bee, but expressed disagreement on the issue of tax cuts, even though that was not a central part of their article.

Jens Laurson and George Pieler have now submitted the following riposte, which we appreciate and are happy to post here:

In commenting on our Wall Street Journal piece ("Not so Faaaaast, Germany"), Joerg Wolf, Editor of the Atlantic Review, disagrees with the following observation: "Germany should cut taxes. But it should do so for its own good..."

Mr. Wolf makes three points which we should like to examine; hoping to clarify an evident misunderstanding that has arisen.

Mr. Wolf says Germany has been advised to cut taxes "especially of top earners, over the past twenty years. Such advice is neither helpful nor original and creative." Well, neither originality nor creativity was our intent, nor is that an argument against the argument. The question is, whether it is good advice. Certainly if it is such oft-repeated advice there must be something to it? For the record, we think cutting taxes is good-indeed essential-advice. This is partly because Germany has one of the highest top personal tax rates in world (47%). More worryingly, the German state absorbs nearly half the nation's GDP which means an astonishing, if hidden loss of productivity. This formula has worked for Germany so far, a reflection of popular acceptance of high taxes in exchange for government-guaranteed income security programs. We don't think that will work so well in the future, though. The German tax cuts over the last two decades Mr. Wolf mentions, in any case far outweighed by the tax increases in the same time, are irrelevant to this discussion.

Continue reading "Debt Will be More Manageable with Smart Tax Cuts"

Germany as Maya the Bee

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 10:53:20 +0200

George Pieler and Jens Laurson take issue with the French finance minister's claim that Germany's productivity is what ails Europe's economy. Writing in the Wall Street Journal they compare Germany with Maya the Bee. (Subscribers only, but you get the full article via Google News.)

Maya was a curious, busy bee, always buzzing from adventure to adventure. Her best friend, Willi, however, was less ambitious and had a more rotund physique. His catch phrase was the elongated, nasal cry: "Maya-don't fly quite so faaaaast."

We were reminded of the Willi character when French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde recently called on Germany to compete a bit less effectively. She argued that Germany's success in exporting goods and its high productivity supposedly puts undue pressure on the other European economies. Ms. Lagarde went so far as to suggest that higher German productivity, in part caused by restrained labor costs, might not be a "sustainable" model for the future.

Laurson and Pieler criticize the "concept of economics as a zero-sum game, i.e. France may only gain at Germany's expense" which "is so woefully outdated that one must wonder how Europe ever got as far is it did, economically. It utterly disregards the fact that competition doesn't weaken but strengthens economies."

Continue reading "Germany as Maya the Bee"

The United States Has the Best Military Advertisements

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 14:10:00 +0200

Cohu (via German Joys) compares recruiting videos from the German, Austrian and Ukrainian military and also includes a beer company's video ad that is promoting the US military.

While the Ukrainian video is ridiculous, the Austrian copy-cat version is just stupid. The Bundeswehr clip is a typical commercial highlighting the fun aspects of serving in the military, while ignoring everything else.

The American clip is by far the most effective advertisement in my opinion (and cohu's) and did not cost the taxpayer anything. The video shows how Americans appreciate the service and sacrifices of their troops and shows how glad they are that the soldiers made it back home. No triumphant atmosphere. The clip is so low-key and appears authentic and honest. All the mess the soldiers had to live through is somehow included in the atmosphere. That makes it honest and patriotic and an effective promotion. Just my opinion, of course.

Does Germany need such videos showing appreciation? Would such messages work in Germany and increase support for the Bundeswehr's mission in Afghanistan?

Can you imagine a German beer company making such an advertisement with soldiers returning from Afghanistan? (BTW: The Bundeswehr consumed 990,000 liters of beer in Afghanistan in 2007.)

The NY Times's Nicholas Kulish writes that what is happening in Germany is the opposite of what the US commercial shows. There are "no parades for Hans":

Often, as I have passed through the main train station here in the German capital, I have seen the sad, lone figure of a soldier, heavy pack on his back, waiting for a train like the rest of us, but separated from the crowd by the uniform he wears. No one would stop to thank him for his service or to ask whether he had been deployed to Afghanistan. The loneliness was obvious, but at times I even sensed what I thought might have been fear, at the occasional hostile looks the soldier would receive alongside the impassiveness of the broader masses on the platform, who just tried to pretend he wasn't there. (.)

The German men and women in Afghanistan set off for war without the support of the populace, and they know that when they return there won't be crowds cheering in the streets, ready to make heroes of them. Germany has turned its back on hero worship. The soldiers fight alone.

What are the most and the least effective military advertisements you have seen? I am most interested in honest, authentic and or funny ones, like the ~~Danish~~ Norwegian KFOR Boys. Yes, sure, post anti-military advertisements as well, if you like, but no gory stuff, please.

Endnote: This is a great photo contest to increase public support: Why Afghanistan Matters

CIA Recommendations for Sustaining West European Support for ISAF

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 20:32:50 +0200

WikiLeaks (HT: Marie-Claude) has published what it calls a Special Memorandum by the Central Intelligence Agency's Red Cell. The document argues that after the fall of the Dutch government "counting on apathy might not be enough," because "indifference might turn into active hostility if spring and summer fighting results in an upsurge in military or Afghan civilian casualties." Unfortunately, the recommendations for shoring up popular support are not as exciting as you would expect from a classified and leaked document. Some examples:

* Some German opposition to ISAF might be muted by proof of progress on the ground, warnings about the potential consequences for Germany of a defeat, and reassurances that Germany is a
valued partner in a necessary NATO-led mission.
* Emphasis on the mission's multilateral and humanitarian aspects could help ease Germans' concerns about waging any kind of war while appealing to their desire to support multilateral efforts.
* Appeals by President Obama and Afghan Women might gain traction.

Germany is the New Bad Boy

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 19:41:19 +0100

I am quite excited that Germany participates in the Eurovision Song Contest with an original, charming and funny artist, who can actually sing and is a bit crazy and therefore represents the new Germany very well. Lena Meyer-Landrut will perform the song Satellite at the Eurovision Song Contest, which was written by an American-Danish duo.

Although for the first time in years, Germany deserves "douze points," I don't think Lena Meyer-Landrut will get them from the other European countries. Animosities against Germany are too strong. Most Europeans have stronger emotional ties to other countries.

And Germany's current economic and fiscal policies make us the new bad boy. The NY Times writes "Germany Begins to Shed Its Role as E.U. Integrator":

Resisting a bailout for Greece, digging in over economic policy and opposing parts of a strategy for Europe's growth, Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany will arrive Thursday at a European Union summit meeting ready to play an unfamiliar role: the bloc's naysayer. Once the invisible glue that bound the Union, German policy is now being dictated by less idealistic priorities rooted firmly by national interests.

I guess, we act now like a "normal" country. Well, so be it!

Germany's previously strong monetary and political support for EU integration did not make us popular enough to win the Eurovision Song Contest either. It just paved the way for German unification, but we got that now and have to focus on bigger national interests, like the Eurovision Song Contest and the Soccer World Cup.

My statements to the Russian English language TV station Russia Today probably cost us a few votes from Greek's Eurovision Song Contest community as well. The 10 minutes live interview took place last Friday. The video clip is from a weekly round-up and mentions just a few short statements of mine:

Christian Science Monitor Interview on Greece

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 12:33:00 +0100

The Christian Science Monitor interviewed a German Member of the EU Parliament and myself on a bailout for Greece: As Athens protests, Germany scoffs over Greece debt bailout.

My comment about Greece not making sufficient efforts was supposed to refer to the last ten years and not just to the present situation. Joining the Eurozone had huge benefits for Greece, but Athens failed to take this opportunity to reform the economy and get the government budget in order.

Now The Economist Respects Germany's Economic Model as well

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:16:55 +0100

As a follow-up to R.E.S.P.E.C.T. for Germany's Economic Model I would like to recommend The Economist's latest issue:

Europe is widely regarded as a place with a sclerotic economy burdened by high labour costs. But our special report on Germany this week suggests that, in the continent's biggest economy at least, that's not the case. Germany has succeeded in ruthlessly holding down labour costs over the past decade, which has helped it maintain its unparalleled success as an exporter. Germany is rightly proud of this; but for the neighbours, it is not necessarily good news.

Norway Wins the Olympics

nospam@example.com (Andrew Zvirzdin) — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 20:24:25 +0100

With the Winter Olympics now behind us, countries are seeking to evaluate how they fared. In the US, there is plenty of self accolades for the record haul of 37 medals. In Russia, the poor performance of the Federation has led to the resignation of the head of the national team and remarkably brusque comments from Medvedev. And while Canada did not win the overall medal count, gold medals in hockey and curling leave our northern neighbors with plenty to be happy about.

But the real winner of the Olympics is Norway. On a per capita basis, no other country earned as many medals as this small Nordic country. And it is not just Norway. Nine of the top ten per capita medal winners are European countries with populations smaller than 10 million inhabitants. The following chart shows the top 26 medal winners ranked on a per capita basis. (HT: Mark Warren)

What explains the dominance of European countries in the Olympics? History, climate, and geography certainly play a role. David Brooks suggests it also has to do with social capital and natural toughness. I personally wonder if sports are an emphasized expression of national sovereignty in Europe because other forms of national identity, such as currency and foreign policy, are increasingly transnational in scope. Some dedicated federalists in the European Union are pushing for an EU Olympic team, at least according to this web page. But I suspect the likelihood of that ever happening is close to zero.

R.E.S.P.E.C.T. for Germany's Economic Model

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 23:55:00 +0100

"It is high time the German economy got some respect. It has been faring much better lately than either the United States or Britain, despite the scornful predictions of Anglophone economic observers," writes Eamonn Fingleton in the American Prospect.It turns out that the German system was quite successfully reformed after all:

Per-capita income. Measured at ruling exchange rates as of 2008, Germany's per-capita income was $44,600. That was within hailing distance of America's $47,500 -- an impressive performance in itself and all the more so when you realize that the typical German worker put in just 1,432 hours in 2008 versus 1,792 hours for the typical American.

Life expectancy. Germans now live nearly 14 months longer on average than Americans. By contrast, as recently as the early 1980s, life expectancy in the former West Germany trailed the United States by fully 17 months (and, of course, East Germany was even further behind). A nation's life expectancy is a function of several key aspects of national well-being, and as such it is a useful reality check on purely money-based economic rankings. In particular, it tests a nation's ability to provide its citizens with decent health care.

Trade. Germany's trade performance over the longer term has been nothing short of spectacular. From 1998 to 2008 the German current account went from a deficit of $5.9 billion to a surplus of $267.1 billion. The contrast with the United States could hardly be starker: The American current account deficit shot from $233.8 billion in 1998 to $568.8 billion in 2008.

Innovation. Germany is a leader in key new technologies, including renewable energy such as solar and wind power. Germany is also the political and economic driving force behind the Large Hadron Collider, the huge new European particle accelerator that is exploring some of the most fundamental questions in physics, and the resulting breakthroughs should redound disproportionately to Germany's advantage.

Jobs. Even in the case of unemployment -- a yardstick that for most of the two decades since reunification had been a major embarrassment for Berlin officials -- Germany is now doing better than many other nations. As of December 2009, the jobless rate, at 8.1 percent, was well below America's 10 percent.

Is NATO Threatened by Diverging Priorities of its Members?

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:06:23 +0100

Robert Kagan's thesis "Americans are from Mars and Europeans are from Venus" was not based on transatlantic disagreements in the Bush era, but described developments that became already evident during the Clinton administration. The trend continues during the Obama presidency, even though Obama is often described as very "European."

Germany's Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle insists on the removal of America's last remaining nuclear weapons from German territory. At the Munich Security Conference, he called them "a relic of the Cold War. They no longer serve a military purpose." According to Spiegel (in German) he also co-authored with his Norwegian, Dutch, Belgian and Luxembourg counterparts a letter to NATO's Secretary General suggesting that NATO needs to discuss how to come closer to creating a world free of nuclear weapons.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, however, stressed at the NATO Strategic Concept Seminar on Monday that the Alliance needs to "invest in deterrence, nuclear deterrence as well as missile defense" and expressed her concern about the current debate in Europe.

Continue reading "Is NATO Threatened by Diverging Priorities of its Members?"

Denmark Shows How to Get Support for Afghanistan

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 13:45:56 +0100

While the Dutch government broke up over the war in Afghanistan, the Danish establishment seems to be very unified and serves as "an unlikely example of how to maintain public support for the war" writes the Wall Street Journal (HT: Atlantic Community):

"The key to sustaining public support is an elite consensus that includes politicians in government and opposition as well as key opinion leaders: influential intellectuals, academics and columnists," says Dr. Peter Viggo Jakobsen, a security expert at the University of Copenhagen. (.)

Mr. Gade, a former Danish army officer [who has led Danish efforts to maintain public support], said a key to winning the public was giving reporters deep access to soldiers, who were allowed to talk. When troops say, " 'We did a job and we did it good, and it is worth doing,' then it is very hard indeed for a lot of people to oppose, because those are the men and women who risk their lives," he said.

The article, however, also points out that recently there have been cracks in the coalition and a fall in opinion polls, with, for instance, a major newspaper withdrawing its support.

Dutch Goverment Falls over Afghanistan Mandate

nospam@example.com (Nanne Zwagerman) — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 14:32:27 +0100

It is a rather late stage in the game for the war effort in Afghanistan to claim its first political victim. But yesterday night the Dutch governing coalition broke up over the question of extending its mandate. And that less than a week after narrowly surviving a debate over the (purely symbolic) support for the war in Iraq back in 2003. The political process has its own pace in the Netherlands.

The Guardian has a quote:

"A plan was agreed to when our soldiers went to Afghanistan," said the Labour leader, Wouter Bos. "Our partners in the government didn't want to stick to that plan, and on the basis of their refusal we have decided to resign from this government."

Bos is pretending that the Dutch did their turn and will now have accomplished a virtuous task when they go home. His coalition partners, in turn, are pretending that their plans and conditions were ever intended to have consequences. The political process has its own rationality in the Netherlands.

Greece and Goldman Sachs

nospam@example.com (Andrew Zvirzdin) — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 20:25:12 +0100

Investigative reports by the New York Times and Der Spiegel have left Goldman Sachs and Greece squirming in the limelight. For at least fifteen years, the American investment bank has been helping Greece legally massage its public finances. The arrangement enabled Greece to keep its European partners happy without having to make tough fiscal decisions. Specifically, the bank created currency swaps that enabled debt issued in dollars or yen to be swapped for euro-denominated bonds that would be paid back at a later date. Sound fishy? Those on both sides of the Atlantic think so. From the New York Times:

Wall Street tactics akin to the ones that fostered subprime mortgages in America have worsened the financial crisis shaking Greece and undermining the euro by enabling European governments to hide their mounting debts.... Wall Street did not create Europe’s debt problem. But bankers enabled Greece and others to borrow beyond their means, in deals that were perfectly legal. Few rules govern how nations can borrow the money they need for expenses like the military and health care. The market for sovereign debt — the Wall Street term for loans to governments — is as unfettered as it is vast.

Der Spiegel has been following the issue for a longer period of time, and the frustration in Germany over Greece's behavior is particularly acute. The magazine notes that the accounting procedures have only delayed the day of reckoning:

At some point Greece will have to pay up for its swap transactions, and that will impact its deficit. The bond maturities range between 10 and 15 years. Goldman Sachs charged a hefty commission for the deal and sold the swaps on to a Greek bank in 2005.

The activities of Goldman Sachs in Greece are neither surprising nor novel. Indeed, Der Spiegel notes that Italy has engaged in similar activities with another bank for some time. The controversy highlights how difficult fiscal reform is in modern democracies. Today was Greece's day of reckoning, tomorrow could be America's. Anne Applebaum at Slate writes, "I have seen America's future and it is Greece."

The revelations come at a very inopportune time for Greece, the bank, and the EU. What do these revelations say about the proposed bailout of the country by the EU? Can the Euro survive when its member states can easily fabricate their numbers? (Imagine California making secret purchases in eurobond markets that are swapped out at a later date for dollar-denominated bonds.) Is the Euro feasible without greater political cohesion among the EU's member states? And what does this transaction say about the value-added of investment banks? As Baseline Scenario notes, are investment banks in sovereign markets really producing "productivity-enhancing financial innovation" or just "a sophisticated form of scam?"

Yanukovych: Ukraine Will Be a Bridge Between East and West

nospam@example.com (Kyle Atwell) — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 01:57:51 +0100

Ukraine's President-elect Viktor Yanukovych writes in the Wall Street Journal that “Ukraine Will Be a Bridge Between East and West”:

Let me say here, a Yanukovych presidency is committed to the integration of European values in Ukraine. Ukraine should make use of its geopolitical advantages and become a bridge between Russia and the West. Developing a good relationship with the West and bridging the gap to Russia will help Ukraine. We should not be forced to make the false choice between the benefits of the East and those of the West. As president I will endeavor to build a bridge between both, not a one-way street in either direction. We are a nation with a European identity, but we have historic cultural and economic ties to Russia as well. The re-establishment of relations with the Russian Federation is consistent with our European ambitions. We will rebuild relations with Moscow as a strategic economic partner. There is no reason that good relations with all of our neighbors cannot be achieved.

Can Yanukovych bridge the gap between East and West? Will he even try, or is this article simply political posturing to console those concerned about his pro-Russia stance?

Yanukovych was the most pro-Russia candidate, and has quickly sought to improve ties with Russia; he already suggested the Russian Black Sea Fleet may stay in Ukrainian waters and made clear Ukraine will not seek NATO membership. Ukraine will however continue moving toward EU membership (Businessweek).

His rival in the campaign and a leader of the 2004 western-supported Orange Revolution, Yulia Tymoshenko refuses to concede, and has requested the high court in Ukraine overturn the election results – an outcome seen as highly unlikely.

President Obama, the EU and NATO have already sent congratulations to Yanukovych.

With Yanukovych ditching NATO and seeking to improve ties to Russia and EU membership, the United States is the biggest loser from Yanukovych’s election. This outcome should not come as a surprise however: popular support in Ukraine for NATO membership has been consistently at or below 30 percent over the past few years, making NATO membership never really likely anyhow (AR forecasted this here).

With NATO membership for Ukraine never likely anyhow, perhaps the US has not lost much. In fact, Ukraine relations with the West under Yanukovych may not be much different than it has been under the Orange Revolution leadership for a few reasons:

* Ukraine will likely continue to develop a partnership with NATO, though not membership;
* Ukraine will want pragmatic and productive relations with the United States, and still seeks EU membership;
* The acceptance by international observers of Yanukovych's election and his intent to pursue EU membership both support the fact that while the Orange Revolution leadership has been voted out, the western values it respresented - a democratic and free society - are now embedded into Ukraine.

Whether or not Yanukovich can balance between the West and Russia is tough to predict. However, Yanukovich's intent to pursue this balance is likely a genuine aspiration.

Of BRICs and PIGS

nospam@example.com (Andrew Zvirzdin) — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:56:44 +0100

There is a significant amount of hand-wringing going on in the US that the Euro is fraying on the edges. Some pundits have even coined a rather derogatory acronym for Euro-countries in economic distress: the PIGS (Portugal, Italy or Ireland, Greece, Spain). The acronym bunches together four countries with very different backgrounds but one shared fact: they all face serious budget shortfalls.

The grouping of these countries, largely by investment banks, may simplify investment and policymaking decisions to an unfortunate level. Italy for one does not want to be part of the group, and the Italian bank UniCredit has waged an effective campaign to change the "I" in PIGS to Ireland. But Ireland too has begun to restore both consumer confidence and budget stability thanks to aggressive action by the central government. Commentators seem to keep the "I" because that is the crucial vowel that holds the acronym together.

Portugal, Spain, and Greece are also all facing very different challenges. Portugal has a sizable but manageable budget deficit, while Spain is struggling with a burst housing bubble a la Florida. Greece remains the real country of concern; but then again, Greece has roughly the same debt levels as Germany, so what is all the fuss about?

The classification overlooks the more important--and legally binding---organizations already in existence, namely the EU and the Eurozone. Talk of the dissolution of the Euro is premature but rampant: the New York Times has published no less than three articles on the subject in the last two days alone (here, here, and here). At the end of the day, policymakers in Europe and the US have to honestly ask themselves: is leaving the Euro really an option? The case of Iceland clearly demonstrates what happens to small countries with large debt obligations in tumultuous times and it is not pretty.

The discussion of categorization reminds me of the BRIC acronym held in high regard by investors prior to 2008. Brazil, Russia, India, and China were touted as the hallmarks of the developing world at the time, and investments in all four countries were seen to be equally appeasing. Two years, a war in Georgia, and a global economic crisis later, the BRICs no longer look so homogeneous. I suspect the same will soon be true for the PIGS.

How should we classify countries economically? Is there any value in grouping problem areas? Just as a reference, I did a quick look at state budgets in the US and found five states with budget deficits greater than 10% in 2009: Arizona, California, Nevada, New Jersey, Rhode Island. Do you think CARINN could catch?

The EU's Increasing Irrelevance to the US

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 19:44:04 +0100

Reuters reported yesterday:

The European Union and the United States are likely to scrap plans to hold a summit in Madrid in May because U.S. President Barack Obama has decided not to attend, EU diplomats said on Tuesday.

Oh, that will make many in Europe's political class angry. Summits are so important to them, especially the "family photo" is considered of vital importance to national security.

An unsentimental President Obama has already lost patience with a Europe lacking coherence and purpose, opined Nick Witney and Jeremy Shapiro with the European Council on Foreign Relations and the Brookings Institution respectively in November 2009. Apparently, last year's EU-US summit in Prague, "at which President Obama was subjected to 27 interventions from the EU's assembled heads of state and government was an eye-opener for his administration."

Witney and Shapiro argued in Towards a post-American Europe: A Power Audit of EU-US Relations:

The US needs strong partners in a world that it no longer dominates. It knows it can turn to China on the economy and Russia on nuclear disarmament. In comparison, Washington is disappointed with Europe and sees EU member states as infantile: responsibility shirking and attention seeking.

The US would prefer a more united EU, but expects so little that it cannot bring itself to greatly care. When the EU is hard-headed, as with trade negotiations, the US listens. When it is not, Europeans are asking to be divided and ruled.

Will Europeans soon miss President George W. Bush?

Related posts on Atlantic Review:

Merkel got back-rubs from Bush, but she gets only a cold shoulder from Obama

President Obama and Europe

"Europeans Mourn End of Bush's Presidency"

Bush's Farewell Tour: Looking Ahead and Missing the Favorite "Punching Bag"

Anything You Can Do I Can Do Better

nospam@example.com (Andrew Zvirzdin) — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 19:58:21 +0100

The health care debate in the United States has recently spurred a tangential conversation among pundits: Is America's or Europe's economy better? The controversy was initiated by Jim Manzi who recently wrote that Europe's bloated welfare state has destroyed its competitive advantage:

From 1980 through today, America's share of global output has been constant at about 21%. Europe's share, meanwhile, has been collapsing in the face of global competition - going from a little less than 40% of global production in the 1970s to about 25% today. Opting for social democracy instead of innovative capitalism, Europe has ceded this share to China (predominantly), India, and the rest of the developing world.

Paul Krugman has responded in kind, arguing:

The story you hear all the time - of a stagnant economy in which high taxes and generous social benefits have undermined incentives, stalling growth and innovation - bears little resemblance to the surprisingly positive facts. The real lesson from Europe is actually the opposite of what conservatives claim: Europe is an economic success, and that success shows that social democracy works.

Economists and journalists have been busy debating the question. Greg Mankiw cites GDP figures to question Europe's wealth, Mark Perry compares European countries to US states, Noah Millman asks why we are asking this question, and Clive Crook says the question is unanswerable.

The debate over the economic prowess of the US and Europe recurs at regular intervals. But it rarely leaves us with any new information. To some extent, the debate sounds like two teenage students trying to prove which one is at the top of the class. At the end of the day, the economies of European countries and the United States are closely intertwined, as the recent financial crisis has demonstrated. Unfortunately, the debate over the "right" economic system may cloud the bigger opportunity: how will Europe and the United States lead the global economy in coming decades?

What do you think? Who has the better economic model? Is that the right question to be asking?

Boell Foundation: Civil Projects Need to Play a Greater Role in Afghanistan

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 22:02:56 +0100

I have interviewed the Director of the Heinrich Boell Foundation's Kabul office about yesterday's London Conference. Dr. Scheller states that along side security, the international community also needs to strengthen Afghan civil society and that Iraq does not serve as a model for Afghanistan. See video below. More information on Atlantic Community and at the website of the Boell Foundation, which is independent, but philosophically close to the German Green Party, which explains the background colors... The voters of the Green Party are more supportive of continued engagement in Afghanistan than the voters of Germany's other main parties.

On Monday I have conducted another interview: UNHCR: Tweets from the Edge: I was talking to Claudia Gonzalez, who was leading Public Relations and Special Projects at the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. She was using Social Media to give refugees give voice, allowing people around the world to engage in a conversation about how to improve the lives of those most affected by wars and conflict.

NATO to Develop Contingency Plans to Defend Baltics

nospam@example.com (Kyle Atwell) — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 16:05:12 +0100

“Thanks to Poland, the alliance will defend the Baltics”, reports the Economist:

IN A crunch, would NATO stand by its weakest members—the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania? After five years of dithering, the answer now seems to be yes, with a decision in principle by the alliance to develop formal contingency plans to defend them.

…

Speaking in Prague in April 2009, President Barack Obama publicly demanded that NATO develop plans for all of its members, which put the Baltic case squarely on the alliance’s agenda. But in the months that followed, inattention and disorganisation in his administration brought no visible follow-up. Instead, snubs and missteps, particularly on the missile defence plans, deepened gloom about how seriously America took the safety concerns of its allies in Europe’s ex-communist east. An open letter by security bigwigs from Poland, the Czech Republic, the Baltic states and other countries publicly bemoaned the decline in transatlantic relations.

...

Now that seems to have changed. Formal approval is still pending and the countries concerned have been urged to keep it under wraps. But sources close to the talks say the deal is done: the Baltic states will get their plans, probably approved by NATO’s military side rather than its political wing. They will be presented as an annex to existing plans regarding Poland, but with an added regional dimension.

A proposal to create Baltic contingency plans has been shot down before, according to Baltic Reports:

General James Craddock, NATO’s supreme commander at the time, asked the alliance for approval of a contingency plan for the Baltics in October 2008. However Germany and France opposed the measure, fearing it would unnecessarily agitate Russia, and the issue as been debated in secret within the alliance since.

It should be interesting to see how this develops. Formal contingencies established or not, my feeling has always been that if any NATO member is attacked, the Alliance will invoke Article V, the mutual defense clause. Article V is the core foundation of the Alliance -- if NATO failed to defend one of it’s members, that would shatter the Alliance. Perhaps this perspective is too idealistic though?

Senate Report: NATO Countries Should Resume Arms Sales to Georgia

nospam@example.com (Kyle Atwell) — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 20:32:03 +0100

A report released by the staff of Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) has sparked controversy from Russia and Georgia. Titled “Striking the Balance: U.S. Policy and Stability in Georgia,” (PDF) the report argues NATO Allies need a coordinated policy toward Georgia, and suggests it should include a resumption of arms sales that halted following the 2008 Georgia-Russia war:

The United States and NATO allies must reconcile a policy that leaves a dedicated NATO partner unable to provide for its basic defense requirements. These efforts will be most effective if they are undertaken on a multilateral basis. The Alliance must come to grips with the reality that Georgia will require coordinated security support from America and European nations for some years to come.

…

Particularly in the realm of security assistance, such coordination is critical. While Georgia finds itself under a de facto arms embargo, other NATO allies are pursuing record military deals with the Russian Federation. Georgia has become an exceptional contributor to international security through its contributions to missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. A strategy to enable Georgia to similarly provide for its own territorial defense will require close cooperation with NATO allies to preserve stability in the region.

Following the war between Georgia and Russia, both Europe and the United States have largely stopped selling lethal military equipment to Georgia. The United States has nonetheless continued training Georgian forces for operations in Afghanistan and Iraq under a program titled the “International Military Education and Training Program” (IMET), and funding appears to have increased for this training. Relatively speaking, military equipment sales to Georgia were much higher than training funding up to 2008, but have dropped to zero in 2009 (see charts based on data from the Lugar report).

Georgia has embraced the report while Russia and the breakaway territories of South Ossetia and Abkhazia argue arms sales to Georgia could lead to another outbreak of violence in the region.

Continue reading "Senate Report: NATO Countries Should Resume Arms Sales to Georgia"

The Annual "Will Europe Freeze?" Month

nospam@example.com (Andrew Zvirzdin) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 17:34:07 +0100

Ah yes, it is that wonderful time of year. Fresh snow, college football bowl games in the US, a new year...and uncertainty surrounding European energy security. Some things never seem to change.

This year adds a few new wrinkles to the annual, "Will Europe Freeze?" month however. For the first time in years, the center of energy disruption does not appear to be the Ukrainian border. Ukraine has paid in full and on time for its use of Russian gas during 2009, and both Russia and Ukraine appear determined to avoid a gas war during an election year. So this year, the energy disputes have shifted north.

First, Belarus and Russia remained locked in heated (excuse the pun) negotiations about oil supply prices between the two countries. Russia has already cut oil supplies to Belarus once this week and many analysts expect further restrictions in the weeks to come. The clash feels all too familiar: Russia, frustrated with its neighbor's overtures to the West decides to throw its weight around in the energy sector to bring it to heel. Of course, the blame also resides with Belarus which has for years subsidized its economy through cheap energy from Russia. If the country truly wants to play on the international arena, it must now be prepared to pay market prices for its resources.

Second, Lithuania has been compelled to shut down its aging nuclear power plant on New Year's Eve, leaving it completely dependent on Russia for its energy supply. The closure was required by the European Union, but leaves Lithuanians feeling very nervous. Russia has already played its energy card in the Baltic, shutting down its oil pipeline to Lithuania in 2007. Energy supply form other EU countries remains extremely weak, and a dramatic increase in energy prices is very likely for this Baltic country already struggling through an extremely difficult recession.

Finally, the UK is approaching capacity limits as it struggles with an extremely cold winter. The Wall Street Journal is reporting today that Britain only has gas storage capacity equivalent to 4% of annual consumption, compared with over 100% storage in the US and 19% in Germany. And National Grid warned this week that supply will be tight in coming weeks.

None of the preceding events really come as a surprise. Despite that, Europe has again been caught off guard. The Spanish Presidency is trying to salvage a July Commission proposal regarding gas security and supply but countries continue to insist the Commission is overstepping its authority. And efforts to encourage greater infrastructure developments within Europe remain merely efforts. So what will it take to really see the development of a true European energy policy? In the US, it took two oil embargoes before the country started developing strategic reserves. And the price of oil reached $160 a barrel before consumer's behavior started to change.

Readers Pat and Pamela both suggested that the Atlantic Review analyze Russian and European energy policy in the upcoming year. This will certainly be an important topic, particularly in the first few months. But at first glance, little has changed. The Russian energy policy of 2010 seems identical to that of preceding years: throw its weight around in the natural resource arena to extract concessions in the political realm. And there still is no real European energy policy to discuss. Europe continues to shiver and simply hope the heat stays on.

A European Saves Americans on Flight 253

nospam@example.com (Joerg Wolf) — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 21:41:14 +0100

The 9/11 attacks and the failed Christmas Day airplane bombing have two things in common: US agencies had enough information about the terrorists and could have intervened if they had properly analyzed and shared the information that they had, but instead another systemic failure - as President Obama called it - has occurred. Like with United 93 in 2001 it was again the passengers, in particular the Dutchman Jasper Schuringa, who subdued the Nigerian terrorist.

Yep, it was a European. And it is documented well. It is, however, not well documented what exactly happened on United 93. Nevertheless a movie was made that defames the German passenger Christian Adams as the "stereotypically weak-kneed Euro-pacifist," even though no information suggests that he acted that way. Hollywood should apologize by making a good movie about Flight 253 with a Dutch hero.

And while we are at it: The Dutch are also taller than Americans, probably because of better health care and more comprehensive welfare systems. So, perhaps Obama's health care reform will prevent further terrorist attacks ;-) Nah, I hope the systemic problems will be fixed. And to be fair: The system, including the much criticized No-Fly List, has probably prevented a few attacks, but such success can't be quantified and does not make headlines.

Endnote: Thanks to Robert Farley for the related post "But Bob Kaplan Said that Europeans Have Lost Their Will to Live!"

I used to be big fan of Kaplan, when he published The Coming Anarchy in the early 90s, but I got more and more disappointed by his writings since the turn of the millenium. I am not sure to which article Farley refers to. It could be this month column Let's Go, Europe about the "neopacifism" in a "debellicized Europe," which can only make a difference in the naval sphere. Or it is his November column The Fall of the Wall, where he argues that "We may have gained victory in the Cold War, but lost Europe to apathy and decadence in the process." Kaplan was so nice and took the 20th anniversary of the first ever peaceful revolution in Germany (our best contribution to the 20th century) as well as the revolutions in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, which are now part of the EU, as an opportunity for Eurobashing:

What does the European Union truly stand for besides a cradle-to-grave social welfare system? For without something to struggle for, there can be no civil society—only decadence. Thus, with their patriotism dissipated, European governments can no longer ask for sacrifices from their populations when it comes to questions of peace and war.

Of course, Jasper Schuringa's initiative on Flight 253 won't change Kaplan opinion about the decadent, neopacifist, debellized, unpatriotic Europeans.