| Past events and notes index |
page and albums | Documents index
| Sets of regional maps | World
Affairs Councils of America (national office)
World Affairs Council's Archive:
These notes by Jeremy Lewis do not represent
the views of AWAC, its Board, or other members.
Bret Stephens, key points of speech to AWAC, YouTube, 3'
Lewis; revised 5 May '10 with latest event notes.
Facebook album for tagged images of AWAC events, '09-10 | Images
on web '09-10 | Hi-res images
29 September 2009: Janet
Guyon, "The Web and the Decline of News Outlets. Managing
Editor of Bloomberg News
13 October 2009: Edward
(Jack) Hardin, "National Security and Civil Liberties." Top
corporate attorney from Atlanta.
1 November 2009 (Sunday), additional event:Gen.
Michael Hayden, "The State of US Intelligence. Former director
of the National Security Agency and Central Intelligence Agency.
3 November 2009: Amb. Ryan
Crocker, "Iraq/AfPak: Retrospects and Prospects". Recently
retired, Ambassador to Pakistan, 2004-2007, Ambassador to Iraq, 2007-2009.
22 February 2010 (Monday): Dr.
Hans Mark, "The Dangers of Nuclear Proliferation", Director
of NASA's Ames Research Center (and formerly at Livermore Labs), Secretary
of the Air Force, and Chancellor, University of Texas system.
6 April 2010: Dr. William
Moomaw, Professor of International
Environment Policy and Director of the Center for International Environment
and Resource Policy, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University,
4 May 2010: Senior Air War
College Instructors report on their
regional tours, as part of the AWC Regional and Cultural Studies Program.
NOTES ON SPEAKERS
September 29, 2009:
Janet Guyon, Bloomberg News. "The Web and the Decline of News Outlets."
Managing Editor of Bloomberg News;
nine years with Fortune Magazine;
and 18 years with the
Wall Street Journal as reporter, editor, and
Notes (blended) from Alexis Johnson
and Jeremy Lewis
• Born in Cincinnati, Ohio
At the Bloomberg News
• Graduated summa cum laude
from Duke in English and Economics
• Did post-graduate work at Columbia
• 18 years with The Wall Street
• 9 years with Fortune Magazine
• In 2000, she won “Magazine Journalist
of the Year” in the UK
• Now managing editor of Bloomberg
While with Fortune, learned at
WEF of web publications, offered free
Wanted to be in charge of the website,
being unfamiliar with the new technology that had taken the U.S. by storm
while in England
Wall Street Journal web pages
were an early success, and attracted millions to their online product though
limited revenue per viewer compared to print. At Bloomberg, became
convinced could never raise enough revenue online.
Bloomberg News has 2,000 journalists
around world, writing content. Goal of $50M ad revenue. Audience
trebled to 15 M per month, but ad revenue never reached $50M. Not
like networks and newspapers (now one per city) so print commands a premium.
But ad inventory on web is infinite,
so prices decline. Advertiser does not need to use Bloomberg News
– can go elsewhere. Google, rather than NY Times, gets ad
money by matching ads to viewer interest.
Web is taking ad revenue away from print
but it is not necessarily going to publishers.
NY Times going through third
or fourth round of layoffs.
Publishers not stupid; there is technology
change and distribution method change.
Squeeze going on and publishers do not
know what to do.
So, what to do?
- The ad revenue for the website
was supposed to be around $50 million, but was closer to half of that
-an ad network, like Google, can
follow the audience, despite leaving the website
-the network usually receives the
money, rather than the publishers
Accept it, and embrace it. There will
still be news, just in a different form.
Pay for an online addition
Effect of coming shakeout?
-How much to charge?
-How and when to charge?
Possible to give away portions for free,
and charge for full articles
Paid subscriptions, just as a printed
Bloomberg model: Bloomberg Terminal
is a computer system that enables financial professionals to monitor and
analyze real-time financial market data movements and place trades.
$20,000 per year for Bloomberg terminal - compared to tiny staff of web
service. 300,000 pay, get download of software for PC as tool for
making money – can compare P/E ratios, bonds, map of oil tanker ships around
world. Magazine, web, tv are just marketing tools for the main service.
Business model 20 years ago was e-delivered from start, able to support
146 offices worldwide, one of world’s largest busnesses organs. Enabling
tool for particular set of people.
Subscription services: like newspaper
and phone service.
BBC model: government supported – but
controversy over how much they can be commercialized with public support.
Like Bloomberg News, create an exclusive program to fund the other media
Web news model: Superior product with
real time news, video, ability to contact authors – but not charging for
it. No other business like this except internet entrepreneurs who
build a business free and hope for Microsoft to buy out.
Free newspapers: were called shockers,
not good quality.
In Europe, newspaper subscriptions and
advertisers have 50-50 split of revenue.
Running web site at Bloomberg, about
10% of audience were addicts, spent much time on site. If those paid
$50 per year, that exceeds advertising anyway.
Many publishers taking subscription
road now, but many will not survive. However, Some newspapers will
Grew up in Cleveland when river set
on fire, and chemicals flowed from steel industry – till shakeouts and
layoffs. Similarly, newspaper industry will have shakeout but some
smaller media players will survive along with some papers.
Other ways to get information about
local issues? Web allows voluminous information
Pressure on Google -- which profits
from scraping content unpaid from other sites -- to pay news organizations
Patron system? [Unreliable]. ProPublica
investigative journalists funded by Wachovia family – unfortunately with
Wachovia stock [now of unreliable value].
Pulitzer prize winners have transferred
to Bloomberg – so some benefit from shakeout.
Should there be a bailout?
How much does it matter?
-It is not a major national concern
-There are other ways to get information
-The web has more information, and
sometimes better information
Instead, the government could pressure
sites like Google to share their profits with the publishers
Q) there a future in $75
subs for individual service?
A) Yes, would do it tomorrow.
Q) Is it a newspaper’s objective to
sway public opinion to influence the national agenda?
A) We go out to collect facts, although
the choosing of those subjects contributes to national conversation.
Now trying to explain health care debate.
Q) Proliferation of resources on web
– How can we, as the consumer, monitor credibility on the web?
A) Most people tend to gravitate
toward brand names, e.g. New York Times. Those brand names will
Q) Did the news media fail to cover
impending 2008 financial crisis?
A) Some warnings of problems but
now linked well enough across markets. (In news awards judging -- did find
a little-known journalist who had warned effectively). Housing
bubble warnings since 2005. Although connections weren’t drawn all
the way, the news media not to blame, hard to draw a line across industries
– and hard to predict when the bubbles would break.
Q) Asian web sites coming to challenge
the western media? The U.S. and Britain control the majority of news sites;
do you see trends of other countries seeking to join this?
A) They do have aspirations, but
most news is language driven.
Q) Is Bloomberg going to run for the
presidency, and how would Bloomberg News cover that story?
Q) Are there any plans for the news
media to involve the college generation?
A) Yes, the news sites are looking
for new ways to incorporate the younger generation, including blogs and
videos. A colleague hired from Yahoo is currently trying to render the
Bloomberg web site more interactive. However, as a whole, news has
always appealed to the older demographic.
Q) What service mix for Bloomberg?
A) Investor tools, stock, bond,
oil prices, analytical software for comparisons. News is merely frosting
on cake. Finanicial info services with a media arm, not the reverse.
Q) National and international politics
vs financial info?
A) 75% financial info, but have
big investment now in political and economic bureaus
Top of Page
October 13, 2009: Edward
(Jack) Hardin, “National Security and Civil Liberties”. Top corporate
attorney from Atlanta. Member of International Bar Association, Council
on Foreign Relations. Selected by his peers for ten years one of the best
corporate attorneys in the US. A member of the United Way's De Tocqueville
Society, he is an expert on and speaks on national security legal issues.
Top of Page
May be resheduled: Amb. John Kelly, Ambassador-in-Residence,
Sam Nunn School of International Relations, Georgia Tech. A career diplomat,
he has served as Assistant Secretary of State for the Near East and also
as US Ambassador to Lebanon and to Finland. In Washington, he was a Deputy
Assistant Secretary in four different important areas.
Historical political culture, inherited
from the United Kingdom: struggle to limit power of government, provide
individuals with opportunity to defend themselves.
Magna Carta begat common law writ of habeas corpus.
Post WW2 international institutions created
with US influence peaceably to network states and protect individuals via
international norms and tribunals. Nuremburg trials an embodiment
of this idea.
US Bill of Rights to protect minority from tyranny
US based on individuals ceding power to government
for purposes of the union.
System of balance of powers between branches.
Right to know accusation, consult with a legal defender,
be free from cruel and inhuman treatment.
Political culture is learned in schools.
Citizens are confident of rights in event of being
Tranquility and peace are based on those assumptions.
Some exceptions, eg WW1 Palmer raids arrested many
on suspicion; WW2 Japanese Americans, McCarthy period. All made possible
because of national security fears.
Cold war environment:
Post 9/11 environment:
US developed national security and intelligence assets,
in late ’60s and early ’70s, these espionage powers were being used to
create dossiers on MLK, John Lennon and many others. Intelligence
was gathered without 4th amendment restraints on searches and seizures.
Reaction to excesses of cold war:
Network of laws in late 1970s: foreign intelligence
by NSA and CIA is directed outside; FBI defends country within borders,
and subject to 4th amendment.
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act created court
of 10 judges from districts around country, could permit wiretaps within
We assumed actors were governments and agents – non
governmental organizations (NGOs) were not part of security thinking prior
[Reaction to excesses:]
President directed US do anything necessary to ensure
VP developed 1% suspicion rule; do anything necessary
when there is a 1% threat.
Facing enemy of invisible soldiers.
But Bush /Cheney administration leaders came to office
with lifelong ambition to increase powers of the presidency, among several
We sublimated concerns about liberties, turning on
Rounded up thousands of individuals who were Muslims
or of Arab descent, and held them without the usual rights or even charges.
Some when held were abused; notably in Brooklyn immigration
CIA began abducting people and taking them to countries
known for lack of rights. Some on US soil subjected to “enhanced
Most of the public supported and assumed powers were
only used against foreigners.
NSA embarked on secret wiretapping program in telecoms
companies, searching with algorithms all email and phone – unknown and
rationalized by a legal opinion that was subsequently withdrawn.
Much of world’s communications came through US, encouraged by US.
Held enemy combatants offshore at Guantanamo base
and US debated what techniques to use.
Detainment designed to be outside jurisdiction of
US courts, because post WW2 legal doctrine held that habeas corpus did
not apply offshore.
Military commissions had been used to determine whether
someone was properly an enemy combatant, but not for the fuller judicial
purposes now projected on them.
The Geneva conventions, and the UN Declaration, and
the UN Convention against Torture that we had entered into, were considered
to be from a different time and place. But the US lost 6 times in
US courts on cases involving detention in Guantanamo, and the rights of
In 2004, Government lawyers began to rethink their
legal opinions (torture memos and wiretaps especially).
Congress became concerned about lack of consultation.
In 2006, Congress changed [to bicameral Democratic
Surveillance authorities of national security agencies
were cut back -- but still reauthorized.
Within the purview of the FISA court, [warrantless
wiretapping] authority was upheld on appeal.
The current administration has withdrawn the authority
of enhanced interrogation techniques.
The 2001 USA PATRIOT act contained several sunset
provisions, including one due at the end of 2009, but most will probably
It was wrong not to go to Congress, wrong to do in
secret, hurt US standing in world opinion as a nation of laws, and said
that these things we did in reacting to 9/11 are more important than the
principles we stand for.
He ended with the post-Nazi Martin Niemoller quotation,
“first they came…”
Q) International frameworks that cause difficulties
for US, by ceding authority. Italian courts brought charges against
troops who shot Italian agent returning hostages.
A) Proponents of presidential war powers authority,
John Yoo, Jack Goldsmith, argued against foreign institutions with rules
not reviewable by US. For 50 years US made argument for human rights,
based on not expecting US to be the problem, and set rules postwar to constrain
Q) under new admin will practices change?
Italian courts operating under own rules – not
an ICC matter; but US declined to join ICC.
Most senior military officials oppose torture
because 1) ineffective and 2) deprives us of moral high ground and weakens
claim for others treating our soldiers properly. We have a duty under
treaty (eg torture) to uphold the treaty.
A) Jack Goldsmith head of OLC 2003, looked at
memos of John Yoo, his friend, and withdrew them as unfounded. See
article “The Cheney Fallacy” in Foreign Affairs – policies threatened lives
of Americans – but IG of CIA says torture and interrogation ended in 2004;
then Congress reasserted itself with amendments to the USA PATRIOT and
FISA acts. More than IG claimed did continue though, targeted killings
with drones, wiretapping. Recently released report of IG CIA 2004
– most enhanced interrogations ended then. Secret CIA prisons closed
and not used that much, no evidence they were successful and engendered
opposition from host countries who in some cases did not know they were
there. Holder has appointed special counsel.
Q) What has been prevented through extraordinary measures?
What level of moderate [detention/ interrogation] is permissible?
A) CIA report 2004 said authorization did
not limit what could be done, and some excesses clearly were torture.
It also reported some techniques did result in [unspecified] actionable
intelligence. But we are a democracy that thrives on openness.
Greatest value is open debate and decisionmaking.
Example of overzealous prosecution in security
reaction: Richard Jewel, security guard in Atlanta bombing, suspect put
under surveillance. Later Eric Rudolph was shown to be the perpetrator.
Another lawyer under surveillance for two years – Richard Mayfield – was
suspect and reputation, work and life severely damaged because of 2 fragments
of finger print, even though Madrid analysts did not accept, soon detained
Moroccans with perfect matches.
1 November 2009 (Sunday), additional event:
Gen. Michael Hayden, “The State of American Intelligence.” Former
director of the National Security Agency and Central Intelligence Agency.
location: Taylor center, at Auburn University Montgomery)
Bowen Ballard, Introduction: Hayden part of
the changing world of intelligence, at NSA under FISA complications &
CIA during international terrorist situations. A man who does his
homework, loves family and country, Pittsburgh Steelers, and runs the marathon.
“State of American Intelligence.”
Intelligence is hard work.
Your intelligence services are not doing too badly.
You have a guiding hand in current issues about
Role of intelligence is more important now to
your safety than ever.
Comparison of threat twenty years ago with now.
Rating intelligence analysis from 0 to 10, never need
8-10 because those issues are obvious. Only get the difficult questions.
Then, massed tank armies and massive ICBMs.
Jerry Boykin (3-star, SOF) said those were easy to find, too large to hide
– but hard to kill. Today the opposite, AQ easy to stop and kill
but really hard to find.
Unlike pessimistic intelligence officers, policymakers
and operational officer must be optimistic, can-do.
John McLaughlin, director of CIA’s analysis for years,
said people ask us to find things or explain mysteries. He asked
his J-2 officer = “deuce”. Didn’t know what Milosevic was going to
do, and M. didn’t even know himself.
Importance of context: Bosnia 1993-early ’94 during
bitter fighting in South between Muslims and Croats (catholics) in Mostar,
(“old bridge”). Would Croats fight beyond river, was river a defensible
line. 1054 schism of Christianity occurred at river – so intelligence
officer knew they would stop at river for historic reasons, not because
just it was defensible line.
Declassified intelligence budget at under $50 Billion.
No such thing as an optimistic intelligence officer.
Inherently inductive, general conclusions drawn from facts. Policymakers
use deductive reasoning from principles. Elected because voters choose
Debating whether to double down in Iraq, President
Bush ordered numerous meetings with NS Adviser. Intelligence said
Maliki had no experience of management, and had been in exile. Bush,
however, had a vision of sharing democracy.
Dec. 2007 Bush pressing Iran about nuclear program;
Intelligence brought the published estimate that Iran had stopped developing
nuclear program in 2003 – not a welcome finding at a time of diplomatic
meetings on sanctions. Intelligence has completely different world
view. Can’t deliver news without being part of conversation and process,
must feel their pain, yet remain ruthlessly objective.
Criticisms of not connecting dots, but still have
world’s best intelligence service.
Examples of public successes (although public not
really aware of them).
Clinton administration appointee as Dir. of NSA, but
never heard of a better country’s service.
How to judge intelligence? On a curve?
Fielding average? Absolute standard? This is hard work.
Arrests in GB when at NSA, backroom assistance on
terrorist arrests. British relied on US intelligence for those arrests.
Secret Iranian nuclear uranium enrichment site announced
at Qom. We were on that a long time.
El Kabar Syrian plutonium plant disappeared 6 Sep
Three summers ago British police rolled up plot to
bring bottled liquids on airliners. In 2001 action would have happened
-- but we owned that plot in 2006. They had the peroxide, so time
Najibullah commuting between NY and Texas(?)
Serious plot detected by intelligence.
Small issues: What satellites? Equipment?
Big issues: What is the appropriate role
for secret espionage services in an open democracy? Really hard when
it goes public.
That is not the biggest deal. The macro issue
is to achieve greater transparency and greater accountability – yet still
do a great job.
Used to be PD DNI, April 2006, gave speech in San
Antonio, assessed GWOT with report card, wrote personally. Had published
top secret NIE, extracted key judgments less a few too sensitive, and created
speech. Passed review by others, did not reveal sources and methods.
Called newsmen all over but only two in room, only one news story.
Not newsworthy when about terrorism. In Sep. the same NIE given to
Capitol Hill oversight committees. It began to leak from left and
right, incredible news story – only interesting when about party struggle.
Still puzzled why Obama released memos about interrogation
techniques. Director for 3 weeks under Obama till Panetta confirmed.
Sent memo to staff, new President has told us where box is going to be,
go fight under the new box. Was releasing his predecessor’s position;
later Panetta successor and 5 predecessors unsuccessfully opposed release
of IG report. 7 living former directors of CIA opposed re-investigation
by AG of incidents [in GWOT and Iraq 2003].
“NY FOIA case about to be lost” rationale for release
is untrue, for with same district, judge and ACLU party in 2008, we had
protected technique of waterboarding even though not going to use it again.
CIA was allowed to fight release of other documents, Panetta said again
release would harm national security. Administration let him fight
Hayden wrote CNN website op-ed piece 2 weeks ago.
Harsh post 9/11 world, judge deferred explicitly to DCI. Reluctance
on part of courts to interfere with discretion under mandates of CIA.
Decision to release those memos was a political one not a legal one.
Should be defended on those grounds. Folks at CIA might be forgiven
for fearing noone will get their back on issues like this, will feed flood
of lawsuits, but ACLU is paying PI s to stalk officers and present pics
to Gitmo detainees to see if they can identify them.
It seems to CIA offices that protection of sources
and methods will only last one election cycle.
Reassuring them is like trying to run a pep rally
in the fuhrer bunker. Officers ask, how can I be sure I will not be pulled
through the hole in five years?
Ultimately a matter of how much you want to know about
intelligence. We defend and honor your values.
Church and Pike committee reforms [1970s] – can tell
secrets to 24 committee members in HR and 18 in Senate –but not going real
well now, either.
Relations of intelligence to Houses of Congress is
not part of solution, but part of problem. There is a tremendous
lack of trust.
McConnell hosted oversight discussions with Congressional
members on a Sunday-Monday but when the Wall St Journal
a dark article on Sunday (Monday?), they discussed it immediately.
Members though, refused to defend publicly on behalf of intelligence agencies,
said did not know it was not true. Oversight system in a bad place,
biggest problem. Intelligence agencies are like a football in a highly
charged game going on in Washington.
Q) Can one defend against shipping container
A) cannot simply defend but there is more
to the story. 9/11 was both preventable and inevitable. Penalty kick
is a good metaphor till 9/11: AQ was taking penalty kicks, and US could
have stopped about 9/10 from going into the net. But playing defense
invites eventual failure: one penalty will score. Must play offense.
US did so after 9/11 by capturing and in the euphemistic saying “otherwise
taking them off battlefield.”
The four IGs’ report included line saying could not
show any imminent attack was stopped by interrogation – but that is not
our interest. We need to stop attacks months ahead when they are
at the financial stage, and disrupt the plots.
A) mystery rather than secret as to how
Iranian decision making works. Discovery of Qom tilts me more to
the direction that Iran is developing a weapon: Qom facility is too small
to spin centrifuges, probably for HEU only, highly enriched for weapon
only. Israelis and we look at same facts, strong agreement on facts,
Israelis always take worst case slice [of the range of possibilities].
This is the most serious issue facing US administration now. Mechanics
of action are very difficult, hard nut to crack even for US airpower, let
alone smaller Israeli forces.
Q) How to reform oversight?
A) Take care as to individuals on committee,
merit to picking some intelligence watchdogs from civil liberties perspective,
but right now especially on HR side, point of view is inherently skeptical
of intelligence. Term limits on committees are a bad idea.
Nobody gets a road paved – service on committee only. Questions often
reflect lack of knowledge. Hearing system is horrible, sit lower
or higher, questions are speeches, and there is no continuity.
Q) safeguards against nuclear, chemical and biological
A) police and internal services OK so
far, unlike other countries. US is a hard target. Welcoming
nation with few isolated immigrant communities, more embracing than European
Q) Afghanistan surge of troops, with unknown president
A) Afghan elections will be retaken next
week, but Abdullah Abdullah has recently withdrawn. Hayden is not
inclined to criticize Karzai, does have some good traits, but in very difficult
Q) Info sharing among intelligence agencies.
Obama: War of necessity, not war of choice – he’s
right. If our strategic objective is protecting US, this is legitimate.
CT rhetoric gives a lighter burden on troops than COIN. Unfortunately
President said back in March, operational strategy of COIN was to change
reality on ground – but this is burdensome, more troops and time, plus
messy working with people we are not totally comfortable with.
A) Quicker, more facile, much better.
DNI and NSA don’t always agree, but NCTC does share info well. There
is some data that should not be shared – because once it is out the source
Q) recruitment poor?
Example: Syrian El Kabar reactor destroyed 2007,
became public 2008. Bush wanted reactor to go away but without Mideast
war. CIA minted coin for operation, No Core, no War. Needed
closely guarded secret, because Bashar Assad would be backed into a corner
if public. Had to make sure but could not let it leak. I determined
who could know about this and kept this circle tight – fewer experts in
know – but alternative was a leak. Info sharing not an absolute goal.
Sharing much better, sometimes bureaucratic but usually a good reason.
A) Very good, in fact. Over 3 yrs
at CIA 130-160,000 applied (cannot give number admitted).
Q) Speaker of HR claims to have been misled.
Problem of caution because not knowing where line
is going to be in a few years time.
A) some believe this, not limited by party.
I do not believe they were misled. Sometimes they do not understand,
or get importance for some months. Former director said 4 were in
the room, of which one is deceased and the others willing to raise right
hand and testify.
Q) reactor destroyed, by whom?
A) I have no opinion – but Press says
Top of Page
November 3, 2009: Amb.
Ryan Crocker, "Iraq/AfPak: Retrospects and Prospects." Ambassador
to Pakistan, 2004-2007, Ambassador to Iraq, 2007-2009. Former Ambassador
to Syria, Kuwait, and Lebanon. In the Middle East, he has had his residence
sacked (Damascus) and survived the 1983 bombing of his Embassy (Beirut).
Amb. Crocker opened the U.S. Embassy in Afghanistan in 2002 and was awarded
the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2009.
Prepared Remarks: Nuclear Proliferation
Several pages of diagrams of uranium and other
First atomic device was a game changer for Japanese.
Concern about how you defend against nuclear
Nuclear Weapons Non Proliferation Treaty:
first statement permits 5 nations to own nuclear
Scale of nuclear weapons currently.
Must develop plans to reduce weapons.
Other nations have right to use nuclear materials
for peaceful purposes.
First president to say he would rid the world
of nuclear weapons was Ford. Every one since also.
C20th killed 100 M in war, of which 85M before
1950. Far fewer in the nuclear age.
189 nations have signed, though not North Korea,
Pakistan, India, Israel.
US now has 5,000 and Russians 14,000 warheads–
but they draw a distinction between strategic (long range) and tactical
(short range) delivery systems. Russians face local threats, unlike
US, and unwilling to give up this asymmetry.
Newer nuclear nations:
UK, France and China have much smaller forces.
All except China only have weapons built during
Unlikely that we can reduce below 500 per nation.
Israel special case, surrounded by 30M enemies.
Now have reactor built by French, to produce plutonium.
Their own scientists create the nuclear materials. Never tested.
India has good technological skills, second.
They claim will not be first to use – but also
not the second.
South Africa like Israel,
when felt surrounded, small racial minority-based
Africaaner government built uranium bomb without reactor, obtaining isotope
centrifuges from Holland.
Pakistan’s program, started up by China as a counterweight
Needs thousands of these in stages, but admitted
quite openly to six bombs.
De Klerk had them destroyed when felt regime was
going to fall.
AQ Khan got centrifuge technology, but Chinese
likely would have provided if necessary.
North Korea learned with start from Russia, may have
Iran only interesting one today.
What nations are capable?
Pop 75m, highly educated. Will get and test
a bomb, establish primacy in middle East. Independent of who is governing
Iraq was clearly on the way to building but did not
have any bombs.
Negotiating with them useless, sanctions also.
We should tell the world we can shoot down missiles
in flight. Last week we shot down Scud with an airborne laser.
Now have capability on ships and have done two
dozen test – Japanese have 2 and 2 more coming.
Found and destroyed separation facility in Gulf
war, but they still have people with knowledge.
Libya – never had the program, though there were possible
Saudi – will likely buy from French, as counterweight
Japan, in dangerous neighborhood.
Convinced that Japan could assemble nuclear program
in months, since they face threats and have skills.
Germany in NATO, has nuclear umbrella – but eventually
may face collapse of that umbrella.
Italy, Sweden, Taiwan, South Korea are all in
position where they could develop.
(Anecdotally, Swiss allegedly also have capability.)
Continue to reduce nuclear weapons.
Safety of stockpile issue: the high explosive
that is used to trigger, is inherently unstable.
Continually improve detection and monitoring of
explosions, including those unannounced.
Develop credible defenses against missiles.
USS Lake Erie shot down first missile from sea,
limited capability – but have Aegis cruisers in Black Sea and gulf, can
shoot down missiles from Iran.
Diplomacy has its limits, but defenses give leverage.
Iranian government will not stop own program.
Detection methods at border crossings improved
and successful in tests.
Develop intelligence ability to penetrate covert
proliferation programs – has begun.
Never built nuclear weapon with a shelf life,
always took out each generation every 2-3 years when developed new ones.
Weapons never designed to be on the shelf for 17 years. Opening up
deployed weapons, we found problems. Just getting started on refurbishing
New designs will have shelf life of 25 years,
and safety features. Build with high probability of working without
Program cancelled by President Obama, but will
need to be restarted.
Buy up Soviet nuclear weapons? Old Buckley
Electro-magnetic pulse weapons?
Nuclear weapon detonation in upper atmosphere
causes large effect – in 1962 it knocked out traffic lights in Honolulu.
Minor damage only, power system continued to function.
Inspection of IAEA is for strategic weapons only,
on long range 5,000 miles. Russians’ shorter range weapons are not
under this regime. Therefore we know little about them.
Not militarily useful effect.
Proliferation by ourselves and others?
Perry, Kissinger, Shultz, Nunn all called for
riddance of nuclear weapons. Presidents all call for riddance because
required by terms of treaty. Destroying our weapons would not cause
Iranians to stop their developments, because they have other issues.
Scale of technology of current weapons?
Iranians have a few but need a reliable delivery
system. Weapons are too big and too hot for a suitcase. Trucks
through Laredo subject to quite good detection systems. Every country
making weapons is also making rockets to deliver them.
Will Israelis try to destroy Iranian capability?
Nuclear complex is so large that IDF would not
have ability to destroy them. 50 or so nuclear facilities.
Do bombs have signatures?
Yes, isotopes give fingerprints of weapon.
US in his time was able to trace every bomb to every maker.
Iran will test a bomb in the next few years.
Real concern in cold war, mostly about computer
glitches. One alert came when Sec AF, 2 missiles detected from USSR,
alerted bombers, then 22, then 222 – so Colorado realized a technical glitch
because of regular increases. Lesser problem now because we do not
have thousands of missiles on hair-trigger alert
Nuclear security in Pakistan, when regime deteriorating?
Under pressure from terrorist organizations and
Taliban (local but not terrorist organization). US high official
has gone to discuss nuclear security with Pakistani officials. But
a terrorist in custody of weapon could do little (heavy and complex).
Real problem would be a government controlled by an Osama Bin Laden figure
(likewise if Iran taken by OBL type leader).
Top of Page
April 6, 2010: Dr. William
Moomaw, "Energy, National Security & Climate Change".
Introduction: IPCC honored with Nobel 2007.
Professor of International Environment
Policy and Director of the Center for International Environment and Resource
Policy, Tufts University. Expert on Global Warming and graduate of Lanier
High School. Co-founder and co-director of the Climate Talks Project.
* Founding Director of the Center
for International Environment and Resource Policy at the Fletcher School
of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University
* Since 1992, lead author of the
U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
* In 1988, became the first director
of the Climate and Energy Program at the World Resources Institute
* Has worked with numerous countries
on a range of global environmental issues
* 1955 graduate of Lanier High School;
PhD in Chemistry from MIT
also notes of his speech to Huntingdon College class, earlier that day
Topic: Energy, National Security and Climate Change
National security depends on energy but climate
change has national security implications.
Graph: growth of world energy consumption, 25%
1973 gas lines found us unprepared. Only plan
was in Shell Oil which had contingency planning.
Graph: non-OECD energy (BRIC, Venezuela) use overtook
(2006) and growing faster than OECD, from 2004 onwards.
US and OECD have agreed to share oil reserves
in event of new oil shock.
Graph: China and India driving energy use and
exceed US by 2010.
Graph: US dropped energy after 1973 and again
after Iranian oil shock 1980-83. Then steady growth of usage until
2009 drop. Petroleum fluctuates, others steady (nuclear) or steady
growth. Renewables steady and about equal to nuclear electric.
US imports more now from non-OPEC, including Canada
and Russia (Alberta now the Texas of Canada).
Petroleum imports rising to US rapidly and steadily
as US production slowly declines.
Oil production in lower 48 states peaked in 1975,
Offshore drilling now is only 3 years worth of
supply for the US and will not arrive for six years.
Coal is biggest in US followed by natural gas
and nuclear – by 70% of nuclear is just heat, only 30% electricity.
Coal only 32% efficient and old plants are locked
in by clean air laws – new plants must meet new standards.
Chinese plants are 45% efficient and closing old
We must do likewise.
Most middle East oil goes to Europe and Asia,
not US, but we have to keep sea lanes open since oil is a commodity.
Reserves in middle East dwarf reserves in north
America (10 years worth)
Graph: 1985, production exceeded discovery for
the first time, and now 5x the rate of discovery, expected to worsen greatly.
Peak oil predicted now to 2020, approximately,
and used now in official reports.
Now 250 M vehicles in US; China produced 10 M
last year, exceeded US production of cars.
1980s stagflation caused by oil shocks of 1970s.
2008 US spent $half trillion for foreign oil.
Gas price at US pumps rising steadily again.
Condi Rice testified oil power is distorting international
Tensions: US with North Korea, Iran over nuclear
Climate change: weather patterns changing in
systematic manner consistent with global warming.
Conflicting claims for offshore oil and gas: China,
Taiwan Japan, Koreas and SE Asia.
Military fuel needs.
Jan 2004 NY Times revealed UK government, not
only US, considered taking oil fields by force if embargo did not run down.
US has 3 strategic oil reserves.
USAF looking at alternative fuels and improved
USAF has jet that flies on biomass fuel.
Heat trapping gases in atmosphere from fossil
fuels – shown from 40 year trends.
Are these variations natural or man made?
Data from 7,000 stations, many remote locations,
satellites: testing air, water and ice.
Graph: Land-Ocean Temp index from NASA,
Japan, UK: similar patterns.
1988 Reagan admin set up IPCC for scientists
to analyze climate change data, latest is 2007, massive set of pages and
8 degrees lower was ice age, 8 degrees more would
produce unknown results.
Spikes of el Nino years. Energy stored in water
and then released. El Nino off Peru predicts corn crop in Zimbabwe, remarkable.
Ten year and 25 year trends show constant rise, despite
Critics found a mistake: sentence in volume
two has incorrect date.
2007 conclusion: most increase "very likely"
Sentence was not in part of document that drove policy
– and only one of 18,000 sentences.
Scientists get no salary, volunteer and receive only
Individuals, not representing nations or corporations.
Global CO2 emissions from fossil fuels
match worst case scenario of predictions from 2000 report.
Climate change is already causing damage:
CO2 traps heat like a car windshield.
Oceans and forests absorb half of what we produce.
Half life of carbon is 100 years.
Mauna Loa observatory shows steady increase of CO2
in atmosphere since 1960.
1,000 year data on temp shows steady until
1900, then dramatic increase.
CO2 concentration over 1,000s of years correlates
with estimated temp. Temp rises before CO2 as earth wobbles in orbit.
Does not correlate with sun, but delay of decades
until heat is released from ocean into air.
Graph: sea levels gauged and satellite sensed
are at worst case of IPCC predictions.
more hot days, more droughts, forest fires,
coastal erosion, more intensity of hurricanes,
glaciers melting and retreating compared to old photos,
sea level rising.
Arctic ice shrinking steadily and freighter sailed
across arctic sea for first time recently. Worse than IPCC’s worst
Insurance industry: destructive weather
caused 88% of all property damage. 7 of 10 most expensive catastrophes
in US occurred after 2000.
Defense QDR 2010 features climate change.
Concerned about bases affected by sea level, including base in Indian ocean
only 2-3’ above sea level.
Unstable governments expected from environmental impacts,
including displacement of many people.
Energy Efficiency is a force multiplier, reduces vulnerable
DOD is largest energy consumer in US, largest user
of fossil fuels in world.
CAN likewise pointed to fuel as a security risk.
US has no [surface] vessel that can operate in arctic
– not Canadians either, only Russians have icebreaker ships.
Shift away from fossil fuels is coming,
for energy, economic and military security.
Actions to address to address climate change
coming for reasons of national security and well as to lower the damage
in the economy.
Brazilian oil not so surprising because of similarity
to western Africa.
2% of world energy from wind now, and Chinese
doubling every 5 years.
How do you sell sure economic pain for only “likely”
Is nuclear power feasible with alternative isotopes?
Scientific term “very likely” actually means 90% certain.
Contrast with buying home fire insurance with one
risk in 300 years.
Why did Obama open up East and West coast drilling?
Will it make much difference? May have been political step.
Skeptical with existing isotopes, but government needs
to pay 80% in order to restart building.
Only 2% of development has been with alternative isotopes,
so little is known.
Is there a magic bullet for energy? Perhaps
Hybrid vehicles and energy efficient houses (Germany,
10% of consumption).
Have to reduce emissions 80% by 2050, at 4% compounded
Now can measure global heating from greenhouse
gases on planets and their moons.
What car and house do you use? Prius hybrid and
zero energy house with solar panels on grid.
US household sector alone uses more carbon than
any entire country except China.
Top of Page
May 4, 2010: Senior Air
War College Instructors will report on their recent trips to hot spots
around the globe, as part of the AWC's Regional Studies Program.
Moderator: Dr. Mark Conversino
Dr. Mark Conversino: Russia & Ukraine
Dr. Chris Hemmer: Israel & Egypt
Dr. Alexander Lassner: Austria, Hungary, &
Mark Conversino, PhD, Dean of AWC, "Euro-Asian
tour of Russia, Ukraine and the Baltic."
index | Asia | Europe
| Middle East
Alex Lassner, “Central Europe, and Europe as a
In 2009, Russian invasion of Georgia prevented tour.
In 2008, new wealth had already left parts of Moscow like Vegas.
Russia: Legitimacy of Putin’s regime based on (1)
economic growth and (2) security in face of Chechen and North Caucasus.
Both have been challenged lately.
Crossed border at night from Estonia, to Moscow, Kiev
(1) 1998 economy bottomed out at under $5,000 at PPP,
rose to $16,000 in 2008 – great recovery, but 2009 lost $1,000 in PPP.
Russians realized they had had growth without development, 2/3 based on
high prices of oil and gas; and piled up cash -- then ran it down in economic
contraction. Much worse in Russia than in US, beggars reappeared
and construction projects were stopped.
(2) March bombings by Chechen black widows – after
Russians had mistakenly declared end of war in Chechnya – and homeland
attacks had doubled in a year. Even state-controlled media questioned
administration. Has raised issue of whether Medvedev would be replaced.
Large and sometimes violent protests across country.
Ukraine: turning back to East.
No longer policy to join NATO, remain non-aligned;
though still interested in EU. Russia feeling good about rollback
of ‘color revolutions’ in Georgia and Ukraine.
Russia remains veto wielding member of UN SC, holds
oil and gas, has determined and ruthless leadership intent on great power
But suffers overreliance on raw materials; crumbling
infrastructure; declining population (losing over 1M per year). Average
life of a man is 59 yrs. Abortions common. Death rate outstrips
third world countries.
East of Urals only 25 M pop; in long term could lose
control of territory, with possibly a failed state.
National interests, EU policies and interests, and
NATO interests. Afghan and security vs Russians, missile defense.
Germany most important economic unit, military resources
third in EU. Supporting Afghan war with third largest contingent,
but hindered by historical legacy. Affects politics whenever German
losses or accidental losses of civilians. Even small tactical activities
could result in fall of government. Germans are finally recognizing
they are involved in a war; Germans reliable partner in low intensity combat
but might leave in future (like Canadians). Austrians and Swiss exceptions;
others involved in Afghan.
Polish have no caveats on activities, unusual.
Eastern Europeans have high proportionate commitments to Afghan.
All have brittle governments, and war is deeply unpopular across EU.
Poland, Czech and Hungary. Suspicious of Russians,
especially since invasion of GA. Dependent on Russian gas and oil
(cut off by Russians 3 times). Discomforted by German bilateral energy
deals with Russia, via North Sea, bypassing Poland. Developing security
policy on energy, if not yet coherent. Hungary is storing energy
to survive 6 month cutoff by Russians.
Missile defense halted by Obama administration abruptly;
not decision but its method agitated them (bilateral talks US/Russia in
secret). Politicians lost face.
Populations becoming more EU oriented, so next generation
of politicians (except Poland) less interested in missile defense.
PIGS: no longer control own central bank policies,
ECB sets damaging interest rates, Greece insolvent, issue of bailout.
Likely to spread to Ireland and Spain, Italy and even Austria. Beginning
of major economic crisis – hence less support for Afghanistan war budgets.
Real threat to European engagement elsewhere. Firebombs in streets
of Greece, will also spread.
Bodes ill for future US relations with Europe.
Immigration problem, not yet handled by European states.
Chris Hemmer, “Israel /Palestine.”
Historical German map shows Israel center of three
leaves of Europe, Asia and Africa.
No peace and no process. Fights in Gaza, air
Gaza: removed settlers 2005 and forces. Palestinian
rocket attacks led to bomb shelters in parks of Sderot (illustrated).
Israelis decided to “mow the lawn” with force in Gaza, not solving problem
but routine maintenance. Fence (Israel) or wall (Palestinians) is
known by US as “barrier”. Living without a solution, while containing
2004 Arafat died; 2005 Abbas elected; 2006 Hamas won
parliamentary elections; 2007 Palestinian civil war. June 2007 the
power sharing broke down. US general (pictured) has been training
Fatah fighters, in control of West Bank -- whereas Hamas controls Gaza.
Problem of party majority coalition:
Israelis Knesset (120 members) needs 61 vote majority.
Likud only has 27 and ruling Kadima party of Netinyahu only has 28 alone,
needs 13 Labor votes (require peace process) plus 11 Shas votes (opposed
to peace process).
Problem is not light at end of tunnel; there is no
tunnel. Final settlement plan with two-state solution on 1967 lines,
and sharing of Jerusalem is widely agreed – but parties unable to develop
tunnel to get there. Conflict shows no sign of ending.
European debt issues?
IMF (and hence US) is involved in EU debt issues.
Greece will have to default, unable to pay back debt. 15-20% loss
of income required for paying off debt. Even small loss causes riots
in streets, as seen this week. 11% of GDP debt exceeds 3% limit for
EU membership. Ratings agencies just downgraded Spain and Ireland.
Political will is an issue: Greeks and Germans are
at each other’s throats on this issue. Greek paper recently stirred
up tensions (put swastika on front page image of German monument) – German
media recently retaliated (with image of Venus de Milo giving finger to
Russian invasion of Georgia alarmed Baltic states,
who still refer to Russian occupation after their guerilla war 1945-52
against Russian troops. Russians have never come to terms with their
brutality; hammer and sickle treated like Swastika in the Baltics.
Eastern Europeans want US materiel on their soil to
help US protect them and do not otherwise view Afghan as vital to their
Importance of Iran to all three regional tours?
Iraq (as glue) had held Iran and Israel together –
but with removal of Saddam, Israelis then faced Iran. Post 2003,
Israelis warned of Iran and Iran warned of Israelis actions in Palestine.
Iran emphasizes this because they are a Shia and Persian nation in Arab
and Sunni middle East.
Russians realized they had ‘stepped in it’ by supplying
lucrative nuclear materials to Iran, which obliged west to negotiate with
them. A Russian colonel described it as suicide to give them weapon
that could be transferred to Chechens. There seemed to be a tacit
agreement -- but now changing tone of policy, more cautious on supporting
Weakness of Euro currency?
Euro, thanks to weakness of US economy, has been overvalued
for a year, perhaps 30%. Populations unable to move to jobs because
of cultural barriers. Will have to restructure Euro or remove countries
from Eurozone. Berlusconi argues Italy should not be held hostage
Top of Page