SUMMARY, ANALYSIS, PUBLICATIONS, AND ARTICLES
Think Tanks Activity Summary
(For further details, scroll down to the PUBLICATIONS section)
The Heritage Foundation looks at the reasons Russia attacked the Ukraine ships this week. They note, “there is another reason that has likely contributed to the outburst in the Kerch Strait: Russian President Vladimir Putin’s approval rating. Ever since Russia passed unwelcome pension reforms earlier this year, Putin’s approval rating has been at an all-time low. To boost his rating and distract Russian citizens from the poor socioeconomic situation at home, Putin likely called for aggressive military actions in the Kerch Strait. That worked four years ago. In 2013, Putin’s approval rating stood at 54 percent. Then, when Russia invaded and illegally annexed Crimea in 2014, his rating skyrocketed to 83 percent. Later this week in Buenos Aires, Argentina, the Group of 20 will be holding a summit at which President Donald Trump and Putin are supposed to meet. However, Trump should not give him the privilege. In refusing to meet, it would make clear to Putin that Russia’s aggressive actions against Ukraine are unlawful. More than half of the Azov Sea’s coastline lawfully belongs to Ukraine, and Russia must provide access to Ukraine’s ships.”
The Heritage Foundation looks at limiting arms sales to Bahrain over the war in Yemen. The arguments are the same for not cutting off Saudi Arabia arms shipments. They note, “Advocates of the arms cutoff apparently believe that they can somehow “end” the war through a one-sided strategy of depriving America’s allies of U.S.-provided weapons. But this is not a one-sided war. Iran and its Yemeni allies have a vote, and clearly intend to keep fighting against Yemen’s government. It is delusional to think that the Yemenis, who have been fighting for years, will end the bloodletting because Bahrain, a minor member of the Saudi-led coalition, has been singled out for a humiliating arms cutoff. The war will go on, with or without U.S. weapons. But depriving Bahrain of arms that it requires for its own defense will undermine U.S. national interests by weakening ties to a major non-NATO ally, giving a psychological boost to Iran, and encouraging the Houthis to continue to drag their feet on peace talks.”
The Foreign Policy Research Institute looks at the Khashoggi murder and what it says about the American media and policy making in Washington. They conclude, “Foreign and national security policymaking has always been an elite, professionalized affair for the most part, and except perhaps in wartime it didn’t matter much whether typical citizens understood how it was done. Now that this once-cloistered domain has entered the age of Trump, the chasm of comprehension between those responsible for this business as their day job and nearly everybody else has widened beyond hope of measurement. And the mainstream media, which once felt responsible for narrowing that chasm to the extent possible, has switched sides. It has all but abandoned the burden of making calm distinctions and has instead mostly resigned itself to decorating the blur. That, ultimately, is what the Khashoggi affair means.”
The CSIS looks at the jihadist threat. The report notes, “These findings suggest that there is still a large pool of Salafi-jihadist and allied fighters willing and able to use violence to achieve their goals. Every U.S. president since 9/11 has tried to move away from counterterrorism in some capacity, and it is no different today. Balancing national security priorities in today’s world needs to happen gradually. For the United States, the challenge is not that U.S. officials are devoting attention and resources to dealing with state adversaries like Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. These countries present legitimate threats to the United States at home and abroad. Rather, the mistake would be declaring victory over terrorism too quickly and, as a result, shifting too many resources and too much attention away from terrorist groups when the threat remains significant.”
The Carnegie Endowment looks at how the new Democratic Congress can defend democracy abroad. They note, “But given how Trump has ratcheted up his anti-democratic messaging during his second year in office, the new Congress will need to do more than hold the line. It will need to innovate to keep U.S. democracy policy alive. Lawmakers can rise to the challenge in three ways: 1) Enact creative legislation to punish autocrats. Given how Trump has cheered on the authoritarian behavior of leaders from the Philippines’ President Rodrigo Duterte to Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, would-be autocrats increasingly assume that they have been given carte blanche. Congress can show them otherwise…2) Support pro-democracy diplomacy. Legislators should push for the restoration of government positions and capacities essential to democracy work. They should confirm the administration’s nominee for assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights, and labor and push the administration to fill key supporting roles, including democracy-focused positions on the National Security Council…3) Bolster public diplomacy for democracy by giving greater priority and visibility to meeting with democratic leaders, activists, and allies from abroad. In doing so, Congress can take on the traditional role that the White House has given up of showing U.S. support for democratic principles by publicly embracing foreign pro-democratic figures.”
Russian – Ukrainian Incident Increases International Tension
The success of this week’s G-20 meeting is threatened by the increasing tensions between the Ukraine and Russia.
Russian military forces opened fire on three Ukrainian ships off the coast of Crimea, rammed one of them, and seized all three. The ships were manned by 23 crew members. Ukrainian authorities say between three and six have been injured.
Russia claims the boats had illegally entered its sovereign waters. However, what we do know is that the Ukrainian vessels – two gunboats and a tugboat – were sailing from Odessa around the Crimean Peninsula in the Black Sea, headed toward the Kerch Strait and Mariupol on the north bank of the Sea of Azov. A 2003 treaty between Ukraine and Russia guarantees both nations the right to use the Kerch Strait and Azov Sea for commercial purposes. The same treaty allows either nation to use the waters to transport military vessels so long as the transporting nation notifies the other. A Russian oil tanker nonetheless blocked the ships from passing through the strait, fighter jets passed overhead as if the ships were an invading force, and Russian troops boarded and took control of the ships.
Ukraine insists that it notified Russia of the tiny fleet, and there is no reason to doubt its statement. Russia claims that the ships “crossed the Russian state border and illegally entered the temporarily closed waters of the Russian territorial sea.”
Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko warned Tuesday of a “full-scale war,” a day after he claimed to “have serious grounds to believe Russia is ready to follow with a ground attack.” Also, on Tuesday, the Russian Defense Ministry announced that it had “begun testing the readiness of formations and military units of the Southern Military District,” a region that includes the disputed Crimea and borders parts of Ukraine. Military trucks were spotted transporting the 3K60 Bal coastal defense missile system toward Crimea.
Given the G-20 meeting this weekend, this is likely a test. Russian President Vladimir Putin wants to know how far the United States is willing to go to check Russian projecting power. Reuters notes, “The episode risks derailing a meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin at the G20 in Argentina later this week. Trump said on Tuesday that he might cancel the meeting due to the incident, but the Kremlin said on Wednesday it thought it was still on.”
(But later aboard Air Force One, on route to the summit, Trump announced the cancelation of the meeting.)
Trump says ‘‘based on the fact that the ships and sailors have not been returned to Ukraine from Russia, I have decided it would be best for all parties concerned to cancel my previously scheduled meeting in Argentina with President Vladimir Putin. I look forward to a meaningful Summit again as soon as this situation is resolved!’’
On March 2014, Moscow annexed the Crimean Peninsula under the pretense of protecting a pro-Russian minority. Russia now considers Crimea part of Russia, although Ukraine and others holds it to be an illegal annexation. More than 10,000 have died in the conflict. The fighting goes on despite the Minsk II ceasefire signed in February 2015.
Ukraine has responded to this quiet invasion by increasing its military preparedness. The eastern European nation has doubled the size of its military in just four years: It now has around 250,000 active-duty soldiers and roughly 80,000 reservists. They are also better equipped. In 2017 the Trump administration began the sale of lethal defensive weapons to Ukraine.
This means that at any moment Crimea and eastern Ukraine could explode into a large-scale hot war between proxies of the United States and Russia. Vladimir Putin wants to consolidate his gains in Ukraine and has every reason to precipitate a low-level crisis in order to find out how far America is ready to go.
How did the United States respond to Black Sea incident? U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley issued a robust criticism of Russia’s aggression. But she’s leaving the administration.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s condemnation included forceful language but lacked any specific promise of consequences.
Trump’s own comments were mild: “We do not like what’s happening either way,” Trump said while leaving the White House. “And hopefully it will get straightened out.”
Russian dissident Garry Kasparov condemned the weak response and said how the US reacts will be critical, “Putin will scan this looking for ‘unless Russia…’ or ‘if Russia doesn’t comply…’ and, seeing nothing like that, he will continue as planned…Translate this U.S. statement on Russia’s latest act of war against Ukraine into dictator-speak, Putin’s language: ‘We aren’t going to do anything about it.’ That’s how he will read it.”
However, Putin isn’t taking chances. Russia has announced plans to deploy more of its advanced S-400 surface-to-air missile systems to Crimea.
“A division size of Russia’s S-400 Triumph air defense system has undergone tests and will soon be put on combat duty in Crimea,” the Southern Military District’s press service said on Wednesday.
The personnel of the air defense missile unit of the 4th army of the Air Force and the Southern Military District deployed to Crimea has started preparing the equipment to be transported by rail to a permanent base. “In the near future, the new system will enter combat duty to defend Russia’s airspace, replacing the previous air defense system,” the spokesman explained.
Adding to tensions, Reuters has further reported that a Russian warship has been dispatched to the Sea of Azov.
But this skirmish impacts NATO because Russia has made a habit of initiating challenging actions against NATO nations. In May of this year several Russian Navy (and probably Air Force) jets, including Su-30SM Flanker derivative and Su-24 Fencer jets flew in the vicinity of British HMS Duncan, which was 30 nautical miles from the Crimea.
In 2017, Su-24s attack jets flew close to the Royal Netherlands Navy Frigate HNLMS Evertsen, operating in the Baltic Sea,
In Apr. 2016, some Su-24s performed as many as 20 overflights, (as low as 100 feet and 11 “very low simulated attack”) within 1,000 yards of the USS Donald Cook in the Baltic Sea. Two years earlier, in April 2014, a Russian Su-24MR, flew within 1,000 yards of the very same US Navy destroyer that was operating in the Black Sea following the crisis in Ukraine. At that time, a show of force was considered “provocative and inconsistent with international agreements.”
On Thursday last week, the Belgian Navy command ship Godetia was participating in a minesweeping mission, when it was surprised by the low-level flyover of two Russian Su-24s in the Baltic Sea. A Belgian frigate (F931 Louise-Marie) operating in the same area had to temporarily suspend an Air Defense exercise and keep an eye on the Su-24 “threat” to the other Belgian vessel.
At the same time, NATO nations are supporting the Ukraine. Earlier this year, the Defense Department approved a $200 million military aid package to Ukrainian forces, bringing the total amount of American weapons and equipment sent to support Kiev’s fight against Russian-backed separatists in the country to $1 billion.
The military support package will include new “capabilities to enhance Ukraine’s command and control, situational awareness systems, secure communications, military mobility, night vision, and military medical treatment,” according to a Pentagon statement.
Pentagon officials have also agreed to provide “cooperation funds for additional training, equipment and advisory efforts to build the defensive capacity of Ukraine’s forces,” as part of the effort, the statement says.
The Trump administration also told Congress that it plans to sell Ukraine 210 anti-tank missiles to help it defend its territory from Russia.
Just two months ago on Sept. 27, the U.S. Coast Guard signed off on providing two patrol boats to Ukraine within the next year.
And on Nov. 21, Britain announced it would provide Ukraine even more troops than promised back in September.
That’s not all. Russia’s Izvestia newspaper reported that Kiev had been trying to persuade Washington – so far unsuccessfully – to open a military base in Ukraine.” However, Reuters, noted it could not be independently confirmed.
The reality is that the Ukraine needs NATO assistance in any confrontation with Russia. The Ukrainian armed forces, which were placed on high alert Monday, were composed of about 250,000 personnel, including about 204,000 troops, according to the Ukrainian Defense Ministry, a figure dwarfed by 1.9 million Russian military personnel, a 2018 estimate that includes some 1,013,628 servicemen. Russian military expenditures also topped off in 2017 at $66.3 billion as compared to Ukraine’s $3.6 billion, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
Russia also commands the world’s largest tank army with some 20,000 armored vehicles and the Ukrainian government claimed last year that the number of Russian tanks covertly operating in support of rebels in Ukraine alone numbered some 680, a figure that would outrank the tank forces of the United Kingdom and Germany combined.
As for the Ukrainian navy, much of its ships were lost when Russia gained control of Crimea and three more have been seized in Sunday’s incident. Though Russia lost its sole aircraft carrier in a floating drydock incident late last month, the Black Sea Fleet has dozens of warships and the navy was set to receive 26 more vessels by the end of this year. Commentator Michael Bociurkiw argued Wednesday in a CNN op-ed that Ukraine was “woefully unprepared to wage a fight with Russia at sea” and that a Russian amphibious assault on the Azov coastline “would face little opposition.”
Dozens of Ukrainian aircraft were also taken in the annexation of Crimea. Even in Ukrainian hands, however, many of these planes were deemed unable to fly. David Axe of the War Is Boring blog writing in April 2014 that “16 Su-27s, 24 MiG-29s, 35 Su-24s and 24 Su-25s were flight worthy at the time of the Russian annexation” a month earlier and that “just 15 percent of the air force’s planes were combat-ready,” citing a local survey.
A more recent assessment authored by Mykola Bielieskov last month found that—following a deadly Su-27UB1M crash involving a Ukrainian pilot and a U.S. pilot—”the Ukrainian Air Force is left with seventeen Su-27s, in addition to twenty-one MiG-29 Fulcrums, a tactical fighter comparable to the F-16.” He added: “It also can muster thirteen Su-25 Frogfoot ground-attack jets, a dozen Su-24 supersonic bombers, and forty-six L-39 jet trainers which can serve in the light attack role.” It also has several heavy transport planes, reconnaissance aircraft and helicopters.
The Defense Intelligence Agency’s 2017 Russia Military Power report detailed the country’s air power as comprising of a vast array of equipment including 141 bombers, 420 fighters, 345 fighter ground-attack aircraft, 215 attack jets, 32 electronic intelligence aircraft, 22 airborne warning and control aircraft, 6 command and control aircraft, 15 tankers, 122 heavy transport planes and 198 trainers. More modernized aircraft have begun entering service as of this year.
Although the Ukraine is friendly with most NATO nations, without NATO membership, the Western military alliance has no obligation to intervene on Ukraine’s behalf, potentially leaving the nation to face Russia on its own.
However, NATO support of the Ukraine doesn’t mean Russia will lose any military engagement with the West. NATO forces in Eastern Europe are just a fraction of what Russia can field. Not only will they outnumbered, it will be difficult to reinforce them should hostilities break out against Russia and NATO.
This is where the G-20 meeting in Argentina and the possibility of a meeting between Trump and Putin becomes important.
Putin is paying close attention to how Trump and the US reacts. If Trump meets Putin and acts like nothing is happening, expect Putin to push the Ukraine harder.
The deployment of a destroyer or frigate to the Black Sea may make Putin more circumspect in his action. However, a couple of American Navy ships in the Black Sea can do little in a military confrontation, because they would be seriously outnumbered.
A more important move would be to deploy US Army units to Ukraine for “training” and maneuvers. Although these can’t stop Russia, they will act as a “trip wire” that Russia may not want to cross. NATO can also move ground units to Eastern NATO nations that could be moved to the Ukraine in a crisis.
Don’t expect sanctions to stop Russia. Speaking before the VTB Capital forum in Moscow on Wednesday, Putin wryly explained that by implementing sanctions on Russia and other countries, Washington is effectively “shooting itself not in the foot but a bit higher.”
He clearly made the case that aggressive US punitive measures against its rivals is undermining confidence in the dollar.
Putin explained, “We are not setting the target of moving away from the dollar – the dollar is moving away from us, and those who take respective [sanctions] decisions are shooting themselves not just in the foot, but slightly higher, as such instability in calculations in dollars creates a desire of many global economies to find alternative reserve currencies and create settlement systems independent of the dollar.”
Putin also reminded Trump that Europe might not be willing to push Russia over the Crimea by noting that sanctions against Russia would lead to the loss of 400,000 jobs in Europe. Any NATO action might threaten natural gas supplies as Europe heads into winter.
In the end, it is more likely that the current situation will calm down. However, it’s not guaranteed that calmer heads will prevail. We have only to look at World War One a century ago to realize that it’s quite possible for rational politicians to march the world into a major war.
Senate Move to Block Arms Sales to Bahrain Would Undermine U.S. Interests
By James Phillips
November 16, 2018
The Senate is set to vote Thursday on a resolution of disapproval that would block the sale of what advocates describe as “offensive weapons” to Bahrain, an important U.S. ally that faces deadly threats from Iran. Advocates of the ban argue that this denial would somehow ease the humanitarian suffering in Yemen. In reality, it will have no such impact and would produce a host of unintended consequences. Yemen has been engulfed in a slow-motion civil war for more than a decade. That war has accelerated in recent years due to Iranian military support for the Houthi rebels, which provoked a 2015 military intervention by a Saudi-led Arab coalition. The Houthi militia, a radical Shia group that increasingly has fallen under Iran’s baleful influence, has inflicted humanitarian suffering on its Yemeni opponents and continues to launch Iranian-supplied ballistic missiles at civilian targets in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
Read more at:
Why Russia’s Latest Aggression Against Ukraine Could Be Aimed at Boosting Putin
By Alexis Mrachek
November 27, 2018
Russian Federal Security Service border patrol boats opened fire Nov. 25 on three Ukrainian maritime vessels—two navy artillery ships and a tugboat—in a standoff in the Kerch Strait, a narrow body of water connecting the Black Sea and Azov Sea. Russia struck two of the vessels and wounded six crew members in the process. The Russians then boarded and seized the three Ukrainian naval ships. The incident followed an earlier clash that morning between the Russian Federal Security Service border patrol boats and the same three Ukrainian vessels. According to Kyiv, a Federal Security Service boat purposely rammed the Ukrainian navy tugboat, which was attempting to reach the Kerch Strait and enter the Azov Sea, causing damage to the tugboat’s “engine, outer hull, and guardrail.”
The Evolution of the Salafi-Jihadist Threat
By Seth G. Jones and Danika Newlee
Center for Strategic and International Studies
November 20, 2018
Despite nearly two decades of U.S.-led counterterrorism operations, there are nearly four times as many Sunni Islamic militants today as there were on September 11, 2001. Based on a CSIS data set of groups, fighters, and violence, the regions with the largest number of fighters are Syria (between 43,650 and 70,550 fighters), Afghanistan (between 27,000 and 64,060), Pakistan (between 17,900 and 39,540), Iraq (between 10,000 and 15,000), Nigeria (between 3,450 and 6,900), and Somalia (between 3,095 and 7,240). Attack data indicates that there are still high levels of violence in Syria and Iraq from Salafi-jihadist groups, along with significant violence in such countries and regions as Yemen, the Sahel, Nigeria, Afghanistan, and Somalia.
Three Ways the New Congress Can Defend Democracy Abroad
By THOMAS CAROTHERS and FRANCES Z. BROWN
NOVEMBER 16, 2018
While the new U.S. Congress will face deep divides on many issues, it does have a chance to act on one issue upon which both sides broadly agree: supporting democracy abroad. Under President Donald Trump, U.S. government support for democracy around the world has reached its lowest ebb in forty years. Many American diplomats and aid providers diligently continue to defend democracy overseas. But their leader’s praise for dictators, disdain for U.S. liberal allies, and anti-democratic outbursts at home have undercut these efforts. Despite this, the 116th Congress can and should step up to reaffirm the United States’ decades-old commitment to supporting democracy around the world. By passing new and useful legislation, encouraging pro-democracy diplomacy, and showing its support for democratic leaders and activists, Congress can help mitigate the damage Trump has inflicted in this arena.
What the Khashoggi Affair Tells Us about American Journalism, Politics, and Policymaking in the Age of Trump
By: Adam Garfinkle
Foreign Policy Research Institute
November 28, 2018
The murder of Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul on October 2 has tripped off one of the grandest cascades of news copy, electronic and print, in many recent weeks, and perhaps even many months. Why is that? Several reasons come to mind. First, the deed itself was both gruesome and spectacular, surprising and utterly beyond the pale of civilized diplomatic protocol. Mainstream media markets in the United States and, less so in the main in the West generally, love that sort of thing because it registers high on the all-critical shock meter. The fact that Khashoggi allegedly entered the Consulate in order to secure a document necessary to enable his marriage to a Turkish woman, knowingly putting himself at some risk as she tells the tale, just makes the plotline juicier for an audience that has become increasingly challenged by the task of untangling reality from fiction (of which more below). Then there ensued for several days an undulating uncertainty about what actually happened, revelations of the existence of surreptitious Turkish tapes promising to reveal the Truth, and the subsequent lateral entry of the CIA into the investigatory mix amid howls of righteous indignation from assorted congressmen and journalists. So the plot thickened, the decibel level rose, and the drama intensified. Think of it: murder and much blood courtesy of a bone saw; love and certainly sex implied; Oriental intrigue, jet-set hit squads, and high-tech eavesdropping in diplomatic inner sancta: This is market share manna from entertainment heaven for mainstream media. No wonder they played it to the hilt.