When Do They Plan the Exit?

In his speech from West Point on Tuesday, President Obama is planning to talk about sending more troops to Afghanistan and a strategy for getting them out. It sounds like the military is already gearing up for more intense fighting. I’m skeptical about where the exit strategy will fit into all this.

The Internet and How We Think

Peggy Orenstein, writing in the New York Times a couple of weeks ago, said something about the Internet that has stuck with me.

The promise is of infinite knowledge, but what’s delivered is infinite information, and the two are hardly the same.

She goes on to talk about how too much data thrown at us all at once actually shuts down our ability to process it and learn, and how easy it is to be distracted by an Internet connection.

Having the ability to surf endlessly trains our minds to follow ideas down rabbit holes rather than thinking them through. It encourages multitasking, which research has shown is a less efficient way to think.

Perhaps it’s a testament to how much a child of the Internet that I am that this article leads me in a couple of different directions, some of them contradictory, that I’ll list here rather than pursue in great detail.They’re related to my work at FCNL, with online technologies, and as a Quaker.

Afghanistan: Which Fairy Tale Tells the Truth?

If President Obama wants to understand the problem of U.S. policy in Afghanistan, he might do well to turn to a fairy tale.  I suggest that he take his top civilian and military advisors to the Family Theater at the White House to watch Walt Disney’s 1940 film Fantasia. It tells the story of “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice.” It’s not just for kids, anymore.

High Stakes on Iran and Afghanistan in Vienna

Iranian nuclear negotiators are meeting this week with their U.S., Russian, and French counterparts and officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency at IAEA headquarters in Vienna. It’s a high stakes moment for the Iranian nuclear issue.

It’s also a high stakes moment for the future of the U.S. in Afghanistan, if you take in the implication of recent remarks by the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal.

First, on the Iranian nuclear issue: The Vienna talks are to discuss arrangements for moving up to three-quarters of Iran’s present stockpile of low-enriched uranium to Russia and France to be fashioned into fuel plates and returned for Iran to use to make medical isotopes. Iran does not have the technology to reprocess the fuel plates into a weapon, so if the negotiators can close the deal, most of Iran’s existing nuclear material will be rendered not only harmless but medically useful.

A deal in Vienna this week wouldn’t be the end of the Iranian nuclear saga but it would be a giant step toward a resolution recognizing Iran’s rights under the Non-Proliferation Treaty but making its nuclear program not only subject to safeguards but dependent upon international cooperation. It would be an elegant solution that could produce dividends in other areas. And this brings us to…

Gen. McChrystal and Afghanistan: Gen. McChrystal made the following remarkable statement

Nobel Hot Potato

Last Friday I woke up to the news that the Norwegians awarded this year’s Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama.  Confined to bed with the flu, I had plenty of time to watch the president’s public statement on the honor and respect paid him by that committee.  Apparently, he and I had the same initial reaction: “That’s odd,” and “This is an unwelcome hot potato,” neither of which he said, of course.

War is Not the Answer in the White House

There’s not a WINA yard sign on the White House lawn yet, and I’m not holding my breath looking for one.  But I jumped when I heard the news that Obama got the Nobel peace prize.  Actually, I had just buckled my seat belt on a flight to Florida for parents’ weekend at my daughter’s college, so I didn’t jump.  And I didn’t yell to the crowd of (mostly vacation) travelers:  Holy cow! Imagine that!

But I wanted to. Even knowing that Washington pundits and international media and politicos of all stripes will begin the expected feeding frenzy of why him?  why now?  why not (fill in the blank)?  and what’s the message here? (OK, I admit it, some of the commentary will be interesting).

The official notification says that President Obama was awarded the prize for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” I don’t know if this prize at this time will lead to  any change in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. I’m not holding my breath on this one either.

But for me, it’s all about Obama’s April 2009 statement in Prague: “Today, I state clearly and with conviction America’s commitment to seekthe peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.”

For over 50 years the world has lived with the threat of nuclear warfare.  I’m part of the “duck and cover” generation myself –the little sing-song routine that had us hiding under school desks, thinking we’d be safe from nuclear fallout.  Some of my first “envelope-stuffing” peace activism as a teenager was for Sane/Freeze.  For many of my parents’ generation, working to end nuclear weapons was the cause of their lifetime.

Here at FCNL we’re working hard on ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, one of the practical concrete steps the U.S. can take on that path to a world free of nuclear weapons. There is lots, lots more to do.

But meanwhile, I’m pausing to say Holy Cow!  Imagine That.

Does Obama Deserve the Peace Prize?

I have to admit I was quite surprised when my husband told me over breakfast this morning that Obama had won the Nobel Peace Prize. As I blog this the Washington Post’s online poll stands at 46% saying he deserves it and 54%, with nearly 24,000 respondents. As for me, I didn’t vote. I could come up with arguments for and against but right now I’m waiting to see what direction he takes US policy in Afghanistan and if he heeds the cautions beginning to emerge from Congress. Because this may well be be the most important decision he makes on matters of war and peace in his lifetime.

What is a Kerry-Boxer? And should I like it?

It’s an 821 page draft climate bill sponsored by Senate Chairmen John Kerry (MA) and Barbara Boxer (CA). It has likable pieces and ones that are in the “not so much” category.  That said it is a step better than the June House-passed climate and energy bill, H.R. 2454.

Three Kerry-Boxer improvements over the June House-passed climate bill
1. Retains EPA authority to regulate heat-trapping pollution
2. Increases pollution cuts to 20% by 2020 (of 2005 levels)
3. Moderately improves pollution offsets language

The Breakthrough That Would Mean Ahmadinejad Has Obama’s Back

The British media, at least, are declaring the result of the talks between the permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany and Iran in Geneva October 1 to be a breakthrough. More reserved than the British where good news about Iran is concerned, the U.S. media have nonetheless been moved to call the result an “apparent breakthrough” or a “potential breakthrough.”

It really is a big deal if it goes through: Iran’s agreement in principle to ship up to three quarters of its existing stock of low-enriched uranium to Russia and France for further enrichment and processing into fuel rods is indeed a breakthrough. Suddenly most of what was touted as “enough fissile material to make a bomb” is going outside the country only to return in a form almost impossible to reprocess for use in a weapon. That’s assuming, of course, that the Iranians follow through.

Herding Cats Lobbying

So I FINALLY managed to send our coalition memo with recommendations on preventing deadly conflict and protecting civilians to congressional staff working on rewriting the Foreign Assistance Act. If this sounds like a simple task involving a little writing and a few emails, you obviously do not do much work with advocacy coalitions! Or perhaps you’re just much better at the tooth-pulling, elbow-tugging, gentle ego-stroking, and cat herding that tends to be involved in bringing different organizations with different agendas onto the same page to create substantive, useful policy recommendations for legislative staff. I won’t claim it’s glamorous work, but it is worth it when the end result is both an effective advocacy product and improved relations among our partners. I just hope those congressional staff appreciate the effort as much as I do!