POLITICS – Page 5 – REVIEWS AND VIEWS OF LIFE

CRISIS

There is no religious, nationalist, or political justification for killing of innocents but the history of the world shows we are all killers.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Conquering Crises (Ten Lessons to Learn Before You Need Them)

By: Admiral William H. McRaven

Narrated By: Willaim H. McRaven

William H. McRaven (Author, retired four-star admiral in the U.S. Navy, ninth commander of the U.S. Special Operations Command from 2011 to 2014, commanded special operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.)

Wisdom does not always come with experience or age. Though born in 1955, William McRaven spent 40 years as a special operations officer in the U.S. Navy. He retired from military service and became chancellor of the University of Texas System from 2015-2018. Now, as a writer, McRaven offers some insightful advice to those who manage others in response to crises. He offers his personal, corporate, and institutional experience as a crises’ manager.

Though McRaven’s experience comes from a military system of command, he offers a listen, learn, and plan approach to getting things done through others.

When faced with a reported crisis, he notes the first information one receives is usually inaccurate and misleading. He offers numerous examples like Pearl Harbor in 1941, Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and Covid-19 in the 21st century. The first reports of those crises were misleading and were found to be much more consequential and damaging than originally reported. The first step when faced with a crisis is to be sure of the facts. McRaven generally discounts first reports. He suggests one should confirm details from personal observation (if possible or practicable). If one cannot investigate facts of a crises personally, one must confirm details from other sources that are at, subject to, or near the crisis. The point is not to act on first reports but to seek more information.

McRaven receives a phone call in the middle of the night about a mistaken Taliban sympathizer carrying a weapon who is shot and killed by an American soldier during America’s intervention in Afghanistan.

It was found he was not a sympathizer but a cousin of the President of Afghanistan. McRaven calls General Petraeus in the middle of the night to report the incident. Petraeus thanks McRaven for contacting him immediately rather than waiting until the morning. Both recognize the urgency of the crises. They discuss details of what happened and plan a response. McRaven is ordered to contact the President of Afghanistan immediately to explain what happened and offer American support for the family of the murdered cousin. McRaven’s point is know the facts of a crises, create a plan to address what is known, react as quickly as the correct facts are known, plan a response agreed upon by those in authority, and act (as soon as possible) according to plan.

Taliban resurgence in Afghanistan.

A more complicated crisis noted by McRaven is also in Afghanistan. America’s ambassador to Afghanistan meets with McRaven to tell him the special forces reporting to him in Afghanistan are alienating local Afghan citizens with their military actions against the Taliban. The ambassador tells McRaven his operations are alienating Afghani citizens to the point of losing America’s war against the Taliban. The meeting becomes heated because McRaven believes his command is doing a great job of pacifying Taliban attacks on local citizens. Rather than acting like an ostrich with its head in the sand, McRaven calls for a meeting of colonels in the Afghanistan theater to investigate the Ambassador’s accusation. The team McRaven assembles finds the Ambassador’s concerns are justified. Though peaceful coexistence appeared to be improved with McRaven’s special forces’ actions, the alienation of Afghani’s was growing. As has been written by other authors, America’s special forces often acted based on one Afghani family’s personal anger at another family rather than for any concern about Taliban activity.

The group of colonels assembled by McRaven developed a plan to more judiciously act on alleged Taliban activity from Afghan informants.

Of course, America’s ignominious departure from Afghanistan, implies McRaven’s response was too little and too late. This is not to argue that McRaven’s response was wrong but only that the plan did not stop Taliban resurgence. The valid point McRaven is making is that one should systematically address a crisis, create a plan once the facts are known, and execute the plan. Obviously, not all crises are successfully resolved. In the case of America’s intervention in Afghanistan, McRaven’s plan may not have been right for the facts that were gathered, or the crises was just too culturally complex for a successfully executed response.

McRaven comes across as a highly competent leader and manager in a crises.

Where one may have reservations about any leader’s role in a crisis is whether they agree on the facts. McRaven believes it is right to assassinate a proven terrorist who has killed innocent people. That kind of decision goes beyond the principles of McRaven’s book about response to crises. “Judge not, lest ye be judged” is alleged to have been said by Jesus in his Sermon on the Mount.

McRaven believes assassination is justified.

In Ukraine and Gaza, innocents are being killed every day. There is no religious, nationalist, or political justification for killing of innocents but the history of the world shows we are all killers. In a crisis, you would want someone like McRaven to be the “beauty on duty”, but one must ask oneself if assassination is ever justified.

ABSOLUTION

History of the world has shown all forms of government are “equal opportunity” inhibitors, if not destroyers.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Secondhand Time (The Last of the Soviets)

By: Svetlana Alexievich

Narrated By: Amanda Carlin, Mark Bramhall, Cassandra Campbell & 8 more.

Svetlana Alexievich (Author, Belarusian investigative journalist, winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature in 2015.)

Svetlana Alexievich’s “Secondhand Time” is a remarkable and informative explanation of why Putin believes he is right and why many citizens of Russia seem to continue in their support of his administration.

Map of the former U.S.S.R.

Alexievich conducts a series of interviews with Russian citizens of different generations about the U.S.S.R. and its return to the world stage as a Russian nation. The narrators of her book recite those interviews to give listener/readers a complex and enlightening picture of Russian culture. The clash of communist and capitalist ideals is at the foundation of the interviews and the narrators dramatically told stories.

The Russian Soviet Army is the first to arrive in the Battle of Berlin on April 16, 1945. Their flag was hoisted on May 1, 1945.

The citizens of Russia are justifiably proud of their role in WWII that turned the tide of Germany’s war of aggression. (Of course, that is putting aside Stalin’s Machiavellian decision to join Hitler at the beginning of the war.) Some Russian soldiers who fought in that war were disgusted with what they feel was a betrayal by Mikhail Gorbachev of communist ideals for which they lived and died for in the 20th century.

The rejection of communist ideals for capitalism is viewed by some Russians as a tyranny of greed that lays waste to the poor and creates a class of haves and have-nots.

Some Russian veterans of WWII see the seduction of capitalism destroying the ideal of a classless society. Some citizens see the ideal of a government is to demand the wealth of life be spread equally according to individual need. To these believers, enforcement of communist ideals would eliminate private property and greed that would create a classless society. Some believed Stalin exemplified leadership that would achieve that ideal. The hardship of life during Stalin’s rule is considered by some as justified means for the achievement of the Marxist ideal of communism.

Statue of the “Circle of Life” in Norway.

Cultures may be different, but all human life is the same.

The underlying point of these interviews is to show Russian culture is not monolithic, just as culture is not in any nation. All cultures are filled with diversity. There is no singular cultural mind but a range of interests among many factions that establish a nation’s culture. The evidence of that is the contrast of Gorbachev and Putin in Russia and FDR and Trump in America. All four leaders led their countries but represent completely different cultural beliefs.

Alexievich shows there are veterans in Russia who strongly believe Gorbachev was a traitor to his country.

Conservatives, New York Governor Al Smith, Southern Democrats, and isolationists like Charles Beard opposed FDR in America. Putin and Trump have their cultural supporters in today’s national governments, but they also have their critics. The difference is that in Putin’s world, being killed or put in prison for opposition is culturally acceptable. In America, one is reminded of Trump’s deportation and imprisonment of migrants without due process.

The author’s interviews are not suggesting that either Russia or the West have good or bad governments but that every culture tests their leaders.

Many Russians, undoubtedly blame American Democracy for the dismantling of the U.S.S.R. Alexievich interviews Russians who believe the hardship that countries within the U.S.S.R. experienced were not the fault of Stalinist policies but the failure of citizens to live up to the ideals of communism. To anyone who has traveled to the Baltics, that opinion is founded on ignorance of the hostility expressed by citizens of the Baltics who were starved, displaced, jailed, and murdered during their occupation by Russia.

The other part of the story is the rise of the oligarchs in Russia as a result of the greed associated with capitalism.

The gap between rich and poor is accelerated in Russia just as it has been in America. Democracy does not have clean hands when it comes to equality of opportunity. Like the Jewish pogroms in Russia, America’s enslavement, murder, and discrimination of Blacks is proven history.

Siberian Exile during Stalin’s reign in Russia.

Alexievich draws from all sides of Russian beliefs. Those interviewed note the terrible conditions of those exiled to Siberia. Many Russians became disillusioned by the redistribution of wealth and privilege after Gorbachev and Yeltsin showed themselves to not be up to the task of leadership change. In fairness, one wonders who could have been up to the task when Russia had a long history of monarchal and tyrannical leadership?

Alexievich reveals a split between those Russians who want a fairer communist’ socialism or fairer western capitalism. One doubts either is possible with Putin.

A few Russians became immensely wealthy while the majority were somewhat better off but some struggled with the loss of State benefits and fewer jobs. The rising gap between rich and poor soured communist idealists. Even those who had been sent to Siberia by Stalin who toiled and suffered the experience of isolation, slave labor, and frigid weather felt they were no better off because of the loss of a socialist future.

The frightening truth of Alexievich’s book about the culture of Russia is that Putin may be absolved for his atrocities just as leaders of America have been absolved for their mistakes. History of the world has shown all forms of government are “equal opportunity” inhibitors, if not destroyers.

MODERATION

Unless homelessness is addressed with affordable housing, America’s future looks bleak. A land of have and have-nots will grow to crush American prosperity.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Abundance

By: Ezra Klein, Derek Thompson

Narrated by: The Authors

Ezra Klein (American political commentator and “NYT’ journalist.)

These two young Americans offer an insightful view of politics and American government in the 21st century.

Klein or Thompson could have voted for either Trump or Harris in America’s last election. Their book argues American government is both a boon and bane for citizen “Abundance” in the 21st century. They note America has contradictory economic policies that have created great abundance among Americans while exacerbating inequality. Evidence for their opinion is growing homelessness, an immigration crisis, loss of manufacturing jobs, and government’s failure to creatively adjust public policies to provide solutions.

Those who have shared in the abundance of America have voted for candidates to preserve their privileges.

The authors note homelessness is a function of affordable housing that is denied by government policies that regulate zoning and construction requirements. Government policies make affordable housing too costly to build and impossible to locate because of zoning restrictions. The number of people living on the street is a self-inflicted American tragedy. Some of the homeless are young, some are old, some have mental or physical problems, and others are victims of drugs or their own weaknesses. What they have in common is unaffordable housing.

Historically, immigration has been a great boon to American economic growth.

Klien and Thompson note restrictive immigration policies have created obstacles for workers needed for manufacturing in key industries like agriculture, auto industry assembly, housing construction, and clean energy infrastructure. Rather than wasting money on building walls and deporting workers, the authors advocate immigration reform that meets the needs of American business. One can imply the authors meaning is that to “Make America Great Again” requires immigrants willing to work in agricultural and manufacturing jobs. The end of the baby boom requires help from immigrants to meet the needs of increased manufacturing and construction in the United States.

Some believe what Trump is doing is good for the American economy in the long run.

The criticism is that in the short run, the economy may collapse. Tariffs being used as a ham-fisted way of negotiating fair international trade is a fool’s errand. America needs labor and material in the short run to achieve equal and greater prosperity than it had in the 1970s. Added manufacturing will aid American prosperity, but it will be surpassed in the long run by automation. It is the automation race America needs to win or compete with to remain a world leader. Competing in that race depends on education, and scientific research. The irony is that Trump is firing government employees who have responsibility for public education, research, and funding that have been the engines of America’s prosperity.

The government employees discharged by the Trump administration to solely reduce costs is short sighted.

In the 1980s, 60% of basic research in the U.S. was funded by the government. In 2022 that funding dropped to 40%. Advances in semiconductors, global positions systems, biotechnology, and aeronautics were government-funded discoveries in the 1980s. American government-funded scientific research gave America the internet, GPS technology, mass production of penicillin, Space exploration, human genome project discoveries, and renewable energy innovations. The Department of Health and Human Services has lost 20,000 employees, the Department of Education 1,300, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 800, and the National Institutes of Health 1,200. One wonders how many of these employees may have been on the edge of scientific discoveries that could change the world.

The truth of “Abundance” is that America has caused many negative ecological impacts and aggravated the gap between rich and poor.

Klein and Thompson have written a provocative book. However, the truth of “Abundance” in America has caused many negative ecological impacts and aggravated the gap between rich and poor. Looking only to abundance does not address either social inequality or the environment. The NIMBY (not in my back yard) resistance to affordable housing aggravates inequality and increases homelessness. Unquestionably, higher density housing impacts the environment.

Klein and Thompson fail to address the increased power of corporations in America.

The 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission gave corporations the power to spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns. The influence of corporations on elections has disproportionate power in the election of government policy makers. That decision by the Court is a distortion of one person, one voter’s influence on public policy.

Aristotle emphasized the importance of “All things in moderation”. NIMBY communities must open their minds and hearts to homelessness and moderate their resistance to neighborhood accommodation. Government agencies must supervise and service higher density housing impacts wherever they are built and after they are completed.

Unless homelessness is addressed with affordable housing, America’s future looks bleak. A land of have and have-nots will grow to crush American prosperity.

SERVICE & PROFIT

Government is not a business for profit and should not be solely measured by its cost. America will survive the catastrophic mistakes being made by President Trump but American citizens, and the welfare of the world will suffer for years to come.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Who is Government (The Untold Story of Public Service)

By: Michael Lewis, Casey Cep, Dave Eggers, John Lanchester, Geraldine Brooks, Sarah Vowell, and Kamau Bell

Edited By: Michael Lewis

The stories of these writers are a tribute to those who have chosen careers in American government. Having personally earned a master’s degree in public administration, worked as a local government manager, then as a manager of a private business division, and finally, as a personal business owner, I have an opinion about President Trump. My experience is based on three different types of employment. All were rewarding experiences but in fundamentally different ways.

The writers of “Who is Government” show how ignorant business creators and managers like Donald Trump and Elon Musk are in discounting the contribution of employees of government organizations. Private corporations do not survive without profit to its owners. Public organizations do not survive without service to the public.

Profit is simple to measure. Public service is measurable but more abstract and difficult to quantify.

One can choose, like Musk did with Twitter, to reduce costs by firing employees. That may improve profitability but at a cost that may hurt or destroy the future of a business. In the case of Twitter, the company lost much of their advertising revenue because an unsupervised public forum could spread false and defamatory information that embarrasses advertisers who were protected by Twitter’ employees that were fired. No analysis was done by Musk about Twitter information’ controls provided by employees. The new entity, “X”, seems to have assuaged some advertisers’ concerns because they have started to use Musk’s new company. The point is that if Musk had taken more time to evaluate what fired employees were doing, he may have retained many of the advertisers who left the forum.

Trump’s employment of Musk to decimate the government employee workforce is following the same foolish path that was taken with Twitter.

No analysis of employee contributions is made. The goal is only to reduce government’ cost regardless of employee’ contribution to public need or service. The consequences have likely reduced health and welfare of American citizens; not to mention harm done to incomes of thousands of government employees’ families.

With exceptions of George Washington, Harry Truman, Carter, and the two Bush presidents, the worst former businessman that became President was Herbert Hoover who served as President before the greatest depression in America’s history. With Trump as President, one has to wonder whether he is leading America and the world toward its second great depression.

HERBERT HOOVER (31ST PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.)

“Who is Government” illustrates how government employees have contributed to the health and welfare of America. They are unknown and viewed by people like Trump and Musk as just a cost, without benefit to the public. How many science, medical, veteran, and welfare services are being decimated by their narrow vision of government management?

CHINA

Harmony and pragmatism undoubtedly remain important characteristics of Chinese society. Time will tell whether societal harmony can be maintained by an increasingly authoritarian leader.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Chinese Looking Glass (The most illuminating book yet written on China and her enigmatic people.)

By: Dennis Bloodworth

Dennis Bloodworth (1919-2005) Author, journalist, British writer at The Observer, first British journalist allowed to visit China in 1955.

“The Chinese Looking Glass” is a whirlwind journey across the vast history of China by the first British writer allowed to visit China in 1955. It is a primer for a general understanding of China that was originally published in 1966 and updated in 1980. The author’s marriage to Liang Ching Ping adds credibility to his view of Chinese culture.

One reads Bloodworth’s book and is somewhat overwhelmed by its breadth. So many generations of Chinese culture are too much to cover in a 400+page book.

The author manages to give a broad understanding of a Chinese worldview that is shaped by Confucian and Taoist history, a collective identity that often conflicts with the Western culture of individualism. He notes Chinese traditions are based on filial piety (meaning duties, respect and devotion of children to their parents). Bloodworth notes, through many generations of Chinese culture, behavior and decision-making there is a focus on social harmony. Both Confucianism and Taoism play significant roles in shaping Chinese society.

Bloodworth notes Confucianism and Taoism shape Chinese society.

Piety, respect for hierarchy, education, and a focus on societal harmony were philosophical foundations of Chinese governance. Piety led governance toward strict rules and centralized authority. Historical figures like Confucius, Laozi, and Sun Tzu influenced Chinese culture and thought. The spiritual tradition of Buddhism reinforced the teaching of these cultural influencers. Buddhism emphasizes the suffering of life is caused by desire, and attachment. Buddhist teaching is that desire and attachment must be replaced by understanding and rejection of both through meditation and mindfulness.

Because democracy focuses on individual rights and freedoms, the ideals of collective harmony, hierarchical structure, and centralize authority make communism a better fit for Chinese culture.

Mao Zedong (1893-1976)

Mao unified China after decades of war and instability. Bloodworth suggests Mao Zedong had a nuanced impact on China.

However, Mao’s centralized power resulted in big economic mistakes like the famine of the Great Leap Forward that caused misleading food production reports meant to please the government when production was much less than what was needed to sustain life for Chinese citizens. With famine, the Cultural Revolution is unleashed, and China’s growth and stability were set back. Bloodworth had observed China’s governing always included pragmatism and adaptability to their drive for cultural harmony.

Though Bloodworth mentions Deng Xiaoping in the last chapters of his expanded edition of “The Chinese Looking Glass”, he does not foresee the opening of the Chinese economy and its rapid economic expansion.

The pragmatic realization that collectivization of farming led to misleading information about production compelled Deng to open agricultural production to a more market-driven incentive to preserve social stability. Deng was an authoritarian as is evidenced by his decision on the Tienanmen Square crises.

Though Bloodworth did not live to see the next iteration of China’s leadership, an element of recidivism enters with Xi’s control of the government.

Harmony and pragmatism undoubtedly remain important characteristics of Chinese society. Time will tell whether societal harmony can be maintained by an increasingly authoritarian leader.

AMERICAN HOPE

From Fukuyama’s intellectual musing to our eyes and ears, one hopes he is correct about America’s future in the technological age.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Great Disruption (Human Nature and the Reconstitution of Social Order)

By: Francis Fukuyama

Francis Fukuyama (Author, political scientist, political economist, international relations scholar.)

Francis Fukuyama argues America is at the threshold of a social reconstitution. Fukuyama believes we are at Gladwell’s “Tipping Point” that is changing social norms and rebuilding America’s social order. He argues the innovation of technology, like the industrial revolution, is deconstructing social relationships and economics while reconstructing capitalist democracy.

Gladwell’s Revenge of the Tipping Point.

The immense power of big technology companies like Amazon, Google, and Facebook have outsized influence on American society. They change the tone of social interaction through their ability to disseminate both accurate and misleading information. They erode privacy and create algorithms tailored to disparate interest groups that polarize society. The media giant’s objective is to increase clicks on their platforms to attract more advertisers who pay for public exposure of their service, merchandise, and brand.

To reduce outsize influence of big tech companies, Fukuyama suggests more technology has an answer.

There should be more antitrust measures instituted by the government to break monopolistic practices and encourage competition with large technology companies. Algorithms created by oversight government organizations can ensure transparency and reduce harmful content to reduce big tech companies influence on society. (One doubts expansion of government agencies is a likely scenario in today’s government.)

On the one hand, technology has improved convenience, communication, and a wider distribution of information.

On the other, technology has flooded society with misinformation, invaded privacy, and polarized society. Technology has created new jobs while increasing loss of traditional industry jobs with automation. Trying to return to past labor-intensive manufacturing companies is a fool’s errand in the age of technology.

Luddites during the Industrial Revolution.

Like the industrial revolution, the tech revolution’s social impact is mixed with a potential for greater social isolation, and job displacement with the addition of wide distribution of misinformation. The positives of new technology are improvements in healthcare product and services, renewable energy, and climate understanding with potential for improved control.

Work-life balance in families has been disrupted by technology.

Face-to-face interactions become less and less necessary. Children’s access to technology impacts parental supervision and relationship. Fukuyama suggests setting boundaries for technology use needs to be a priority in American families. Technology can open the door to better education, but it also becomes a source of misinformation that can come from the internet of things. Employers have the opportunity to help with work-life balance by encouraging flexible hours and remote work. (Oddly, that suggestion is being undermined by the current government administration and many American companies.)

Economic growth, access to information, and global connectivity have been positively impacted by technology. However, the concentration of power, misinformation, and surveillance of social media has diminished privacy and eroded individual freedom. There are concerns about technology and how it is good and bad for democratic capitalism.

The good lies in increased efficiency, innovation and creation of new markets, through globalization. However, today’s American government shows how tariffs are a destroyer of globalization. Fukuyama implies A.I. and automation is displacing workers and aggravating economic inequality because it is being misunderstood for its true potential and also being misused. Personal data is used to manipulate consumers in ways that challenge the balance between corporations and consumers.

Fukuyama argues private parties will grow in America to create software that will filter and customize online services.

With that effort control of the influence of big tech companies will be diminished. With decentralization of big tech power and influence, society will theoretically become less polarized and more consensus oriented. The capitalist opportunity for tech savvy startups that diminish influence of big tech companies will re-create diversification like that which the matured industrial revolution gave to new manufacturers. Like Standard Oil and other conglomerates of the industrial revolution, businesses like Amazon, Google, and Facebook will have competition that diminishes their power and influence.

American Government will grow to regulate the internet of things just as it has grown to regulate banks, industries, and social services.

Service to citizens will become a bigger part of the economy as a replacement for manufacturing. Family life will re-invent itself as a force of society because of the time saved from manufacturing product to improve human relationships.

From Fukuyama’s intellectual musing to our eyes and ears, one hopes he is correct about America’s future in the technological age.

A UKRAINE BOMB SHELL

Though Yovanovitch had nothing to do with Poroshenko’s defeat by Zelensky, it seems clear that her tenure as Ambassador to Ukraine set the table for a change in direction for Ukraine.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Lessons from the Edge (A Memoir)

By: Marie Yovanovitch

Narrated By: Marie Yovanovitch

Marie Yovanovitch (Canadian-American Author, retired senior member of the US Foreign Service.)

Marie Yovanovitch is retired from the US Foreign Service but as is widely known she was fired in the first Trump administration as US Ambassador to Ukraine in 2019. A reported reason for her firing is she is said to have resisted Trump’s effort to pressure Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden. One suspects that is partially true, but Yovanovitch shows she was a believer in equal rights for women and a supporter of Hilliary Clinton which may be additional reasons for Trump’s action to fire her. “Lessons from the Edge” is a memoir of Yovanovitch’s career as an American diplomat.

“Lessons from the Edge” is interesting because it reveals the history of how one becomes an American diplomat and what his/her role is as a representative of America. One may wonder what qualifies one to be a diplomat when some are appointed because of political connection rather than educational accomplishment or training.

Yovanovitch became a diplomat because of her education and personal ambition. Because of her background as the daughter of a Russian born father, she chooses to take classes in Russian which leads to her eventual assignment in Ukraine. Her memoir explains how her journey began and how it ended. It is a highly personal memoir that is enlightening. However, this mild journey explodes at its end. Yovanovitch comes across as a decent person caught up in the events of history, not as a giant of diplomacy but an honest and hard-working diplomat.

Marie Yovanovitch earned a BA in History and Russian Studies at Princeton. During her career she studied at the Pushkin Institute of Moscow and acquired a Master of Science in National Security Strategy from the National War College. Her background certainly qualified her for diplomatic posts. Her early assignments were in Africa which eventually led to Russian speaking countries like Russia, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, and Ukraine.

Russian speaking countries.

An example of the difficulty of her job is when America wishes to maintain the American Kyrgyzstan’ Air Force base because of America’s role in Afghanistan in 2009. Kyrgyzstan offers closer logistic support for the American military.

The Kyger’ President demands an increase from a $17.4 million-dollar annual rent payment (Yovanovich indicated the rent payment was $2,000,000/yr) to $200,000,000 per year for the continuation of Kyrgyzstan’s American military base. Yovanovich implies Kyrgyzstan’s President, Mr. Bakiyev, demand for higher rent would be to line his pockets with stolen revenue, not help the citizens of Kyrgyzstan.

A final settlement increased annual rent to $60 million per year with additional payments of $37 million and $30 million for new aircraft slots and additional land for location of a new American navigation system.

Kyrgyzstan’s American Air Force Base.

Many questions come to mind in listening/reading Yovanovitch’s book. How important are the presence of American military bases around the world? What is the difference between isolationism and internationalism? Should America remain isolated from other nations or engage and collaborate with other countries of the world? Where is the line to be drawn between American influence and the cost of that influence? This last question is answered in the last chapters of “Lessons from the Edge”.

Yovanovich takes on the complicated role of American Ambassador to Armenia from 2008 to 2011.

Armenia and Azerbaijan are a source of political and territorial tension. There is a dispute over a region called Nagorno-Karabakh that is under the control of Armenia with a majority Armenian population. Turkey supports Azerbaijan while Armenia has a close relationship with Russia. Armenia and Turkey’s relationship is strained because of a WWI Armenian Genocide perpetrated by Turkey. An estimated 600,000 to 1.5 million Armenians were killed between 1915 and 1917. Turkey refuses to identify it as genocide which aggravates Turkey’s relationship with Armenia. Russia has a military base in Armenia and has tried to mediate the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict without much success. Because of energy projects and trade relations, Russia has managed a balanced relationship with Azerbaijan.

Yovanovitch decides to return to the U.S. because of her aging mother and an offer to take the role of Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs. However, as Ukraine becomes embroiled in a conflict with Russia and her previous assignment and knowledge of Ukraine, she returns as America’s Ambassador. Her mother’s decision to accompany her made the opportunity worth taking.

When Ukraine became independent of the U.S.S.R. in 1991, its transition to a market economy was marked by widespread corruption in the same way as alleged in Russia.

The assets of the country fell into the hands of Ukraine’s leaders who became wealthy oligarchs at the expense of the general population. Election to the leadership of Ukraine gave Presidents like Viktor Yanukovych, who served from 2010 to 2014, license to embezzle state funds. Compounding that corruption were Ukrainian bank owners who were equally corrupt. The fifth president of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko faces allegations of corruption with his ownership of the International Investment Bank (IIB).

Rudy Giuliani (American politician, former NY mayor, former U.S. Associate Attorney General–now a disbarred lawyer.)

As if Rudy Giuliani needs no further damage to his reputation than his lies about election fraud, Yovanovitch reveals his role in discrediting her reputation with false accusations about badmouthing Trump as the new President of the United States. Judging from Yovanovitch’s book, Trump is unlikely to have been someone she admired. However, as an experienced diplomat, it is inconceivable that she would have undermined Trump or any U.S. President’s reputation. Trump ordered Yovanovitch’s removal. She is recalled in May 2019.

Volodymyr Zelensky became the President of Ukraine in May of 2019.

Zelensky soundly defeated the corrupt Vasily Poroshenko with 73% of the vote.

Though Yovanovitch had nothing to do with Poroshenko’s defeat by Zelensky, it seems clear that her tenure as Ambassador to Ukraine set the table for a change in direction for Ukraine. This is a very personal memoir of Yovanovitch’s career that is somewhat marred by a plaintive melancholy about life and an aging mother but “Lessons from the Edge” is highly informative about what it takes to be an American diplomat.

America makes a mistake if it chooses to isolate itself from allied countries that have similar economic and political aspirations. It may be time to reset America’s international relations, but isolation is not a rational alternative for an interdependent ecological and economic world.

AI REGULATION

As Suleyman and Bhaskar infer, ignoring the threat of AI because of the difficulty of regulation is no reason to abandon the effort.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Coming Wave

By: Mustafa Suleyman with Michael Bhaskar

Narrated By: Mustafa Suleyman

Mustafa Suleyman (British entrepreneur, CEO Microsoft AI)

This is a startling book about AI because it is written by an AI entrepreneur who is the founder and former head of applied AI at DeepMind. He is also the CEO of Microsoft AI. What the authors argue is not understood by many who discount the threat of AI. They explain AI can collate information that creates societal solutions, as well as threats, that are beyond the thought and reasoning ability of human beings.

“The Coming Wave” is startling because it is written by two authors who have an intimate understanding of the science of AI.

They argue it is critically important for AI research and development to be internationally regulated with the same seriousness that accompanied the research and use of the atom bomb.

If AI has the monumental risk Suleyman and Bhaskar describe, it remains the responsibility of humanity to manage it wisely.

Those who have read this blog know the perspective of this writer is that AI, whether it has greater risk than the atom bomb or not is a tool, not a controller, of humanity. The AI’ threat example given by Suleyman and Bhaskar is that AI has the potential for invention of a genetic modification that could as easily destroy as improve humanity. Recognizing AI’s danger is commendable but like the atom bomb, there will always be a threat of miscreant nations or radicals that have the use of a nuclear device or AI to initiate Armagedón. Obviously, if AI is the threat they suggest, there needs to be an antidote. The last chapters of “The Coming Wave” offer their solution. The authors suggest a 10-step program to regulate or ameliorate the threat of AI’s misuse.

Like alcoholism and nuclear bomb deterrence, Suleyman’s program will be as effective as those who choose to follow the rules.

There are no simple solutions for regulation of AI and as history shows neither Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) nor the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) has been completely successful.

Suleyman suggests the first step in regulating AI begins with creating safeguards for the vast LLM capabilities of Artificial Intelligence.

This will require the hiring of technicians to monitor and adjust incorrect or misleading information accumulated and distributed by AI users. The concern of many will be the restriction on “freedom of speech”. Additionally, two concerns are the cost of such a bureaucracy and who monitors the monitors. Who draws the line between fact and fiction? When does information deletion become a distortion of fact? This bureaucracy will be responsible for auditing AI models to understand what their capabilities are and what limitations they have.

A second step is to slow the process of AI development by controlling the sale and distribution of the hardware components of AI to provide more time for reviewing new development impacts.

With lucrative incentives for new AI capabilities in a capitalist system there is likely to be a lot of resistance by aggressive entrepreneurs, free-trade and free-speech believers. Leaders in authoritarian countries will be equally incensed by interference in their right to rule.

Transparency is a critical part of the vetting process for AI development.

Suleyman suggests critics need to be involved in new developments to balance greed and power against utilitarian value. There has to be an ethical examination of AI that goes beyond profitability for individuals or control by governments. The bureaucracies for development, review, and regulation should be designed to adapt, reform, and implement regulations to manage AI technologies responsibly. These regulations should be established through global treaties and alliances among all nations of the world.

Suleyman acknowledges this is a big ask and notes there will be many failures in getting cooperation or adherence to AI regulation.

That is and was true of nuclear armament and so far, there has been no use of nuclear weapons to attack other countries. The authors note there will be failures in trying to institute these guidelines but with the help of public awareness and grassroots support, there is hope for the greater good that can come from AI.

As Suleyman and Bhaskar infer, ignoring the threat of AI because of the difficulty of regulation is no reason to abandon the effort.

WORKER ABANDONMENT

Trump is unlikely to help the middleclass and poor any more than some of America’s past Presidents, but he disrupts the status quo. That is Thomas Frank’s answer to why Trump was re-elected.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Listen Liberal (Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People?)

By: Thomas Frank

Narrated By: Thomas Frank

Thomas Carr Frank (Author, political analyst, historian, and journalist)

How could the American people elect a billionaire felon as President of the United States? Thomas Frank offers a compelling answer to that troubling question.

Since WWII, the American people have been misled by the words, policies, and deeds of both Democratic and Republican leaders. No post WWII leader escapes Frank’s frank explanation. Not since Franklin Roosevelt, and Harry Truman have any Presidents effectively reduced income inequality.

Frank embarrasses American voters for complicity in reducing the size of the middle class, ignoring the poor, and making the rich richer. He explains how Presidents of the last 70 years have made the middleclass smaller and the poor poorer. Frank particularly points to Bill Clinton and Barack Obama as examples of Ivy League’ wordsmiths that misled the public and instituted policies that moved America away from the working class and poor.

Clinton and Obama represented education as the primary measure of success in the 21st century. They largely ignored the working class that grew the American economy to be the most successful in the world. With that neglect the Democratic party became adjunct to the Republican party by diminishing the contribution and value of working Americans. Whichever party leads America no longer makes a difference to the middleclass’ and poor. Frank argues there is little difference between a Democratic or Republican President. The middleclass and poor realize those who are elected to lead make little difference in American worker’s lives.

Frank methodically dismantles Clinton and Obama administration’s policies to show how they diminished opportunity for the middleclass and poor. Clinton manages to balance the national governments debt on the backs of working America. Clinton’s welfare reform took many off of welfare by demanding employment as a requirement for any help by the welfare administration. That seems laudable but its impact on single parent households left children home alone and at the mercy of their neighborhoods. A child alone is left to the influence of neighborhoods festooned with gangs, drugs, guns and their societal consequences. In reducing the number of people on welfare, poverty increased.

Clinton’s programs for crime control massively increased prison building and prison populations that disproportionately affected African and Latino American communities.

Clinton repeals the Glass-Stegall Act and allows commercial banks to enter the derivative mortgage business that led to the near future financial collapse of America between 2007 and 2010.

Entry into the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) led to manufacturing job losses in America.

Frank admits Obama helped the middleclass and poor with Obama Care but argues he made the same mistakes as Clinton by supporting the rich at the expense of the middleclass and poor. Obama chose to follow the lead of George Bush’s plan to get America out of the economic ditch of the century by bailing out the financial industry while allowing the working class to fend for themselves. Many lost their homes as a result of banker’s lending greed and mortgage derivatives that came from Clinton’s decision to repeal Glass-Stegall. None of the banks were punished by bankruptcy because the federal government made a deal to keep them in business or subject to acquisition by bigger banks that became even larger. Poverty remained at the same level. Surprisingly homelessness was reduced by Obama’s “Opening Doors” initiative in 2010. However, the trend of aiding the rich at the expense of the working class is re-invigorated by emphasis on higher education and creativity rather than the nuts and bolts of economic prosperity that comes from job creation and a working public.

The trend of aiding the rich at the expense of the working class is re-invigorated by emphasis on higher education and creativity rather than the nuts and bolts of economic prosperity that comes from job creation.

The glaring irony of Frank’s observation led to the election of a billionaire who lauds wealth and power and cares little about the middleclass and poor. Donald Trump, Barack Obama, and Bill Clinton distorted the truth, partly by lying to themselves but also by purposely lying to the public with political policies and actions that did not make the lives of the middleclass and poor any better.

Trump directly distorts the truth but Obama and Clinton lie to themselves about the value of education as the singular path to improvement for the middleclass and poor. People are not only educated by school.

People are also educated by work and their experiences in life. Not every person in America or the world is interested in having a college degree. Shared economic productivity is the key to reducing income disparity. The brilliant oratorical skills of Obama and Clinton were refined by their intelligence and education but not everyone is blessed with the same skill. Trump is no Obama or Clinton, but he appeals to many who feel they have been left behind or can be benefited by his transactional view of the world.

One may agree that economic productivity comes from creativity, education, and work. However, it does not come from emphasis on one thing but on equality of opportunity for all to be employed.

Franks’ cynicism is overwhelming. By the end of his book, which is published before Hilliary Clinton’s political defeat by Trump, one is depressed by the truth of what he writes. The second election of Trump is proof of the failure of the Democratic party, and the Republican party, to live up to a belief in social equality and equal opportunity.

Creativity is an innate human quality. Education comes in many forms which are both formal and informal.

Being employed is a government, private enterprise, and personal responsibility. It is the job of governance to create public policies that support equality of opportunity for people to be creative, educated, and employed. Equality of opportunity ensures national economic growth and prosperity.

Trump is unlikely to help the middleclass and poor any more than some of America’s past Presidents, but he disrupts the status quo. That is Thomas Frank’s answer to why Trump was re-elected.

FOR BETTER OR WORSE?

Trump’s purposefully uninformed knowledge of history will become a greater source of conflict in the world because he has a second term’ understanding of how the American government works and how it can be subverted with loyal followers.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Underground Empire (How America Weaponized the World Economy)

By: Henry Farrell, Abraham Newman

Narrated By: L. J. Ganser

Henry Farrell (Professor at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, editor at the Washington Post.)

“Underground Empire” is not a surprising revelation in today’s media-savvy era. Every person in the world is being surveilled by someone because of the power and influence of government. Whether a democracy that believes in freedom or an autocracy that believes in absolute control, Farrell and Newman explain how “Big Brother” is watching and acting in ways that affect your life.

Henry Farrell and Abraham Newman explain how surveillance dramatically changed in America after 9/11/2001.

The potential for ubiquitous surveillance was known and wished for by some government bureaucrats. Wide social surveillance was resisted by many in the American government until 9/11. After 9/11 that resistance weakened and surveillance of the world, more fully including American citizens, became indispensable. The creation of an “Underground Empire” has weaponized privacy and the fuel of money that can heat, cool, burn or freeze national economies.

The authors argue there is an invisible war being waged by this “Underground Empire”.

The empire’s objective is to be in charge of the future. One may take issue with the word “…Empire”. The scale of an “Underground Empire” varies from nations like America, China, the UK, the EU, Russia, and others to a group of Al Qaeda’ terrorists, or a disparate group of Syrian freedom fighters. The common denominator is technological connection, i.e. the basis of “Underground…” organization for coordinated action that changes the world.

Ferrell and Newman’s primary focus becomes the use of surveillance to influence world policy.

Particularly, the surveillance of money, the source of power and prestige, is shown by the authors to be key to understanding what other countries and interests are planning and doing that affects society. They speculate that 9/11 could have been exposed before it happened with more surveillance of the money that was being accumulated by Al Qaeda and used by the terrorists who attacked the world trade center in New York. That might be true but there is a wider consequence of that level of surveillance. Surveillance has become a weapon in the hands of political leaders. Surveillance of the flow of money, the source of power and prestige, may make “America Great” as inferred by the pending second term President. The EU, NATO, and other international organizations are looked at differently by Trump than by former post-world war’ Presidents. Trump views the EU and NATO as users of American wealth without equivalent contribution to world defense.

Trump is clearly described as a transactional President with a view of America’s superior economic strength that can make it the bully of the world.

On the one hand, Trump objects to NATO because of its disproportionate financial burden to the United States which pleases Putin and changes the perspective of America’s role in the world. On the other hand, the authors note Trump opposed Putin when it came to the Nord Stream 2 oil pipeline to the E.U. The difference has to do with the Trump’s transactional view of the world. Because of America’s vast gas supplies from fracking, Trump sided with Texas politicians who vociferously objected to the second Nord stream pipeline to Europe.

Thinking, doing, and wanting are critical precursors of action but are largely, if not always, unfulfilled without money.

The “Underground Empire” is not exclusively focused on money, but the use of money is based on knowledge of what people are thinking, doing, and wanting. Accumulating information becomes actionable with money. The inference by the authors is that the government’s decision to track money, as well as private information, informs one of what will happen in the future. The problem with this narrow reasoning is that national interests of countries do not always line up with each other. The formation of the EU with its own currency becomes a competitor for America, not just a useful tool for exchange of goods between nations.

The internet of things and the influence of minor and major “Underground Empires” have changed the world.

Today’s playing field is not limited to major powers. As the spread of technology is mastered by the public, anyone as small as an interest group or as large as an international alliance can influence and potentially change the world. Farrell and Newman offer important understanding of that invisible war. Obvious examples are 9/11, Ukraine’s invasion, and most recently, the overthrow and exile of Bashar al-Assad in Syria. But they also reveal another front for conflict between the U.S. and countries that have traditionally been allied with America.

The only hope for peace in the world may be exposure of the works of the “Underground Empire”.

Histories carriers of belief in information transparency are people like Edward Snowden, Daniel Ellsberg, Chelsea Manning, Mark Felt, and Reality Winner. Snowden, a former NSA contractor, leaked classified information about global surveillance, Ellsberg exposed the lies of Vietnam, Manning exposed the WikiLeaks, Felt exposed the Watergate scandal, and Winner exposed presidential election interference in 2016. Secrets frequently kill the truth.

As a transactional President, Trump will roil the world more in his second term of office than his first.

Ferrell’s and Newman’s book will make many even more concerned about the Trump presidency. Trump’s purposefully uninformed knowledge of history will become a greater source of conflict in the world because he has a second term’ understanding of how the American government works and how it can be subverted with loyal followers.

To make the point clearer, Trump views the world transactionally. The measure of value is most easily understood as wealth and the influence of money. Appointing wealthy sycophants to the government ensure victimization of the poor.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: