Sunday, March 17, 2024

Outbidding Oneself? Trump Competes with Himself?

 The entire idea of ethnic outbidding is that one is pushed by competition to ever more extreme promises.  In 2016, Trump was pushed by Cruz and others to ban Muslims, for instance, to prove that he was a better defender of white "Christians" and all that.  Ethnic outbidding is a well understood dynamic built from studying cases where multiple contenders for an homogeneous party each make extreme claims.

But, Steve, Trump doesn't face any competition from his own party.  That's right, his last significant opponent dropped out, and Nikki never really tried to outflank Trump to his right anyway.  Yet now Trump is promising bloodshed if he loses and has gone from calling all Mexicans rapists in 2016 to saying that refugees aren't human: "“They’re not people, in my opinion.” He later referred to them as “animals.”"  

I have to admit that the conventional poli sci tools can't account for this.  While Gary J (who was at UCSD during my time there) long ago argued that politicians are always running scared, always acting as if there is competition even when they have a safe seat, I think something a bit less rational is going on here. 

Here I go from amateur scholar of American politics to amateur psychologist.  Trump is an insecure narcissist who is always seeking louder and louder applause.  Notice that his most threatening rhetoric comes at his rallies.  Does he need these rallies?  No, as a pseudo-incumbent with followers threatening opponents with violence, Trump could run for Presidency without every leaving the golf course.  Sure, the rallies may be useful for some grifting, but he kept on doing his rallies mid-pandemic and again more rallies sans competition because he gets high off of the adulation.  He could just play his old hits--build a wall, ban Muslims, etc, but he wants the crowds (the mobs) to be loud and enthusiastic, so he finds new applause lines and pushes them when they get the desired reaction.

This is, of course, a guess, but I think a sound one.  The alternative is that he thinks that threatening yet ever more violence and ever more dehumanizing racist rhetoric will either cause more people to vote for him or deter folks from voting for Biden.  As someone who has mostly relied on rational choice assumptions, I simply don't think they work here.  There is a risk of outflanking oneself as greater extremism may turn out the extremists but turn off those who are not so extreme but dislike Biden or want more power for the GOP or want yet another supreme court seat.

There may be some crafty strategist manipulating Trump, but the way his claims tend to escalate when speaking off the cuff suggests otherwise.  It suggests a search for lines that will hit, causing the crowd to react, which then gives Trump the fix he needs.  It is not just all adderall. 

To be fair, he is right about one thing--there will be more violence.  Trump incites violence, so this is both a cause and a prediction.  The blood is and will be on his hands, on Fox's, and on the GOP's. 


Saturday, March 16, 2024

Berlin 2024 Week Vier: Progress Accelerating

A bit of the wall near
the Canadian embassy
 Time flies when one is sabbaticalling in a foreign land.  Today marks a complete month in Europe with most of it in Berlin (just the one trip to Vienna thus far but that will change soon).  I had my first interviews for the project--it took a while to get started, but now the schedule is filling up.  And I got to present the project to the Hertie folks.  Oh and more walking and gawking and touristing. 

Usually, when I travel to a national capital to do fieldwork, I am there for a week or two, I try to fill up my schedule before or as I arrive, and then scamper around to meet as many people as possible.  This trip is different, of course, since I am here for three months this year and then again three months next year.  So, I prearranged an apartment and other living details but mostly waited to arrange the interviews until I got here.  Just before I started to get frustrated, I started getting appointments for this past week and the upcoming weeks.  I had an excellent conversation with a German air force officer and with a defence attache, and people have started to shower me with the names of interesting people to meet.  So, I will be doing coffee somewhere tomorrow (Sunday) with one such person and then my Monday will be quite full.  I have, of course, preconceptions of where Germany will fit in this project, but have already heard that some of that may be a bit off.  Good--I like learning.  

Speaking of learning, I presented my project to the Hertie folks.  They have a colloquium every two weeks, so I was invited to share my research, such as it is.  The project is in its very early stages, so the feedback can and will be most useful in directing the project.  I received a lot of very good questions, some of which we had not thought about.  It was a very helpful experience, and I hope to be able to do it again next year and see if we have made much progress.

I stayed in character and betrayed my character in the same day.  I saw this and ran away.  No, most of the milk here is in cartons.  I haven't gotten milk in a bag, although I have sometimes bought shelf-stable milk.  I still prefer to buy cold milk, but the shelf stuff was fine.  The betrayal was that the highly rated cookie store near me is vegan.  I had one wildly overpriced cookie, and it was good. I won't be going back mostly because of the price.  It was about 60% the cost of an amazing doner kebab sandwich I had a few minutes earlier, so I know where I will be investing my food splurge Euros.



I did do a spot of shopping as a need a luggage strap for my huge suitcase for the trip back in May.  So, the Mall of Berlin was tempting but not for the goods but because of this:

Yep, a three story slide.  If I wasn't wearing my nice clothes (I was in the neighborhood for an interview), I would have done it.  Maybe next time.

I am finally making progress on writing up the South Korean case study which is a mass of contradictions.  I have been doing some CDSN stuff--podcast recording, meetings, reporting.  So, the beat goes on.

I have been most successful at binging stuff--Masters of the Air is done, The Gentlemen was good except a meh ending, Damsel was a fun princess versus dragon (quite an excellent dragon) tale.  I have slowed my Buffy watching because, dare I say it, I don't find it that compelling.  I think my daughter will disown me....  oh well.

But in the next few weeks, the rhythm will change.  I will get on the road (or rails) more as the Humboldt folks have a meeting for us awardees in Bamberg, which is famous for smoky beer.  The following week I head off to the Alps (which will require planes, trains, and automoboiles) to see how Euro-skiing is different from my experiences elsewhere.  This year, I am doubling the continents where I have skied as I had done North and South America (Chile) in previous years, and Japan/Asia in January.  Very much looking forward to the next new skiing experience.

I will be spending this afternoon checking out a new (to me) neighborhood and food market.  Hope all is well over there.









Sunday, March 10, 2024

Vienna Waited For Me?


 I spent roughly 48 hours in Vienna, as Erin Jenne, a friend and co-author, invited me to Central European University to give a talk about my ongoing research and to help her grade her class's poster presentations.  It was not my first time to Austria, as I did visit Salzburg during my Eurailpass summer long ago, but it was my first time to Vienna.  Indeed, I am pretty sure Vienna was the only European capital on this side of the former Iron Curtain that I had not visited other than Athens.  And I am pretty sure we will do Greece next year.

I am most grateful for the chance to present our work on both legislative and defense agency oversight over democratic armed forces, as I received a bunch of really good questions from both the audience in the room and those watching online that has already caused me to add a paragraph to our essentially complete book.  The ethnic conflict class was a blast to the past as Erin had teams of students compare pairs of situations, mostly across space but some over time, applying theories of ethnic conflict to understand the variation.  It exercised old brain muscles, as I have mostly left that stuff behind when I moved onto civil-military relations.

Speaking of ethnic conflict, CEU is in Vienna because it was kicked out of Budapest, Hungary.  George Soros, bogeyman of the far right, essentially pays for CEU, so Orban objected to the school and pushed it out.  It has only been a few years, but enough time has passed that the students of today don't really know the history of the prior situation.  Oh, and the place we ate at after my talk had the most unusual lamp:












Since both events were in the evening and my flight got pushed to the mid-afternoon on Friday, I had time to see the city.  On my first day of tourism, I hit the two museums near my hotel, both based in a prince's former set of palaces.  So, it was a two-for--seeing some great art and walking around a big palace or two.  And, yes, not only is Vienna chock full of massive buildings but a heap of palaces.  I aimed to walk around much of the historical center and accomplished that. 

Klimt's Kiss was the featured
piece at the first Belvedere palace
The second Belvedere palace
had Ukrainian art exhibited
 

 













Oh and I found the restaurant that was recommended to me.  I was looking for strudel and found it.


I had plenty of time before my flight to go to two more museums--one about the history of Vienna and a modern art museum.  I learned a lot about Vienna in a short period of time.  That there were huge divides between the left wing city and the countryside in the early 1900s that created much tension, for example.  I was surprised at how much anti-semitism was discussed, even going so far as to mention how Austrians tried to duck responsibility by considering themselves the first victims of the Nazis.

The wire cutters and wire here are from when Austria and Hungary cut the fences separating the two countries in 1989 which ultimately led to the fall of the Berlin wall and the end of communism and autocracy in Eastern Europe.



My timing was good as one of my fave artists had a special exhibit that started on this day I had to do some tourism.  I am not an expert on art, but, yes, I know what I like. Roy Lichtenstein's art has always resonated with me, partly because of my old hobby of collecting comic books, partly because I like art when it is colorful and dynamic, and partly because he had a great sense of humor.  I learned a bit more about him and that he had some sculptures.




This trip to Austria was the first of two this month as I am going to spend the end of the month skiing in the Austrian Alps, my first time skiing in Europe.  So, I predict more schnitzel and strudel in my near future.


 

 

 

 

Friday, March 8, 2024

Cranky Defence Critic And Threats Facing Canada

 I woke up in the middle of the night because I am old and I ate and drank too much.  I couldn't resist schnitzel and strudel as I am in Vienna for a talk and for some other shenanigans (more on that in another post).  And then I saw Phil Lagassé's post on the Conservatives and if they might spend on defence if elected.  On that general topic, I am a skeptic as I think the CPC cares more about deficits than about defence, and the place to cut the budget is, alas, defence.  That is where the money is.  This was true under Harper.  I don't know what Pierre Poilevre believes in, other than opportunism and pandering to the far right, but I don't think he will commit lots of money to get Canada to 2% of GDP (on the other hand, he could tank the economy, and that is the other way to get there).  Oh, and to be clear, I think we need to spend significantly more on the military--I am just not going to threat inflate to get us there.

Anyway, Phil said in his piece that we need to spend more to deal with the threat in the Arctic, and I had to scoff. Which led to a fun exchange in bluesky, reminiscent of the old days on twitter where we would argue and people thought we hated each other.  Hint: I don't co-author with people I don't like.  Ir don't co-author with the same person several times unless we get along very well.  But it is both fun and educational to push back against one of the very sharpest defence minds in Canada.

Specifically, Phil said: "Canadians know their Arctic is vulnerable."  And my ensuing commentary focused on that: what exactly is the threat to Canada from on high?  And should we consider this the most significant/dangerous threat?  My point is that it is way back in line.  Phil says we need to have better situational awareness up north.  My rejoinder is: no invasion coming, just some spy ships on the water and below it.  Others chimed in: more ships going through the northwest passage means more environmental stuff could go awry.  And, I agree.  But where does that line up in the threat picture?  

Here's my cranky, awakened with acid in my throat, ranking of the threats facing Canada. 

  1. Climate change: Canadians are paying a high price for the changing climate even if we could joke about being a beneficiary as our winters get mostly shorter.  Milder?  Variance is more certain than anything else.  Anyhow, people are dying in floods and fires, much property is being destroyed.  When I speak of threat, I think of real harms to Canadians, to the economy, to governance.  Climate change is first and it is not close.  I was mocked by someone via email when I said this on TV,  but I have never been a super lefty, green environmentalist type in my work.  It is just the reality that in dollar amounts and in lives, the warming planet is harming Canadians in a big way and it is only going to get worse. A recurring theme is that many of the threats either cannot or will not have the military as the lead agency.  This actually comes the closest given that the provinces underinvest in emergency management, knowing that the military will act if asked and won't present a bill.
  2. Pandemics: how many people were killed by covid in Canada?  Nearly 60,000, which is more than Canadians killed in all foreign wars combined if one leaves out WWI.  Plus many people now have long covid.  It did a heap of damage to the economy, and, if you care about deficits (I don't really), guess what blew a big hole in the budget? I am very glad the Liberal government poured a ton of money into the economy as we didn't have runs on food banks during the height of the pandemic.  I just wish Conservative-led provinces actually spent the money allotted to health care on.... health care.  Will covid be the last pandemic?  No.  Indeed, given what it has done to attitudes about vaccinations, quarantines, and masking, I doubt we will respond as well next time.  Scary, eh?  The military was called out because other agencies lacked capacity, but this was really a medical/scientific thing, so let's not allocate a ton of money to the military for pandemic preparedness.
  3. Cyber attacks.  Wars are distant, but cyber attacks are hitting Canadians every day, disrupting people's lives, hurting various businesses and public agencies, and pose a significant threat where some country could bring down our power or harm dams and more.  Is this the military's job?  Partially but not really.  We don't need people who are trained to fire weapons and ready to deploy abroad and all that stuff to fight a cyber war.  We need smart folks at well equipped desks.  We definitely need to have more money spent on the military to survive and thrive in a cyberwar environment, but the CAF is not really our answer to thwarting cyber attacks against the Canadian public.
  4. Far right violence.  We live in a time of increasing attacks by xenophobes, misogynists, homophobes, racists, anti-semities, Islamophobes, and white supremacists (these hates tend to travel together).  Yes, left wing extremists can have many of these attributes, but it is clear that the violence is almost entirely coming from the far right. These haters are doing real harm to Canadians right now, and the trend is in the wrong direction.  Can the military do anything about this?  I think the general rule of not having the military police the public is a very good idea.  Instead, the military's role is mostly to make sure it is not training the next generation of far right terrorists. 
  5. Disinformation.  This is, of course, related to the prior one, but it also involves foreign actors who are trying to tilt election outcomes.  We are increasingly living in a time where people can't trust what they see and hear, or they are trusting the wrong actors.  This leads to develop dangerous beliefs--like vaccines are poisonous, that the government in power is engaging in great, deliberate harm against its ideological opponents, and so forth,  While the Liberals have screwed up many things, they need some trust in government to operate on our behalf, just as the Conservatives or NDP would need people to trust in institutions.  The military should not be the primary actor at home on this either even as they engage in info ops abroad.
  6. People might I was joking about the increases in truck/SUV size being a threat, but more than 2000 people died in car accidents in 2023, and the trend is going up, even if one cuts the peak covid years from the dataset.
  7. North Korean missiles. While China and Russia have nuclear missiles, I have a bit more faith in the workings of deterrence and a bit less worried about accidental/deliberate first use.  North Korea would not have any reason to attack Canada, but I could imagine that their aim might be that good.  Of course, what is the CAF's role in this?  Providing warning that Vancouver is doomed and then helping to respond to the aftermath.  We have no defences against ballistic missiles nor will Canada have any such systems  anytime in the future.  I am a skeptic about American strategic defense (although tactical anti-missile systems seem to range from pretty good to amazing), but I do think Canada should join the US system as the ABM treaty is very dead.  This is a military job and would justify the massive investment in NORAD modernization.  Otherwise, it really is a system to warn us to give us a few minutes to kiss our loved ones goodbye.  Oh, and manage relations with the US.
  8. US relations!  The Canadian economy and its security crucially depend on the US, and, oh my, Canada will be so very, very fucked if Trump were to win. Democracies have lived beside authoritarian regimes before (hey, Finland!), but so much of Canada's position in the world relies on this huge market and this peaceful border and cooperation with the US.  When was the last time Canada fought abroad without the US beside its side?  UN missions?  Guess again as the UN relies heavily on American support to do its ops.  One could argue this would mean less wars for Canada--no more Afghanistans (which was purely to help its ally).  But Canada would be even at greater risk of being bullied by the China's and Saudi Arabia's of the world.  And, of course, by Trump himself.  But again, this is not the CAF's job to prevent or mitigate this.  If Trump is elected, most of the problems above get worse and this item zooms to the top.
  9. Maybe here goes: incomplete understanding of what is happening in the Arctic. Yes, that stuff up north is still Canada, but the threat to Canadians up there is not really that posed by Russia or China but by the lack of infrastructure and by the aforementioned climate change, pandemics, etc.

So, if the military is not needed for this stuff, or only needed for domestic emergency ops, why spend tens of billions on it?  Why increase spending?  It comes down to this: the military is an instrument of policy.  This means that it can and is used to further Canadian government objectives even if most of those objectives are not about thwarting threats to Canada.  Canada has consistent interests in the world for which the CAF is a key tool, such as helping to foster stability in Europe and Asia.  Canada, like the US, has learned that when those continents catch fire, it damages Canadian interests and hurts Canadians.  A war in the South China Sea with or without the Canadian navy would be catastrophic to the Canadian economy.  War west of Ukraine would also be quite damaging.  

NATO itself is an important interest that requires the Canadian military to invest in itself and in NATO missions.  Ultimately, Canadians want to do good in the world and want to support the international order, whether we call it liberal or rules-based or American hegemony or whatever.  Because we understand that Canadians have more influence within institutions than outside of them, that the rules have favored the Canadian economy, and helped the Canadian people to enjoy the fruits of international cooperation.

Ultimately, one wants a well armed, well trained, well staffed military to prepare for the worst.  In my ranking of threats, I focused on both likelihood of the threat being realized and the amount of harm that is likely if the threat happens.  Climate change is at the top because it is happening and is not going away and is going to do heaps of damage.  The threat in the Arctic is lower down because it is unlike that any foreign actor will attack that way and the damage they can do is not that great, again compared to everything else.

Oh, and what is also a threat?  Having an under-funded, unprepared, ill-equipped military sent off to war--that way lies tragedy.  So, yes, spend more, but let's not exaggerate where the threats are coming from and what the role of the military is.



Saturday, March 2, 2024

Berlin 2024: Report Zwei

 Before I go out and tourist this Saturday, time to post about my second week in Berlin.  The big news was laundry.  No, not really.  The big news is the Zeintwende conference I attended.  

I spent two days hanging out at the Hertie School where they and the German armed forces Centre of Military History and Social Sciences held a conference on how European countries are re-thinking their world views in the aftermath of Russia's re-invasion of Ukraine in 2022.  I blogged about it here, so I will not repeat my summary of the event.  I will say that it definitely facilitated two of my objectives for my time here in Berlin: interviewing folks about the civil-military relations of European countries (as part of the larger, global project) and getting European perspectives on the state of things.  So, I learned a great deal, and I met with folks who I will eventually be meeting for interviews.  I definitely am feeling good about the research project even though I haven't interviewed anyone here yet.  But that will change soon.

Nice views of Dom
and TV tower at hight
The conference had one complication--a transit strike.  Google maps wouldn't show u-bahn routes, but I tried my local u-bahn stop anyway, but the subway entrance was fenced off.  I tried another entrance and same thing.  I was able to take the s-bahn and then walk about 15 minutes to get to the Hertie School on the first day.  I walked all the way home (I could have gotten a cab or taken the s-bahn, but it was a nice night).  The strike ended the afternoon of the second day so I could go home after the conference and then come back for a great dinner with some of the folks who were still around.  My first real German dinner, as I have been mostly cooking for myself, and, yes, my first beer on this trip.  

I did also do laundry.  The place I am staying has a scary looking washing machine and no dryer, so I took my stuff to a nearby laundromat.  It was super clean and got cleaner as the attendant showed up midway through my cycles and was super thorough.  The machines automatically put in detergent and such so I didn't have to buy any or measure any.  There was a central panel that controlled all the machines so I didn't have to have a lot of coins (5 Euro notes were handy).  And plenty of instructions in both German and English.  My plan was to read a novel while I waited, but I got to chat with a lovely Australian couple that were cleaning their clothes in between their Norwegian cruise and their German touring.  

I made progress in revising the legislative civ-mil project, and now have some appointments for the next project.  

The most dangerous aspect of this trip: I live way too close to one of the best bakery chains in Berlin: https://zeitfuerbrot.com/en.   Yum. 



Nope, didn't go, but thought about it.



Zeitenwende All Over the World!

 Two years ago, Olaf Scholtz, the German Chancellor, announced that we were at a moment of Zeitenwende in the aftermath of Russia's renewed invasion of Ukraine (2014 was the start, 2022 was much deeper with greater intensity and more far-reaching aims).  The term refers to a watershed moment, a rupture, a turning point that ushers out the old way of thinking and ushers in a new one.  That alters the ideational foundations of foreign/defense policy and grand strategy.  I am lucky enough to be in Berlin and at the Hertie School as they held an event aimed at seeking to understand whether this was just a German thing or whether other parts of Europe were also changing their worldviews/mindsets.  The public event was advertised thusly.

For the Germans, a key was that rather than thinking that there is no security in Europe if it is not cooperative security with Russia, now the thinking is that there is no security in Europe if it is not cooperative security against Russia.  The big question, of course, is whether there have been changes not just in thoughts but in deeds.  And, yes, Germany is doing stuff it had not done before: spending at least for now more than 2% of its GDP on defense, sending arms to a war zone, reduction of energy dependence on Russia, etc.  But does it have a clear idea of what the new world view is?  Not so sure.  

The panelists from all over Europe were asked a bunch of questions by the organizers including: has your country or region had a zeitenwende, if so, what is it, when was it?  How is the match between the governing elites and the public on attitudes about all of this?  We folks in the audience asked whatever questions that came to us (yes, I tended to ask civ-mil questions).  And hanging over all of this was Trump potentially winning in November and the meaning of that--can there be a European NATO (with a Canadian appendage?)*

Since we had three workshop panels and one public panel essentially covering most of Europe, I am not going to repeat everything I learned.  I did learn a lot and will remember some of it.  But here are some of the highlights:

  • The Baltics and Poland did not have a change in worldviews in 2022, but could simply say "we told you so," as their views towards Russia and European security were either formed around 2007-8 with Russia's cyberattack on Estonia and war with Georgia or... always saw NATO and European security as against Russia not with Russia.  UK was also in this camp, more or less, and is better able to respond as it has reduced the dependence on Russian capital in the financial sector.
  • France has made some significant policy shifts, but providing extended deterrence if Trump pulls back the US commitment is not going to happen.  
  • Lots of lag--several countries want to make adaptations but implementation is slow.  I got some knowing laughs at lunch today when I said that everyone's procurement was broken in different ways--kind of the way every snowflake is different.
  • Everybody has recruitment/retention issues in their militaries--Canada is far from alone in that.
  • Germany is trying to find the old playbooks from the Cold War--how did West Germany contract with the US and others about the long term bases--providing schools and infrastructure and the like--as they need to know for their plan to have such bases in Lithuania.  Yes, they are moving not just a brigade of troops but their families as the US, UK, Canada, and others did during the Cold War. This contrasts sharply with the Canadian strategy of shipping troops in and out every six months.  It shows how long term and how serious the Germans are.  Significant up front costs but probably less expensive in the long run.
  • Carlo Masala's public talk started the three known unknowns that frame thinking--will Russians win in Ukraine, what will happen in the US election, what will be the future of EU/will the far right gain more ground?  
  • Speaking of Trump, there is still some wishful thinking in Europe--that Trump will not follow through if elected. I kept telling folks that he wouldn't have sent forces to help an invaded ally before and he certainly won't do so in the future.
  • Sweden and Finland had public opinion flip after 2022 invasion, so, yes, some zeitenwende here.  But an interesting contrast as for Finland, neutrality was a strategy, but for Sweden, it was an identity.  
  • Poland having nuclear thoughts?  Irony is that this almost makes Mearsheimer right as he predicted that Germany would develop nukes after NATO falls apart after the end of the Cold War.  Instead, after the end of the after the cold war, due to the possibility of American withdrawal, Poland, not Germany, is now pondering proliferation.  Much talk in that part of the world about whether the Russian timeline for invading Poland/Baltics is 2-3 years or more like 5-7.  And yeah, I don't think that is likely, but it is easy for me to say from distant Canada.  One thing is clear in Poland--no one is wondering where the money will come from as they move beyond 2% to 3.5% or more.
  • The Baltics convo started with a reminder that Trump was so ignorant he thought World War I started there and not in the Balkans.  
  • The NATO-Founding Act is not dead enough.  It no longer restricts conventional deployments (see German permanent basing in Lithuania above), but it does restrict the nuke stuff.  Which enrages the Baltics who think that agreement is dead, dead, dead.
  • Ethnic politics is alive in the Balkans as the various stances of countries towards Russia-Ukraine is complicated by the ethnic politics within.  Three cheers for my first ten years of research!  Serbia is pro-Russia, the Serb entity in Bosnia is pro-Russia.  This leads to actors in the region that are not pro-NATO. Of course, those that benefited from NATO intervention are pro-NATO--Albania, Kosovo, Northern Macedonia.  This discussion raised another complication from a Trump victory--NATO is still in Kosovo.  But probably would not be if Trump is President again.  
  • Romania's relations with Ukraine did go through a big swing from tensions over old territorial claims to friendship as they both are threatened by Russia.
  • A side discussion mines floating in the Black Sea reminded me that the consequences of this war will outlast the war, just as the Germans at the conference reminded me that construction workers discover a old bomb from WWII in Berlin every couple of weeks.
  • Why is Hungary such an outlier in all things these days?  Mostly because it wants to be exactly that.  Since there is no real competition domestically, Orban can fixate on foreign policy and wants to pull Europe in his direction.  I had forgotten about the Hungarian minority in Ukraine, but, of course, an optimally obnoxious nationalist country such as Hungary (see the Steve and Bill book) would want to keep that tension alive.  
  • The challenge of potential Ukrainian membership in the EU is mostly about the fact that Ukraine is big--it would have a major impact on the distribution of agricultural benefits/competition and also specific sectors like transit.  So, Portugal and Spain (and others) are more concerned about the economic impact of Ukraine joining the EU than any implications regarding Russia or anything else.
  • Greece is in surprisingly good shape.  Its spending on defense is now more focused on modernizing the force, it is attempting rapprochement with Turkey, and is even participating in the US-led op in the Red Sea (if I heard correctly).  Greek support for Ukraine is ahead of where the public is. 

Some big themes drawn by the organizers at the end:

  • Distance matters--those closer to Russia either already had shifted their stances and were in "I told you so" mode or flipped quite dramatically, changing decades of orientation (Finland/Sweden).  Those furthest away and least energy dependent on Russia didn't really have to shift.
  • Everyone is holding their breath for the next zeitenwende--if Trump gets elected---what happens with NATO (Steve says it essentially dies or becomes far weaker with Europe plus Canadsa)?  
  • Some ZW was a matter of time--some revolutions in thinking started with Crimea in 2014, some started in 2022, some started in 2007-08.  And some have not had a major re-thinking.

The only Canadian content was injected by... me.   During the lunch on the second day, I got some questions about whether there has been a Canadian zeitenwende, and I basically said no.  That would require some real hard thinking on Canada's role in the world and how it has changed and what should be the Canadian response.  And, no, this Canadian government is not doing that thinking (nor would a Conservative one lead by PP).  Instead, as someone asked me: is Canadian foreign policy diaspora politics, I pretty much said yes.

It was a great event for me.  First, I came to Europe in part to get European perspectives on the state of play, and this I got in a big way. Second, I met a number of people who I hope to interview for my current project, so I am a bit less anxious about getting to talk to the right people and enough of them.  I have plenty of time between this three month trip and next year's, but always good to have a more in-person, human connection with the sharp folks on the stuff I am studying.  Third, it was just fascinating.  I got into IR because this stuff engages me, and this conference did so.  Finally, the folks involved--the organizers and the speakers--are simply nice, sharp folks, and so it was fun.


Sunday, February 25, 2024

Pondering Platforming

 A controversy broke out on social media this weekend: Taylor Lorenz interviewed the (or one of the) truly horrible people behind the far right Libs of Tiktok account.  It raised questions of whether one should platform the truly awful.  I have been thinking of platforming such for awhile  now, so I am using this as an opportunity to think through my stance (which is not at all based on a strong standing of the legalities of all of this).

Let's start with the basics that people get so very confused about:

  1. No one is entitled to a platform, everyone is entitled to free speech.
  2. To be clear, when we talk about free speech, we need to be clear that the 1st amendment in the US (and probably the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canada) only restricts governments from restricting people's right to engage in free speech.  Clubs and, yes, businesses can restrict the speech of their members/employees in ways that the state cannot. 
  3. Free speech does have some restrictions--the classic is you can't yell fire as a prank in a crowded theater as that is dangerous.  Inciting violence is also not so free, although your mileage may vary on what counts as incitement.  Is "Free Palestine" incitement? I don't think so. 

Now, that whole platform is not the same thing as free speech thing. One is not obligated to give time/space/bandwidth/whatever to anyone (in ye olde days, US tv stations had to give equal time, and when it went away, that gave room for Fox and its ilk).  Universities, for example, don't have to provide stages and fora and audiences to far right speakers or even not so far right speakers.  Or far left ones. 

In an op-ed, I argued that the Conservative Party of Canada should not provide a prominent speaking position to a far-right retired general as that would politicize the Canadian armed forces.*  Of course, the supposedly cancelled retired general then used his perch at the National Post, a right wing newspaper, to argue that I was trying to deny him free speech.  Nope, I didn't say he couldn't rant in public, I was just arguing it was a bad idea for the CPC to amplify him.  He is entitled to say what he wants, he is not entitled to having his speech amplified.  There is a distinction here, and he is smart enough to get it, even if wants to play coy about how a dual citizen might dare to question him.

So, the question is rarely whether to deny someone free expression (although when it comes to jury tampering or inciting violence, gag orders on the Trump family seem to be not only fair but wise), but rather who to platform and under what conditions.  Obviously, the starting point is the intention of the potential actor that might be platforming someone.  The example of the CPC: they wanted to attack the government and found a handy tool that might make it look like they presenting mainstream military views that contradict the government.  Yeah, tis bad faith bullshit, but they had that intent so they didn't care what the downstream effects will be on the military.

The example of this weekend is a lot different: it is not just giving space for a hater to speak at length, but providing a critical interview where the interviewer pushes back and gets the hater to be revealed as shallow, incoherent, virulently racist and xenophobic.  To be honest, I haven't watched the entire thing because, well, yuck.  I am online enough (understatement) to know what Libs of Tiktok have been doing--inciting violence against Black Americans first and now LGBTQ+ folks. That the account deliberately names individuals so that its followers can then threaten those people.  Truly, truly awful.  But folks who are not so online may not be aware of this, so a WashPo reporter doing an extended interview with the source of all this hate is a good way to expose what's going on.  People can disagree about whether we need to hear from the source directly, but this is not platforming in the sense of giving someone a megaphone and letting them spread their views.  Recently, the governor of Oklahoma gave this far right white nationalist a position on the state's library advisory council.  That is giving someone a platform.  And then a non-binary kid gets killed, and the governor then acts all shocked.  

Anyhow, sometimes these decisions are tricky because we want to expose awful people, but we don't want to provide awful people with greater audiences.  Folks might argue that we need the marketplace of ideas to sort this out, but like most markets and most invocations of the market metaphor, it really doesn't work like the metaphor. Ideas do not win or lose based on the quality of their debaters or the quality of the ideas themselves.  They win or lose based on what people do and who has the power.  That a far right white supremacist owns and controls twitter is a real problem that cannot be sorted out by everyone sharing their competing ideas online.  Musk is platforming far right racist and xenophobic stuff, and he is blocking stuff that is critical.  Suspending Navalny's wife a day or two after his death is a real tell.  

Ultimately, journalists and organizations have to be prudent about who they give platforms and who they do not.  Again, no one is entitled to the front page or the editorial page or the university's biggest stage. Every decision to give someone a platform is just that a decision, which should be based on the benefits and the costs.  Academic freedom suggests giving space to a wide range of views, but there is no need to bring back that which has been thoroughly discredited--like flat earthers or those who buy into eugenic stuff or bell curves and IQ tests or antivaxxers.

And, yes, we live in a time where Democracy is under threat. Which is a bigger danger: giving anti-democratic forces the megaphone or denying them platforms and then having those forces try to make those institutions feel bad for being hypocritical?  The bad faith actors want to use our values against ourselves.  It can be tricky about how to respond but respond we must.  

So, that's my incoherent rambling on this topic.  You are required to read it, to respond, or to share it via social media.








* I realize that folks can argue whether Maisonneuve is right wing or far right, but my coding rule these days if one uses "woke" disparagingly and essentially slurs those who are not cis straight folks, they are far right. If right wing folks want to say that is not fair, that those are mainstream views of the right, well, they are telling on themselves about where they are. 

Saturday, February 24, 2024

Berlin 2024: Report Eins!

Yes, I went back to the East Side Gallery my first
weekend, as it was not closed on Sunday
most shopping is closed)
 I have been in Berlin for one week thus far, with nearly three months to go.  It has been a very busy week, and it did not just involve getting situated.  But, yes, that took some effort and time as well.  So, what have been up to in the shadow of the TV tower that is featured in any movie that wants to depict Berlin as a destination?

 

 

First, yes, getting situated.  I am staying near the Hertie School's Center for International Security, which is just off of Alexanderplatz.  The apartment has much of what I need, but I had to go out and get a pillow (made in Canada!), a printer, groceries, and a residence permit.  Yes, the country of Max Weber is very bureaucratic.  Because there is much demand these days for all kinds of paperwork, I was lucky to snare an appointment on the farthest southern edge of Berlin.   I got my paperwork stamped, so I can reside in Berlin officially.  woot!  

 

 

 

 

 

President of Hertie, the Chinese former VM,
and Tobias Bunde
Second, it turns out that my timing is good and the Hertie School is a happening place.  Tobias Bunde, one of the researchers here, is also a/the organizer of the Munich Security Conference which happened the weekend I arrived.  So, he brought a former Chinese Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs to a packed room (the Hertie students are from all over and they are keeners) where she presented her take on what happened at Munich and what are the major trends in international relations.  I found her to be the best representative of the Chinese government: her English was great, she was not overly polemical, she knew her audience, and so forth.  She definitely presented a biased point of view, but a clear one that was well asserted.  She noted for instance that only four panels out of a hundred at the conference were on Gaza. She pointed that the discussions on that and on Ukraine were focused on problems, not solutions.  But she was not pressed to offer any solutions. She contrasted the threat to freedom of the seas--that it is a problem for commercial shipping in the Red Seas but only a threat to American warships in the South China Sea.  Hmmmm.  She talked about Asia's long peace, she seems to be omitting the occasional Indo-Pakistan conflict.  Speaking of omissions, she argued that occupation never works, and that this something the Americans should have known in 2003 and the Russians should have known two years ago.  I was tempted to ask about Tibet or perhaps Chinese intentions towards Taiwan, but the event was for students.  It was a great way to jump into things and meet a bunch of folks.

No pics of Peter K,
but of other
important thinkers
Another event was a session with Peter Katztenstein--one of the most important scholars in both International Relations and Comparative Politics for the past fifty years.  Required reading, indeed.  He was presented his latest book project (no retirement yet) that is pretty complex, raising meta questions about our thinking and about our need to think about uncertainty.  It was similar to Debbi Avant's presidential address at the ISA a couple of years ago.  He gave us a few chapters, the crowded room had read it, and so it was mostly Q&A.  After the talk, he sat near me and we chatted a bit.  That he has written books comparing Germany and Japan was not lost on me given my latest projects.  

Next week, there will be a conference I am crashing at Hertie on the state of Zeitenwende and whether other countries are experiencing it as well.  Huh?  Oh, this refers to a speech by Germany's Chancellor  Olaf Scholz shortly after Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine, that we live in a watershed moment, that we need to have a revolution in foreign and defense policy.  He committed to a lot more defense spending and ending German dependence on Russian energy.  The big questions are: how much of this has and is happening and whether other countries are rethinking their place in the world. I hope to find out next week.

Third, I have been getting some work done.  I have started arranging interviews for the German case, finalizing the details for a trip to Finland in April to do that case study, doing the same for a research presentation at Central European University in Vienna in a few weeks (and, yes, nailing down the details for an Alps ski trip).  I also revised three chapters of the Steve/Dave/Phil book before Dave tries to find some interest at the ISA in April.  I hope to do my turn on the rest of the book in the next week.  

Fourth, I have, of course, been touristing.  I spent last weekend and today walking around this part of Berlin.  I am far more familiar with west Berlin, as I have been largely based at hotels in west Berlin.  My first walks were more targeted as I was looking for grocery stores (and google maps kept lying about where they were).  

 Some observations, which may be due to change over time or may be due to East Berlin being a bit different than West Berlin:

  • Less adherence to the guidance of the little green/red Ampelmännchen, as I saw more people walking despite the red signs.  Is this a sign that German society is breaking down?
  • Or is that the walk signals in East Berlin are too damned short?  I can't tell you on how many streets I have been stuck in the middle (mostly where the trams go) as the light turns red very quickly.
  • I don't remember this much graffiti all over the place last time.  On the bright side, when a store or something has nice wall art, the vandals or artists paint elsewhere.
  • Lots of reconstruction and renovations going on.
  • Lots more Five Guys burger places than I can recall.  I haven't tried them yet, as I am mostly doing my own modest cooking (this apartment's kitchen is not well equipped, so no baking and only basic dinners).  I did start off my time here with currywurst and chips, but I think my go-to cheap food will be kebabs/shawarma stuff.  I did happen to walk past an Indonesian place, so I will be returning to that neighborhood when I am tired of my own cooking.

Today's walk was more random, as I would head in one direction and then find something interesting on the map.  Which took me to a memorial for those who the East German government killed at the Berlin Wall, which, yes, has been down longer than it has been up.  I learned a great deal:

  • I should have realized how dynamic the interplay between Communist government and those seeking to escape would be.  The wall such as it was kept evolving as the government learned via the escapes and attempts.
  • Part of the memorial showing
    where the house got built over by
    the wall
    Including tunneling!  57 people got out through one tunnel--amazing.
  • The wall itself caused more people to want to leave as it signaled more repression.
  • The evolution of the barrier included destruction of a church (one dedicated to Reconciliation!) and the movement of dead bodies from a graveyard, it involved boarding up and then destroying houses.

 

 

 


  • There were a fair amount of German tour groups going through this area, so yes, still much interest even as it recedes in our memories.

The other new experience for me is a 21st century gym.  I have mostly exercised on ultimate fields, bike rides through neighborhoods, the treadmill in our basement, and the occasional hotel fitness center.  There is a spiffy, reasonable place near me that has the stuff I need (treadmills, space to stretch to try to fix my balky knee) and far more stuff.  The denizens are in much, much better shape than I am, doing all kinds of exercises that I would not attempt, so that has been a funky distraction while I sweat out the pastries I have been buying.  The bakeries here are good, and, yes, they like their donuts.  I have resisted mightily but not entirely.  

Next week, I will report what I learned at zeintenwende-fest.   

 Some random pics from my walks: 



Vegetarian butcher? 









Funky signs, not sure there is an actual cafe here.