Major Security Issues in 2012
January 19, 2012
As we begin 2012, there a number of pressing issues and recent events that will both affect and shape the national security policy of the United States. This is particularly important as we also begin an election year. It is then critical to review some recent issue and events that will shape the debate.
Domestic Security Issues
2012 Defense Budget
On December 1, the Senate completed action on the Senate Defense Authorization bill. In some significant fashion, it approved a measure by voice vote urging the president to speed up the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan. It placed greater sanctions on Iran and approved detainee provisions, despite the fact that the Obama administration had previously announced its objections to these proposals.
After nearly two weeks of debate dominated by a dispute over military detainees, the Senate finally passed the fiscal 2012 defense authorization bill. The bill authorizes $527 billion for the base defense budget, and $117 billion for overseas contingency operations. In addition to a 1.6 percent pay raise for military personnel, the Senate agreed to amendments that would:
- Make the National Guard bureau chief a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
- Provide for employment and reemployment rights for certain individuals ordered
to full-time National Guard duty.
- Provide for the freedom of conscience of military chaplains with respect to
the performance of marriages.
- Modify the Financial Improvement and Audit Readiness Plan to provide that
a complete and validated full statement of budget resources is ready by not
later than September 30, 2014.
One significant issue was the proposal by Republicans that the military handle all cases with respect to captured members of al Qaeda. The argument over these detainees centered on a provision requiring that members of al Qaeda and its affiliates, including those captured in the United States, to be held in military rather than civilian custody, although it would allow a waiver. The Senate finally reached a compromise stating that the bill would not affect existing law relating to the detention of U.S. citizens and lawful residents, effectively leaving the contested issue to the Supreme Court to decide.
The compromise did, however, set up a fight with the Obama administration, which had threatened to veto the bill. The White House argued the provision would restrict the administration's handling of suspected terrorists. A spokesman from the National Security Council accused the Senate of "political micromanagement at the expense of sensible national security policy" and said lawmakers had ignored the advice of counterterrorism experts from Republican and Democratic administrations.
The House-passed version of the bill included even stronger language that would have required military commission trials for all accused terrorists. It would have barred the transfer of any terrorist suspects held anywhere in the world to the United States, while also toughening the review process for those held and restricting the transfer of suspects to other nations.
On December 12, Senate and House conferees filed the conference report. It provided $530 billion for the Pentagon's base budget, as well as $116 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and $17 billion for nuclear-weapons-related spending at the Department of Energy. The total bill, at $662 billion, provided $26.6 billion less than the president's requested amount in accordance with limits set by the debt deal in August 2011.
Senate and House conferees responsibly bridged the differences between the two versions of the bill on nuclear weapons policy and missile defense provisions. The House bill had included many limitations that the administration found objectionable on nuclear and missile defense policy matters that would 1) constrain the Pentagon's ability to implement the New START treaty and 2) undercut the constitutional authority of the president and senior military leaders to determine U.S. nuclear force structure and engage in discussions with the Russians on missile defense cooperation. The conferees slightly softened language on detainees (previously discussed) and Iran sanctions. On December 14, the House approved the measure 283-136. The Senate vote on December 15 was 86-13. The president signed the bill at year's end.
Analysis of Proposed Budgetary Cuts
In October, the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) released "Hard Choices: Responsible Defense in an Age of Austerity." It stands as the most detailed analysis to date that I have seen which also presents realistic alternative scenarios for budget reductions. This includes not only the announced reductions of over $470 billion over a ten year period beginning in 2013, but also the impending additional roughly $500 billion in reductions from the defense budget over that same period brought about by "sequestration." This is the Pentagon's portion of the required reductions brought about by the failure of the "Super Committee" to reach an agreement on a package of budget reductions in November.
The pending cuts are "a worst-case scenario," retired Army Lt. Gen. David Barno, who led the report, told Army Times. "We judged the risk to U.S. interests in maintaining a global engagement strategy as very high. They're not just high, they're very high." Barno is also among those that feel legislation to reverse the cuts forced by sequestration will be "difficult at best."
The Pentagon must halt most new programs in order to meet the new budget, according to the report. This comes as no surprise. According to Defense Department statistics, 75 percent of major acquisition programs last year exceeded their baseline program acquisition unit cost, up from 66 percent in the previous report.
In order to meet these reductions, the CNAS report also calls for a reduction in short-range strike fighters, amphibious capabilities, and manned aircraft. It cuts heavy armored formations, with the remainder being shifted to the reserves. Military officials have said such a move is not feasible as the reserves lack the training time required to maintain proficiency. CNAS and other analysts say budget cuts and changing strategies leave no other choice.
With those cuts as a baseline, the CNAS report then presents four scenario-based outcomes based on fiscal and strategic requirements. They are:
- Scenario 1: Reposition and Reset. Had the supercommittee succeeded and added
no further defense cuts to Obama's requirement, Army end strength would still
require a reduction to 482,000 —roughly 87,000 fewer soldiers than are
serving today and the lowest number since 1989. Marine Corps end strength
would be cut to 175,000. Six CG-47 cruisers and 15 C-5A transport planes would
be retired. The ground combat vehicle, joint light tactical vehicle, and missile
defense programs would be canceled. The Joint Improvised Explosive Device
Defeat Organization, or JIEDDO, would be shut down in fiscal 2017.
The risk inherent to this scenario is described as "modest and acceptable." - Scenario 2: Constrained Global Presence. Had the supercommittee succeeded
and required a total of $502 billion in defense cuts when combined with the
president's plan, the services would add one aircraft carrier to the cuts
of Scenario 1. It also would be necessary to reduce the V-22 Osprey, the Navy's
MQ-4C broad area maritime surveillance unmanned aircraft system, and the F-35
joint strike fighters.
The risk inherent to this scenario is described in the report as "significant but acceptable." -
Scenario 3: Selective Leverage. Had the supercommittee succeeded and required
a combined $665 billion in defense cuts, Army end strength would be cut
by 110,000 soldiers to 460,000 and the Corps to 162,500. Heavy armored forces
would be moved into the reserves. In addition to the cuts of Scenario 2,
the Navy would see reductions in Virginia-class attack subs and amphibious
ships, and the cancellation of MQ-4C. More F-35s would be purchased than
in Scenario 2, but canceled F-35s would not be replaced with as many F-16s
and F/A-18s, resulting in fewer fighters.
The risk inherent to this scenario is described as "high" in the CNAS Report. -
Scenario 4: Focused Economy of Force. Because the supercommittee failed,
federal law now requires substantial cuts totaling $1.2 trillion across the
board. The CNAS analysis said it will be necessary to cut Army end strength
to 430,000 soldiers and 150,000 Marines. The lack of manpower would make large
commitments of ground forces very difficult. As such, the Army would focus
on rapid response/forcible entry (airborne and helicopter assault) and on
the lower end of the conflict spectrum, such as advising and assisting foreign
forces and conducting irregular warfare.
In addition to the cuts of Scenario 3, the Marine Corps' F-35B will be canceled and its heavy capabilities would be eliminated. Procurement of the littoral combat ship would end in fiscal 2013.The risk inherent to this scenario is described as "very high" in the CNAS Report. Alternatively, the Pentagon could buy back some troops by reducing the cost per soldier, CNAS found. For example, increasing Tricare prescription costs, raising Tricare fees and deductibles, and introducing a minimum deductible for Tricare for Life would save about $97 billion—enough money to fund nearly 100,000 soldiers.
The Army already plans to cut 22,000 soldiers by the end of 2013. Another 13,500 soldiers will be cut in 2015, and again in 2016 to bring the Army down to roughly 520,000. That is nearly 40,000 more soldiers than the Army had ten years ago, and most analysts agree that 480,000 is the minimum cut the Army can expect—whether or not Congress gets its act together.
Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno in October told the Army Times that an Army of 520,000 is "reasonable," based on the assumption that forces are out of Afghanistan in 2014. Such an Army would come "fairly close" to the long-standing goal of fighting two simultaneous wars, but "below 520, we can't." Odierno further said that while he was "comfortable" with 520,000 soldiers, he didn't think the Army would end up with that number.
A reorganization of brigade combat teams [BCTs] is also underway. The final force structure will depend on the force size, mission and risk defense leaders are willing to take. Details are expected in the annual Total Army Analysis, due to service leaders at the end of December. Most experts expect the Army will cut 15 of 73 BCTs and strengthen the remaining teams.
Cutting one in four soldiers is hard to swallow, but there is little else to cut from ground forces. The CNAS analysis eliminates the ground combat vehicle, and the low hours on upgraded Bradleys and M1A1 tanks make those adjustments hard to argue. The bottom line is that personnel costs are the primary expense for ground forces. For example, more than $6 billion will be saved by reducing the Army by 27,000 and the Marine Corps by 20,000 in 2014. And the Pentagon is likely to cut ground forces as future strategies place a heavier reliance on naval and air forces. "Naval and air forces will grow increasingly important in the future strategic environment," the CNAS report said. "As a result, the Pentagon should prioritize these forces and not distribute the expected defense cuts evenly across the services."
Those forces have already had significant reductions. The number of ships has been reduced by nearly half and the Air Force has parked 2,500 planes in the "boneyard" since Operation Desert Storm in 1991. The Navy also has cut 50,000 sailors in the past nine years. The Army cut six divisions following the first Gulf War. But a return of the Pacific theater to the forefront of future strategies has placed renewed emphasis on the air-sea team.
Some Army leaders seem prepared for this adjustment. In October, Gen. James Thurman described the Pacific region, which is the home of some of the world's largest militaries and economies, as "key to U.S. security and prosperity." Thurman is commander of United Nations Command, ROK/US Combined Forces Command, and U.S. Forces Korea. Across that border stands North Korea. It possesses the world's fourth largest military, 70 percent of which is on the demilitarized zone—something Thurman called "a no-kidding threat." Obviously, the death of Kim Jong-il and the possibility of unrest on the Korean peninsula underscore Thurman's argument.
There can be little doubt that Pyongyang is a serious security challenge. North Korea also has made significant progress on the construction of a new nuclear reactor. The "six-party talks" have worked to find a peaceful resolution to security concerns arising from this nuclear weapons program, but leadership of four of the six will change or be challenged in 2012, adding to regional instability. North Korea also has 11,000 underground facilities and the world's largest artillery force, which boasts 13,000 systems, Thurman said. Its 60,000-strong special operations force is the world's largest. While U.S. ground forces are there to deter and defend, current strategy puts a greater emphasis on advanced technologies and air superiority.
Furthermore, the People's Liberation Army of China [PLA] now boasts 3 million members and is the world's largest military force. More than two-thirds are ground forces, but it is the PLA Navy that is catching the attention of many defense strategists. An August 2009 Office of Naval Intelligence report calls the submarine force a "primary thrust" of Chinese naval modernization. Andrew Krepinevich, president of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, in his February 2010 report, "Why AirSea Battle?" said that at its current pace, China will double the number of Navy subs. Those subs can fire anti-ship cruise missiles (many while submerged) and long-range, wake-homing torpedoes. This is obviously critical in the Pacific region since the nation that controls shipping lanes controls commerce and economies.
China also is building a nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine [SSBN], according to a report by congressional analyst Ron O'Rourke. The Chinese SSBN is expected to be armed with 12 ballistic missiles with a range of nearly 4,000 nautical miles. That means they could hit Alaska from protected waters close to China; the western half of the 48 states from mid-ocean locations west of Hawaii; and all 50 states from mid-ocean locations east of Hawaii.
As previously suggested, there is one other way the Pentagon could save a significant number of weapons and personnel even amid this "doomsday" scenario, but it will be very difficult. The CNAS cuts did not include any changes to pay and benefits, but they are likely to take a hit. Pay raises are on the top of that list. Federal law requires service members to receive a raise at least equal to the national average, known as the employment cost index [ECI]. But anything more than that is unlikely in coming years.
Service members have enjoyed unprecedented boosts to benefits and pay increases above the national average every year since 2004. As a result, service members are better compensated than 80 percent of civilians of comparable age and education when tax-free cash allowances for housing and food are included, according to Department of Defense personnel statistics. A service member's total compensation is doubled when noncash or deferred benefits such as retirement pay, health care and veteran's benefits are added. These benefits boost the total compensation for a civilian worker by only one-third.
That is why the Pentagon and Senate in 2010 balked at an effort by the House Armed Services Committee to bump the military raise to 1.9 percent, half a percentage point higher than the 1.4 percent ECI The Pentagon and Senate have voiced opposition because the proposal would cost $367 million in fiscal 2011 and $2.4 billion over five years.
Health care also is under scrutiny. Those costs ran $50.7 billion in 2011—nearly one-tenth of the total defense budget. Health care costs in the past decade have grown by 85 percent in real terms, according to the CNAS report. Because the force is older than in previous years, and more likely to have spouses and children, that cost is expected to double again by 2028. Benefits could carry a cumulative $1 trillion price tag in 30 years. Unlike Social Security, there is no "lock box" for this unfunded line item. Making changes to Tricare is on many agendas in Washington. Raising premiums for Tricare Prime has been postponed time and again, but is increasingly likely in coming years. These have not increased since the program was launched in 1995, though the cost to the military has tripled, from $4,000 to $12,000 per family in the same period.
Tricare for Life has become another hot-button issue. Military leaders and lawmakers with whom Army Times spoke were adamant that the program must continue for current service members and retirees—but they aren't convinced this is a benefit future service members will see. Many who are staggered by the $10.9 billion Tricare for Life price tag for 2011 also question whether the program can be restructured to cut costs. They point to a 2007 Rand Corporation study that said three in four military retirees can get health insurance through a civilian employer or other group plan, but only half do so. The rest rely on Tricare, which means the Defense Department funds their insurance as part of the annual defense budget.
In conclusion, 2012 may be a very difficult year for military planners as well as those involved in the defense industry. Despite the efforts by many, the Congress is unlikely to overturn the planned sequestration of defense funds until after the November elections if at all. Consequently, many defense contracts will be slowed down or delayed. There is also little doubt that military pay and benefits will come under increased scrutiny as the Pentagon grapples with significant budgetary reductions.
The Resignation of Under Secretary Flournoy
Secretary of Defense Panetta announced that Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Michèle Flournoy has stated her intention to step down and return to private life. Flournoy made clear that her decision to leave was motivated by personal and family considerations. She also agreed to stay on until early in 2012 to enable a smooth transition. So far at least, there has been little speculation on who might be her replacement. It appears possible that her position may remain vacant until after the November 2012 elections.
International Security Issues
European Economic Challenges—The Debt Crisis
There can be little doubt that the leadership of the Federal Republic of Germany has been consumed by efforts to deal with the ongoing European financial crisis. While the announced agreement in December would seem to prevent an imminent collapse, there are still difficult days ahead. The fundamental problem is both economic and cultural. At the onset, the creation of the euro as a common currency established a clear link in terms of all member states' monetary policy. At the same time, however, there was not a corresponding effort to establish a common fiscal or budgetary policy. While all members agreed at the onset to stay within certain bands of deficit spending, many immediately began to ignore these requirements. Consequently, many states, particularly in southern Europe (Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, et cetera), have now reached levels of unsustainable debt.
But this has both cultural and demographic implications. One of the implicit (if not explicit goals) of the European Union was to transform the continent's culture so that future generations would view themselves as primarily "Europeans" as opposed to their respective nationalities. This has not occurred. In light of the current economic crisis, this is further complicated by demographic changes throughout Europe. This has resulted in an aging population that will continue to place greater and greater demands on scarce government resources.
Political challenges: The ongoing European economic crisis has caused leadership changes in Greece, Italy, Spain, Ireland, and several other countries. France will hold presidential elections later this spring. In Germany, Chancellor Merkl appears to enjoy widespread support, but she will face difficult challenges in the months ahead. Her coalition partner, the Free Democrat Party (FDP), was split over the financial compromise she had negotiated with the other EU members. The FDP eventually voted to support the agreement but now appears in total disarray. Public opinion polls suggest that the party could not muster the necessary 5 percent to ensure representation in the Bundestag if elections were held today. While Germans are not scheduled to go to the polls until 2013, there is a possibility at least that elections might occur sooner. At this moment it would appear that a ruling coalition of the Social Democrats and Greens may well be possible in future.
Chancellor Merkl's political challenges are also complicated somewhat by a potential scandal involving Federal President Christian Wulff, who is also a member of her Christian Democratic Union party. Wulff is alleged to have received over 500,000 euros in loans from banks at almost zero interest rates in order to buy and decorate his home. An investigation is ongoing, but at this writing Wulff has remained in office.
In Germany, as well as across Europe, this will have a significant impact on defense spending. It would appear very likely that German defense spending (as well as that of all European countries) will continue to decline. There have been many discussions about the creation of a common European defense policy and the corresponding sharing of costs. But little has actually been accomplished. Germany is also experiencing difficulties in its transition from the draft to a professional army. It is believed that German defense planners had calculated a requirement for 3,000 recruits per month to maintain overall strength. Some months have seen roughly 500 applicants. There appears to be little interest among young Germans to enlist in the military, and this is further complicated by a generous education system that provides largely free college tuition and thus removes one of the incentives found in many Western states for young recruits.
Removal of Last U.S. Forces From Iraq
The last American forces departed Iraq in late December ending one of the longest wars in American history. Almost immediately following their departure, Iraq experienced one of its most significant terrorist attacks. Fourteen bombs exploded over a period of two hours in and around Baghdad. The number killed exceeded 60 with nearly 200 injured. Al Qaeda in Iraq announced that it was responsible, and this attack clearly had been planned for a significant period of time. It is likely that al Qaeda sought to increase the friction between the Shiite and Sunni communities in Iraq, not unlike the attack against the Golden Mosque in 2006.
This could not have occurred at a worst time politically for this embattled nation. Prime Minister Maliki had already announced that a warrant had been issued for the arrest of a leading Sunni politician, Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi. Maliki stated that Hashemi is alleged to have directed "killing squads" against government officials and other political targets throughout Iraq during the period of sectarian violence in 2006 and 2007. Many experts believe this more likely an attempt by Maliki to consolidate if not increase his power in Iraq. The result, however, has been to bring on a political crisis in the country, with the primary Sunni parties now boycotting the Parliament and even the Shia Party led by Moktadi al Sadr calling for new elections. Hashemi fled the Iraqi capital for the Kurdish region in the north. Prime Minister Maliki has demanded that Kurdish officials turn the vice president over to Iraqi security forces.
All of this serves as background for the political campaign in the United States. Many Republicans have criticized the administration for not keeping American forces in Iraq longer, and if the situation in Iraq should deteriorate this could become an election issue. Still, these arguments would appear to ignore the fact that the agreement to remove all American forces by the end of 2011 was initiated by the Bush administration shortly before its departure, and endorsed by the Obama administration upon its arrival in office. Furthermore, the United States had long argued that one of its stated goals was to create a functional democracy in Iraq. While the current government in Baghdad is far from perfect, it was elected by the Iraqi people. Subsequently, this Iraqi "democracy" decided that American forces should depart consistent with the established treaty. Finally, it would be hard to imagine how the United States could, on the one hand, support the aspirations of many in the Arab world to establish democracies in Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, and Syria while imposing its will on an Iraqi democracy of its own creation.
Pundits will now begin the long discussion of whether or not the war in Iraq was "worth it". As this discussion unfolds a few numbers may be instructive:
CASUALTIES:
- U.S. deaths as of Nov. 30, 2011: 4,485.
- Confirmed U.S. military wounded (hostile) as of Nov. 29, 2011: 31,921.
- Confirmed U.S. military wounded (non-hostile, using medical air transport) as of Oct. 31, 2011: 40,350
- Deaths of civilian employees of U.S. government contractors as of Sept. 30, 2011: More than 2,097.
- Iraqi deaths as of Nov. 30, 2011 from war-related violence, according to Iraq Body Count: At least 103,775.
- Assassinated Iraqi academics as of Aug. 25, 2011: 464.
- Journalists killed on assignment as of Nov. 30, 2011: 174.
- More than $805 billion as of Nov. 30, 2011, according to the National
Priorities Project.
- Prewar: 2.58 million barrels per day.
- July 29, 2011: 2.37 million barrels per day.
- Prewar nationwide: 3,958 megawatts. Hours per day (estimated): 4-8.
- July 29, 2011: Nationwide: 6,990 megawatts. Hours per day: not available.
- Prewar cell phones: 80,000.
- October 2011: An estimated 23 million, served by three carriers.
- Prewar: 12.9 million people had potable water.
- Sept. 22, 2011: Approximately 24 million people have potable water
(majority in urban areas).
- Prewar: 6.2 million people served.
- Sept. 22, 2011: Approximately 20 million people served (majority in urban areas).
- Prewar: 1,021,962.
- August 2011: Approximately 1.3 million people are currently displaced
inside Iraq.
- Prewar: 500,000 Iraqis living abroad.
- July 2011: Approximately 1 million Iraqis, mainly in Syria and Jordan.
Sources: Associated Press, U.S. State Department, U.S. Defense Department, Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, The Brookings Institution, Iraq Body Count, U.N. Assistance Mission for Iraq, U.N. High Commission for Refugees, Committee to Protect Journalists, National Priorities Project.
Lost Drone Over Iran and Threats to Close the Straits of Hormuz
One of the United States' most high-tech stealth drones was captured by Iranian security forces. It appears that the RQ170 Sentinel was providing surveillance over Iran when its operator lost control of the aircraft. It apparently then landed largely undamaged and was recovered by the Iranians. Iran has claimed that it was able to force the drone down by interrupting the satellite signals to the aircraft, but American experts have disputed this. It has been reported that these drones do not have a self-destruct mechanism. There was some discussion on what intelligence the Iranians could gain from the drone. The Sentinel does not maintain surveillance data on board, but there can be little doubt that the capture of the aircraft will provide some information in terms of stealth technology, cameras, et cetera. Many experts believe that Iran is likely to either sell or provide the aircraft to Russia or China. This heightened tensions between the United States and Iran to a degree though surveillance drone flights have been conducted by the U.S. over Iran for some period of time.
At the end of the month, tensions, however, escalated. The Iranian leadership announced that it would consider closing the Strait of Hormuz for oil tankers if the United States attempted to orchestrate an economic boycott of Iranian oil. The Obama administration has stated its clear intentions to implement these sanctions and its European allies have discussed this as a new effort to place additional pressure on Tehran in light of its ongoing efforts to develop a nuclear weapon.
Iran also began an extensive naval exercise (Velayat 90) in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea in order to demonstrate its military capabilities. It also tested several missiles, which are believed to have sufficient range to strike Israel. A spokesman for the United States Navy Fifth Fleet responded to the Iranian threats that the every effort would be taken to insure the freedom of navigation through this critical waterway.
This is obviously of great concern. The Strait of Hormuz is approximately 54 kilometers wide. It is economically and strategically important since 14 oil tankers carrying more than 15.5 million barrels of oil pass through this strategic waterway daily. In 2011, more than 20 percent of the world's oil production traveled through the strait. This has caused many to fear that this action by the Iranian government could cause a steep increase in the price of oil. Nonetheless the year ended with the price per barrel dropping slightly below $100 per barrel.
U.S.-Pakistani Relations
In early December, the office of Pakistani Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani announced that the country's president, Asif Ali Zardari, would remain in a Dubai hospital for medical checks related to a heart condition. This occurred as officials sought to head off speculation that Zardari might be forced to resign. This was due to the so-called "memogate" involving a memorandum that was allegedly passed by the Pakistani ambassador to the United States to Admiral Mike Mullen, who was then serving as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Zadari did in fact return to Pakistan later in the month, but this controversy has continued to escalate. The Pakistani Supreme Court has now ruled that a full investigation can be conducted and charges potentially levied against those involved.
The Pakistani military also announced that the U.S. military had vacated an air base in the country's southwest, meeting a deadline set by the Pakistani government in response to a NATO air strike that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers last month. The Pakistanis assumed control over the Shamsi base in Baluchistan province, as the last flight carrying U.S. personnel and equipment departed. The American media had reported that the American military had used the base as part of a years-long drone offensive against al Qaida and Taliban militants along the Pakistani-Afghan border. U.S. intelligence experts say the withdrawal from the air base is not likely to have a major impact on the drone war in the border region because the U.S. military still can fly the unmanned planes out of air fields in Afghanistan.
The Pakistani government had ordered the United States to vacate the base by December 11 as part of several punitive measures reflecting Pakistani anger about the November 26 NATO strikes that killed the soldiers. Islamabad also closed its border crossings to trucks delivering supplies to NATO forces in land-locked Afghanistan and boycotted a December 5 international conference on stabilizing its western neighbor. If Pakistan should continue to prevent the United States from using its road networks to move supplies to Afghanistan for a prolonged period of time, it could have a serious impact on ongoing military operations.
U.S. officials denied Pakistani accusations that NATO warplanes deliberately targeted the Pakistani soldiers during an operation against militants on the border of Afghanistan's Kunar province and Pakistan's Mohmand tribal region. The U.S. military and NATO launched investigations of the incident, and President Obama immediately offered condolences to Pakistan for the soldiers' deaths. The investigations did discover that mistakes were made in map overlays which contributed to the air strikes on the Pakistani positions.
This does appear, however, to be the incident that will fundamentally change American-Pakistani relations—the tipping point. Throughout the year there have been a series of crises in the relationship. These have included: (1) the capture of an American CIA agent by Pakistani security forces after he allegedly killed two Pakistanis; (2) the killing of Osama bin Laden while he was living in a villa in a Pakistani military city; (3) statements by Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shortly before his retirement in which he accused the Pakistani intelligence service of providing direct support to the Haqqani terrorist network; (4) the "memogate" scandal over an alleged memorandum prepared by President Zadari requesting direct American assistance against his own military; and (5) finally, the American airstrike that resulted in the deaths of over 20 Pakistani soldiers.
Senior Pakistani military officers have told me that they cannot envision the relationship with Washington being the same in the near future. They also pointed out that Pakistan cricket legend and opposition politician Imran Khan has now become a major force in Pakistani politics. Khan drew as many as 150,000 people to a rally in Karachi, demonstrating his growing appeal amid anger over power blackouts, corruption, and the troubled alliance with the United States.
After 15 years of political irrelevance, Khan's Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, or the Movement for Justice Party, is gaining momentum as the ruling coalition fails to improve a slowing economy or fight corruption. Khan's stance that Pakistan should pull out of a security pact with the U.S. is winning support amid criticism of army offensives against Taliban militants since 2007 that have triggered retaliatory bombings throughout the country. If this trend continues a military coup or early elections could replace the current government in Pakistan.
Death of Kim Jong-il
The sudden death of North Korean leader Kim Jong-il has raised concerns about stability on the Korean peninsula. The announcement that his son, Kim Jong-un, would assume leadership of the nation did little to reduce concerns.
Kim Jong-il had been groomed for over 20 years by his father to assume the leadership of North Korea. He only decided on his youngest son, Kim Jong-un as his successor a scant two years ago. It is problematical that the new 28-year-old leader of North Korea is prepared for the task of leading the most secretive nation on the planet and the only communist state to be ruled by a hereditary dynasty.
Many experts believe that there may be a shift towards a "collective leadership" in North Korea. In this regard, Jang Song-thaek, 65, brother-in-law of Kim Jong-il and the younger Kim's uncle, is seen as the power behind the throne, along with his wife Kim Kyong-hui, Kim Jong-il's sister. So too is Ri Yong-ho, the rising star of the North's military and currently its most senior general. It was also announced that Kim Jong-un had assumed command of the North Korean Army and accepted the position of "supreme leader" of the Communist Party. This clearly indicates a desire to effect a fairly rapid transition.
Some experts have speculated that the death of Kim Jong-il may herald the beginning of the end of the communist regime. The military is likely to be able to hold the nation together, but the continuing economic collapse could precipitate change over the next few years. Others have argued that this may have a "silver lining" for the U.S. military. Tensions on the Korean peninsula provide the Defense Department with a rationale to bolster U.S. military presence in the Pacific for reasons other than China. But during the transition it is highly unlikely that there will be any significant change in North Korean policies.
Obviously, further instability on the Korean peninsula could also affect global markets. With so much uncertainty and North Korea's past behavior providing little reason for optimism, it's the downside risks that are the focus of attention. That casts a cloud over a region that is a key driver of global growth. South Korea and Japan are critical parts of the global supply chain for everything from computers to cars. China is the main engine of demand for global commodities. The Korean peninsula borders key shipping routes in Northeast Asia, including those to Pusan and Dalian. Markets in Japan and South Korea both fell sharply and the dollar got a lift as investors sought safety.
Still, one Korean expert may have provided the most important insight. He observed that "we probably know more about black holes in the universe than we know about what goes on in North Korea."
Media Security Issues
The following are a brief summary of the major national security issues that the media focused on during the month:
Russian Elections
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's party suffered a sharp drop in support in parliamentary elections, winning the most votes but falling far short of the majority it has enjoyed for years and failing to clear the 50 percent mark. The ruling United Russia party suffered a dramatic drop in support in national legislative elections but did hold onto its majority in the State Duma, albeit barely. This was followed by large demonstrations in Moscow in opposition to Prime Minister Putin and his announcement that he intended to seek election as Russian president in March.
Syria
Violent demonstrations have continued throughout Syria, and international human rights groups now believe over 5,000 people have been killed in the ongoing struggle. The attacks during the month also included two suicide bombers that attacked government targets in Damascus. Syrian officials allege that these attacks were conducted by al Qaeda and that the terrorist group was supporting the demonstrators. This was denied by the leadership of the opposition groups that now have offices in Turkey. The opposition Syrian National Council also urged the United Nations Security Council and the Arab League to take action after reports that government troops "massacred" more than 200 people in two days.
President Assad did agree to admit observers from the Arab League, but this has had little effect in terms of reducing the violence or the freeing of many alleged to be held as political prisoners. Many believe that the arrival of the observers may have actually encouraged demonstrators to expand their efforts. The Arab League has begun to discuss pulling the observers because they believe they will be ineffective. In Washington, the Obama administration continued to denounce attacks on protesters and call for a peaceful transition to a new government in Syria. One congressional subcommittee also conducted hearings on how assistance could be provided to the Syrian opposition.
Bonn Conference on Afghanistan
One decade ago, diplomats travelled to Bonn, Germany, to appoint a transitional government in Afghanistan. Now, with international combat forces set to leave in 2014, more than 100 delegations returned to Bonn for a conference on the future of Afghanistan. Pakistan and the Taliban did not attend. While many voiced some optimism, President Karzai argued in a speech that the possibility existed that the current momentum could be reversed. The month also saw a serious attack against Shiites in Afghanistan that killed over 80 people during the celebration of Ashura (a Shiite religious holiday).
General Observations
As we look ahead I would make the following final comments:
Iraq
It will be important to see how the ongoing crisis between Prime Minister Maliki and his Sunni vice president will be resolved in the month ahead. There is a clear possibility of renewed violence between the various sectarian groups or between the Kurdish and Arab communities.
American Presidential Campaign
January 2012 began with the Iowa caucuses and subsequent primary in New Hampshire. Several other primaries are to begin soon as the presidential election campaign for 2012 gets fully underway. So far at least all of the Republican candidates (with the possible exception of Congressman Ron Paul) have had little to say about their views on national security policy. They have confined their comments to support for Israel, continued pressure (to include the possible use of military force) against Iran, and promises to maintain defense spending at current levels
Syria
As violence continues in Syria the possibility of a full civil war cannot be discounted.
Pakistan
As previously suggested, U.S.-Pakistan relations have now reached an all time low in the aftermath of the accidental airstrike by American forces against a Pakistani border outpost. In the short term, it will be important to see what must be done in order to insure the flow of military supplies through Pakistan into Afghanistan. Islamabad has said that the blockade on NATO resupply will last until significant changes are made to the "rules of engagement" concerning airstrikes along the Pakistani-Afghan border. Consequently, Pakistani Prime Minister Gilani stated his country's blockade of NATO supply lines into Afghanistan is likely to stay in place for weeks. If this blockade were to continue, it could have a significant negative impact on US and NATO operations in Afghanistan.
Read More: European Union, Collective Security, International Relations, Iraq War, National Security, U.S. Foreign Policy, Global, Afghanistan, China, Germany, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Syria, United States
blog comments powered by Disqus