Corruptions Perceptions, because that's not vague

I actually had no idea that there was an annual corruption index measured every year.  I think it's a very interesting idea, and while I'm not sure exactly how its measured or how accurate its findings are, I ran across it in the Foreign Policy blog, so that has to count for something, right?

Where does your favourite country rank?

How to get my blood boiling

I have realised that the quickest way to start my blood boiling is to read small-minded, one-sided arguments about Turkey's past human right's abuses.  Excuse me, I mean the Ottoman Empire's human rights abuses.  Let me give you some context.

In Monday's NYT, Roger Cohen wrote a well-put op-ed about Turkey's foreign policy.  Naturally I was going to post a link to it when I finally got out from the pile of reading that I let build up.  Regardless, we were assigned to read it for my Turkish foreign policy class, along with the reader's comments.  I scan over the article, to refresh my memory on the topic and move on to the reader's comments.  Much to my chagrin, the first one is basically ripping Turkey a new one for the Armenian Issue (or Genocide, however you prefer to call it) of 1918.  This is my open letter to you, JG, Caesarea @ blogspot:

The Settlement Freeze and the Olive Tree

Somehow I find myself posting Thomas Friedman again.  However it feels good to know that I'm not the only one getting fed up with Israel.  My favorite part of the article:

First — I know this is a crazy, radical idea — when America asks Israel to do something that in no way touches on its vital security but would actually enhance it, there is only one right answer: “Yes.” It is a measure of how spoiled Israel has become that after billions and billions of dollars in U.S. aid and 300,000 settlers already ensconced in the West Bank, Israel feels no compunction about spurning an American request for a longer settlement freeze — the only purpose of which is to help the United States help Israel reach a secure peace with the Palestinians. Just one time you would like Israel to say, “You know, Mr. President, we’re dubious that a continued settlement freeze will have an impact. But you think it will, so, let’s test it. This one’s for you.”

A Voice of Reason

Not a full post, but I just read a fantastic op-ed from the prominent Israeli newspaper Haaretz.  The article outlines Netanyahu's foreign policy failures and Israel's general international conundrum with a clarity that is rarely found in the pro-Israel camp.

Spitzer for Governor ... again

     I discovered a post on RCW today by none other than former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, who is apparently going to be co-hosting his own show on CNN. It's mostly a domestic politics piece, but think he makes some good points for the future of US foreign relations and foreign policy. The article naturally has a very liberal slant, but Spitzer asks questions that neither party has given me a satisfactory answer to. What are we going to do about our unemployment? And when we fix it, what is your plan to fix all the entitlement programs that are going to run huge budget deficits over the next few decades?

Venezulea and the End of the World

Its been a while since I've posted, but there was a good article on Foreign Policy today. Written by Roger Noriega, who was a member of the Bush administration and is an expert on South American affairs. The article describes the mounting circumstantial evidence that Venezuela may be aiding Iran with acquiring uranium, and that in turn Iran may be helping Venezuela develop a nascent nuclear power program. Obviously the terrifying implication here is that Chavez may one day be able to back up his insane rhetoric and posturing with nuclear weapons. However, even if Venezuela is beginning to walk down the path of nuclear weapons development (which I highly doubt it is), there is little reason to be concerned.

If in 5-10 years there is evidence that Chavez is attempting to develop these weapons, the US could easily destroy its facilities without fear of major repercussions. The multitude of barriers that prevent a strike on Iran (Iranian ability to retaliate against U.S forces and Israel, highly unstable region, powerful ties between Iran and China/Russia) do not apply to Venezuela. Venezuela's neighbors would be abhorred by the idea of a nuclear Chavez, Brazil and Colombia would either seek to develop their own or would seek assurance from the US that they would be protected by our nuclear umbrella. A strike against Venezuelan nuclear sites would bring some grumblings about "American Imperialism" from Cuba and other leftist South American governments, but there would be few other reprecussions.

I think it is almost impossible for this scenario to occur, unless Chavez is completely insane or a complete idiot. The more pressing issue is the increasing ties between Iran and Venezuela. If Chavez is providing the Iranians with uranium, then Venezuela is violating UN sanctions. I think that the Iranian sanctions are the best foreign policy achievement of the Obama administration. Everyday brings news that the sanctions are causing further disarray in Iran. Eventually these pressures will cause some change with Iran's actions. It is vitally important that gaps in the sanctions be found and closed, or we will just end up with meaningless sanctions (i.e. Iraq in the late 90's/ early 2000's).

In the long term, it will be interesting to see how Venezuela develops. There has been some recent evidence that Chavez's power has been weakening due to his infringement on civil liberties and failed economic policies. Clearly on the international stage Chavez relishes being a foil to America, much like Ahmadinejad. I suspect that is why these two have been buddying up, what better way to annoy America than to have two of its major headaches work together. Chavez did this a fear years ago with Russia, inviting some of its military units to visit while relations were cool between the US and Russia.

Will the US allow Venezulea to grow into a regional power in South America? We've been subtly supporting Colombia as a means of balancing against Chavez, could this become more overt? Finally, what role will Brazil play? Brazil is one of those countries prognosticators love to call a future great power. It will be interesting to see if this turns out to be the case, and what its relationship will be to the US and Venezuela. Many would argue that the Monroe Doctrine is out of date, but just how would the US react to a growing power in South America? We were once concerned with foreign powers interfering in the western hemisphere, will we willingly accept a home grown great power? Many of these questions will define South America for the next 50 years. While it has been a continent largely off the international stage for sometime, I would not be surprised to see this change.