{"id":2807,"date":"2011-12-12T15:07:14","date_gmt":"2011-12-12T20:07:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/harvardnsj.com\/?p=2807"},"modified":"2013-01-11T10:53:57","modified_gmt":"2013-01-11T15:53:57","slug":"global-roundup","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/2011\/12\/global-roundup\/","title":{"rendered":"Global Roundup"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Ty Cobb* –<\/strong>–<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Drone Dilemma: Iran has the real thing. Now what?<\/strong><\/p>\n

High level defense sources confirm that the drone the Iranians have displayed on TV is, in fact, an intact RQ-170 Sentinel. The capture\u2014however it was done\u2014is a severe blow to America\u2019s super-secret surveillance program, leaving advanced, highly sensitive technology in the hands of an arch-enemy.<\/p>\n

The sources also confirm that the beige-colored drone is a CIA adaptation of the craft. It is programmed to automatically return to its base of operation should it lose communication with its control central. No one is sure why it apparently \u201clanded itself\u201d safely in Iran, over which it was probably conducting surveillance. The Iranians claim they penetrated the drone\u2019s internal communications and brought it down. This is highly doubtful, even should the Iranians have had Chinese or Russian \u201cassistance\u201d, which is also unlikely.<\/p>\n

Why the Sentinel did not have a self-destruct mechanism is not known. It may have and the drone simply \u201cthought\u201d it was returning to its base of operations. Whatever the cause, the Iranians have a golden opportunity to sell the drone intact or in pieces to certain adversaries. U.S. officials are concerned that others may be able to reverse engineer the chemical composition of the drone\u2019s radar-deflecting paint or the craft\u2019s sophisticated optics technology that enables operators to make positive identifications of terror suspects from tens of thousands of feet high. The sensors would be very important for countries like China to exploit.<\/p>\n

In Russia, voters, despite a fraudulent election, hand Putin a major defeat<\/strong><\/p>\n

Vladimir Putin\u2019s \u201cUnited Russia\u201d party suffered a major setback at the polls, potentially losing its parliamentary majority just months before Putin seeks to return to the Presidency. The results will likely force the Party to form a coalition with opposition parties. United Russia garnered at best 47% of the vote, compared to its 64% in the previous election four years ago, and it probably would have gotten much less if the authorities hadn\u2019t resorted to ballot stuffing and illegal voting.<\/p>\n

The election has emboldened the opposition, which has staged huge rallies and parades in Moscow, this time with the grudging permission of the authorities. Putin himself has been booed when he has made public appearances, something that he claims\u2014as only a former KGB officer could suggest\u2014was the result of American \u201cmeddling\u201d in Russia (specifically Secretary of State Clinton).<\/p>\n

Before anyone starts rejoicing, keep in mind that the major beneficiaries of United Russia\u2019s fall have been the Communist Party and the strongly nationalist Liberal Democratic Party led by the erratic Vladimir Zhirinovsky. So far those reaping the fruits of Putin and Medvedev\u2019s downturn have not been the forces advocating for greater democracy and liberalization, although corruption and nepotism have been a focus. So far this is not a \u201cRussian Spring\u201d, perhaps more a \u201cRussian revanchism\u201d (return to the days of a \u201cstrong leader\u201d?), but hold on\u2014this shift is far from over.<\/p>\n

Europe avoids a collapse\u2014for now\u2014but the debt crisis is far from solved<\/strong><\/p>\n

The 27-nation European Union summit ended with a band-aid being placed on the continent\u2019s economic crisis, enough to get by for now but far less than what is necessary to seriously address Europe\u2019s burgeoning debt crisis. While some breathed a sigh of relief that a global economic meltdown was averted, in fact the EU tried\u2014and failed\u2014to come up with a grand plan to fix the underlying fundamental challenge. At best they kicked the can down the road for a few months. That\u2019s all.<\/p>\n

The only \u201cconcrete\u201d result of the Summit was a pledge\u2014nothing more\u2014to work toward a new treaty binding them together in an effort to save the Euro. Leaders have tried, and repeatedly have failed, to come up with a solution to the debt crisis, especially among the southern \u201cPIGS\u201d\u2014Portugal, Greece, Spain and Italy. The pact that emanated from this meeting is very complicated, may require national referendums to pass, must be accomplished in a matter of months when it has taken years in the past to achieve even modest changes, and must overcome powerful employee unions\u2019 opposition to any austerity measures.<\/p>\n

The big winner, if there was one, from the meeting was Chancellor Angela Merkel, and the session signaled the growing clout of Germany. At the same time it marked a further distancing of the United Kingdom from the Continent and the increasing isolation of Britain from Europe\u2014much of that due to PM David Cameron\u2019s refusal to join in the commitment to a new treaty. Cameron himself sought a face-saving compromise, one that would allow him to satisfy the intense anti-Europe sensitivities of his Conservative Party. Cameron had incurred the wrath of his own party back home by suggesting the UK should be helpful in assisting its neighbors save the Euro. Ironically, Cameron is very much in synch with Germany and France as a leading advocate of austerity that Merkel and Sarkozy are pushing.<\/p>\n

Both Merkel and Sarkozy said they had no interest in trying to placate Cameron and the UK. As a result, Britain is even further isolated in Europe.<\/p>\n

The net result of the Summit is that the crisis has once again been delayed, Germany\u2014and to a lesser extent France\u2014has solidified its leadership and dominant position in European economic issues, Britain is even more isolated, and the countries on the southern rim must take domestically impossible austerity measures to reduce spending and rein in government employee compensation. Hmm\u2014sound familiar?<\/p>\n

JCS Chairman Dempsey reiterates that the most critical security issue is the Economy<\/strong><\/p>\n

Former Chairman of the JCS Admiral Mike Mullen raised some eyebrows when he stated explicitly that the biggest threat facing the U.S. was the national debt. This week the current Chairman, Army General Marty Dempsey, extended that worry further by saying that today \u201cWe are extraordinarily concerned about the health and viability of the euro\u2026.because of the potential for civil unrest and the breakup of the European Union\u201d. Wow\u2014very unusual for a CJCS, to say the least.<\/p>\n

The comments illustrate two points. First, one would expect the country\u2019s top military man to comment on global terrorism threats, the military challenges in the Mideast, or what rogue nations like North Korea or Iran do. Here the Chairman is again saying that the economy, and particularly the debt crisis, are at the top of the list of challenges we face. Second, his focus illustrates that the European economic crisis is also an unexpected concern and focus of our military commanders\u2014the health of the economies of our key allies.<\/p>\n

The national budget has also fixated the top military and civilian leadership at the Pentagon. Not surprisingly, since the failure of the so-called \u201cSuper Committee\u201d means that the stipulations proscribed in the Budget Control Act passed by Congress now come into play. This \u201csequestration\u201d means that government spending will be automatically cut by $1.2 trillion in 2013, with the axe falling primarily on the Defense Department. In addition to the $350 billion of cuts already agreed on, DOD could lose up to another trillion dollars\u2014nearly a fifth of the total\u2014from its projected spending plans through 2023. If that happens, according to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, America would have the smallest ground force since 1940, the fewest ships since 1915, and the smallest air force in its history.<\/p>\n

Well, it\u2019s doubtful that sequestration will actually happen, but given the paralysis that now encompasses the nation\u2019s capital, who knows?<\/p>\n

NRC Chairman Jaczko is causing the nation serious damage, his colleagues charge. So why has he not been removed? \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

Even though NRC Chairman Greg Jaczko has been the subject of an extremely scathing report by the Inspector General of his own agency, and even though\u00a0 all four of his fellow commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission say that they have \u201cgrave concerns\u201d that he is causing \u201cserious damage\u201d to the Commission and has created a horrible work environment marked by \u201cbullying\u201d and a total \u201clack of understanding\u201d, he has not been removed.<\/p>\n

How could this be? This is the Chairman who overrode a Technical Panel review that concluded that closing the Yucca nuclear waste repository was illegal. But he brushed aside that conclusion and ordered the Repository to be shuttered anyway. Congressman Darrell Issa says that the letter of complaint from Jaczko\u2019s fellow commissioners shows a serious breach of trust. Commissioners and staff have complained about the Chairman\u2019s \u201cbrusque\u201d style, that the Commission\u2019s staff operates in an atmosphere of intimidation, and that his behavior is \u201cabsolutely unacceptable\u201d.<\/p>\n

So why has he not been replaced? President Obama has the authority and has been urged to do so by Congressional representatives? How is that such incompetence, corrosive behavior, widely condemned unilateral decisions, and having created a \u201cchilled work environment\u201d, could permit him to stay on, you might ask. How could it be that a Chairman of a key agency who has been lambasted by his own Inspector General could stay on?<\/p>\n

Oh, silly us. We forget that Jaczko formerly worked for SEN Harry Reid, the Majority Leader and key ally for the President\u2019s legislative agenda, whose opposition to the Yucca repository is well known. It appears that Reid will not permit his one time lackey, or staffer, to be replaced. In fact, just today, SEN Reid labeled the charges against Jaczko as nothing but \u201ca politically-motivated witch hunt.\u201d Did he forget that two of the four Commissioners are Democrats appointed by President Obama?<\/p>\n

It also appears that Nevada\u2019s senior leadership, including SEN Dean Heller, GOV Brian Sandoval, and former SEN Dick Bryan, who heads up the state Committee on Nuclear Projects, are content to not raise any concerns and leave this corrosive individual in charge of the very important NRC, despite his demonstrated incompetence and lack of trust and support. And that\u2019s a shame, isn\u2019t it?<\/p>\n


\n<\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n

*Dr. Cobb was a professor at West Point and a Lieutenant Colonel in the Army in the years just prior to the Reagan Administration. He consulted with the National Security Council during the latter half of the Carter administration and the early Reagan administration on international energy issues. At the start of the Reagan administration, Dr. Cobb was on an exchange in the Soviet Union. After the change in National Security Advisor to William Clark and Deputy Robert \u201cBud\u201d McFarlane, Cobb was asked to submit strategy papers regarding the long-range strategic position of the United States vis-a-vis the Soviet Union. As a result of these papers he was asked to join the NSC staff as a member of the European and Soviet Affairs Directorate to work on European issues and Canada, and to provide some input on long-range strategic Soviet policy. He took Dennis Blair\u2019s slot within this directorate. Cobb worked very closely with Peter Sommer and they divided responsibility for 34 countries among themselves. Cobb was responsible for France, Italy, Canada, the Netherlands, Austria, the Vatican, etc. As part of his Soviet responsibilities, Cobb attended the Geneva and the Reykjavik summits. In 1988, Cobb took Robert Dean\u2019s place as the Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director of the International Programs and Technology Affairs Directorate, with responsibility for science & technology agreements, export policy, United Nations issues, and the environment. He became President and CEO of the Business Executives for National Security (BENS) in 1991, then left to become President\/CEO of the Yosemite National Institutes (1995-2002). He returned to his home town of Reno, NV, where he heads up the Northern Nevada Network as well as the National Security Forum. Dr. Cobb received a Ph.D. from Georgetown University, an M.A. from Indiana University, and a B.A. from the University of Nevada. He is married to Suellen Small of Reno, NV. They have three children.<\/p>\n

Image courtesy of NASA.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Ty Cobb analyzes recent events affecting our national security.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":13,"featured_media":2826,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[4,24],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2807","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-features","category-online"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/82\/2011\/12\/globe_west_20481.jpg?fit=2048%2C2048&ssl=1","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/peZtUX-Jh","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2807","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/13"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2807"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2807\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2826"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2807"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2807"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2807"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}