I never cease to be amazed at how bad the foreign policy takes from Acela Corridor Galaxy Brains™️ are and I think I've narrowed it down to two specific issues. First, they have limited technical knowledge about the issues they are actually pontificating on. 1/n
I read an article just recently by a noted outlet on a topic that should have focused on technical hurdles to realizing a solution but turned out to be nothing more than basically a Risk board game analysis of forming alliances and moving troops into Kamchatka. 2/n
The fundamental problem is that the analysts are pontificating about something they have no idea about technically. Rather than discuss the technical hurdles it was board game analysis of alliances and resources from conquered lands. In the areas I focus on, there is a severe 4/n
Problem with people writing about things they don't really understand so they gloss over this deficiency with buzz word board game geopolitical word salad. This is a huge problem when describing global problems. IR grads are not technical specialists in anything 5/n
Second, partisanship is a hell of a drug. Throughout the Trump administration and right now the foreign policy drug of choice is "alliances". People chanted this like mindless drones not because they knew anything about the alliances but because Trump was angering them 6/n
What is the reality of those "alliances"? South Korea is forming economic partnerships with Pyongyang. Germany is selling subs to Turkey, wants change through trade with China, and won't buyNerf Guns to defend itself but wants to free ride. The list of very real technical 7/n
Problems that are not going to be solved by being nicer, asking nicer, or having a President with a better haircut is long, not going away, and unlikely to be solved. There are valid concerns and questions about Trump administration approach but the uninformed analysis 8/n
That so permeates conventional wisdom of the Acela Galaxy Brain set is not doing justice to the problems. This isn't just White House problem, there are deep problems and until people understand the actual problem, undstand the value and interest, this is not going away.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Christmas Spirit Balding 大老板

Christmas Spirit Balding 大老板 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @BaldingsWorld

12 Dec
Another great data leak by the IPAC team on CCP members in UK companies and government institutions. A couple of important things about this database are important to note 1/n
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9…
First, these CCP members are in senior ranks at all the major multinationals with access to key IP and IT security. In other words, MNCs are dealing with the CCP and infiltrated by the CCP at all levels. 2/n
Second, this data was offered to ALL major US outlets and all passed. Think about that: all major US outlets passed on a CCP membership list with work information! Why does this matter? Many reasons. Let me give you one: a recent executive order blocks CCP members and 3/n
Read 5 tweets
6 Dec
As a great lover of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, I love this thread and line if thinking. However, I take a slightly different view, not even really disagreeing. To me Tolstoy and Dostoevsky focus on two different areas of life. Tolstoy is like the macro view as Einstein is to 1/n
Is to physics through relativity. War and Peace sought to explain human role in the upheaval of historical events. The psychology existed within their role of this macro view of historical change. Dostoevsky is the Neil Bohr of quantum physics at the individual level of 2/n
Personal salvation and struggle. The inveterate obsessed gambler, the killer struggling to reconcile his actions to his belief, or the monk seeking to make certain his faith in God. These were personal individual struggles separate from the macro backdrop of history against 3/n
Read 5 tweets
3 Dec
I'm frequently asked why the obsession with China? Simple: The CCP wants to dominate the world. Period. They are not a competitor. They are an adversary. An enemy. It is not hard to conceive where they usher in a long period of global authoritarianism. Too many people 1/n
Including a lot of DC "experts" have been entirely and totally wrong and still are. They need to be treated as they are: not a country with whom we have a trade dispute but a whole of society adversary bent on changing the governance system globally and within democracies. 2/n
Every issue you talk about is a China issue: inequality, innovation, climate, on and on. They are ALL fundamentally China issues. Too many people think China will negotiate and cooperate. Find me an example of where China has good faith cooperated. I'll wait. 3/n
Read 6 tweets
2 Dec
The EU framework for transatlantic cooperation is more Euro non-sense. There is a reason every administration since the fall of the wall has held pretty similar position on Europe and why Europe is not considered a leader in global affairs. Highlights: 1/n
ec.europa.eu/info/sites/inf…
The Iranian nuclear deal is called "key pillar of the global non-proliferation architecture". You cannot be serious but then again this is European security policy makers so you probably think you are being serious. 2/n
China gets one paragraph near the end where they are called "China is a negotiating partner for cooperation, an economic competitor, and a
systemic rival." Again only a European foreign policy bureaucrat could write that and think they are serious 3/n
Read 6 tweets
30 Nov
The EU position on its face is imminently reasonable. The realities and mechanics is where it falls apart. Let me give you a couple of examples. First, the EU is years behind the US in cybersecurity. Y.E.A.R.S. Second, lacking the expertise and resources, this sounds a lot 1/n
Another opportunity to free ride than actually do something. Couple that with the EUs ability to churn out working papers that mean nothing in practice and I wouldn't hold my breath. Then this is mostly national sovereignty issue and not an EU issue difficult to see national 2/n
Governments moving or allocating the necessary resources needed. Third, national investment encapsulates all these issues perfectly. Every EU country had the ability to set their own investment policy (think NordStream). They don't need the US to set national security 3/n
Read 5 tweets
18 Nov
This article highlights the absurdity of Acela Corridor journalists who have the memory of a fruit fly repeating inane talking points about US policy towards Europe and allies. Follow me a moment 1/n
politico.eu/article/german…
Germany openly admits they absolutely must have the US security guarantee because other than a handful of boy scouts and launching stale Nutella at invading forces, they have absolutely no capabilities and will not be investing in their security any time soon. 2/n
Not only is it true which admit it, they have refused really since 1989 to do anything but free ride off of the American security guarantee. They insist on running extremely tight fiscal policy all while throwing temper tantrums when the US draws down forces. This isn't new 3/n
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!