Look at almost any event and if you play back the decisions or little events that led up to that, what we see as the "BIG EVENT" ultimately became almost inevitable by all the previous events or decisions that took place to cause the "BIG EVENT". Let's revisit why we are here 1/n
1. Disconnect between word and deeds. The reality is there is a vast difference between the two and enemies looking for any weakness to exploit know that the major democratic powers are little more than hashtag powers 2/n
2. Engagement needs to be shot between the eyes. Russia, China, Iran and others know engagement is a one way bet. Let people make some money because they will never do anything because they fear the consequences. What have universities really accomplished in Russia/China?
3. Global power still resides at the end of an AK-47 paid for by an Amex Black. Soft power and cyber are great, but they are overwhelmed by guns and money. Until you are willing to use both to further your aims, it's all B!@#$#!+ 4/n
4. Consistency matters. You want to send a real message about NS2? Blow it up. Seriously. Blow. It. Up. Until then everyone knows Germany and Russia will just wait six months. You want credibility? Be consistent other wise they know nothing matters
5. Allies are wildly over rated. Seriously what as the EU done other than launder Russian money? In the stare down US matters, Germany a just a little. Almost no one else. If the US wants allies, it needs to commit resources, act and use its resources to get action from allies
6. All the little actions matter. Events like Ukraine are a quadruple bypass. Everyday you didn't treat Russia and China like a very real threat was that double bacon cheese burger. Occasional cheat day is fine, every day cheat day creates real problems
7. Burn history down. Even now most people are stuck in a 2012 view of China or Russia where a little more engagement will change things so we can push a broad plan to relocate all supply chains. Do it now. Do it now. Do it now. Burn it all down
8. It will only get worse. We need to accept that, internalize, and act upon it. Deeds only no more hashtag campaigns.
9. Work with those who will join you but do not hamstring your ability by allowing them to slow you down. Germany can join us but if they do not want to leave them behind and act independently
10. Rregular shows of weakness matter. The rule of global diplomacy is simple: just like prison, knock somebody out the first day just to let everyone else know you mean business.
11. The post WWII institutional order is worthless at this point. Anyone pointing to them should be ignored. Burn it all down and start again.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Take a brief trip with me about about how we frame foreign policy leading up to major events. As I tell my kids, you should never arrive in a test or a game and think OMG what do I do? You've practiced. You've studied. You're ready. The process and work has prepared you. 1/n
So how do we apply that thinking to foreign policy? A. Is foreign policy consistent in direction, statement, and execution? Put another way: do words match actions and do so consistently? Let's start with Trump: the PR on Trump foreign policy was relatively inconsistent 2/n
BUT actions and directionality were very consistent. On Iran, China, and Russia, he took a pretty hawkish line and did so very consistently over the course of his administration. Let's turn to Biden who saw many flaws with the Trump approach and has done almost exact opposite 3/n
I don't normally use the language I am about to use but in this case it is completely accurate. The White House recently released their Indo-Pacific Strategy and in it they made the following statement: 1/n whitehouse.gov/wp-content/upl…
Let me state in no uncertain terms: this is an absolute lie and the White House knows this is an absolute lie. This is why in spending bills O-RAN is being removed from every spending bill around. The White House is actively pushing an industry coalition that will 2/n
a) Give Chinese and Russian intelligence access to the source code of a USG backed telecom systems b) license USG and American firm technology to Chinese firms c) give technology to ENTITY list and PLA owned firms according to executive agency lists 3/n
Excellent thread and while I am definitely not a progressive nor have I ever been there is a lot to listen to here. Maybe for me the biggest is that many of the "given" parameters of US politics are breaking down in ways that the cliched elites simply aren't appreciating 1/n
Just to take two simple examples, black parents broadly support different school options like school vouchers when Dems and teachers unions are rabidly against. On the other side, there is pretty broad support for continued relatively high levels of immigration 2/n
We see this in both stated and observed preferences. The GOP has staked most of its platform however on the significantly smaller number of activists that believe strongly in limiting. There are many many example of how the old lines simply don't match the old coalitions 3/n
So even though I would generally rather unnfurl a Free Tibet Flag in Tianenman Square than discuss race because most any discusion on Twitter is just absurd BS, I am going to go against my better judgement and tell a recent story from my kids school 1/n
As they started growing up in China and very multicultural environment whether it was being literally the only white kid in every school or class, or playing with kids from all over the world in different settings my wife and I made a very conscious decision to NOT use 2/n
Many common descriptiive words to describe their friends specifically anything have to do with nationality. Most commonly that meant not describing friends as Chinese or Korean for instance and just calling them their tall friend or almost Seinfeldian like desciptors 3/n
Since absolutely NO ONE is getting the importance of this statement let me explain. The BIS under the Commerce Department a department not exactly known for being China hawks have added to the Mechanical Engineering Department at Southern University of Science and Technology 1/n
This is THE EXACT department MIT Professor Chen Gang was working with that was the source of the charges against him which were recently dropped. So let's recap the situation then 3/n
Since it is a holiday and this idea for many reasons is in my head today, let me explain my framework of how I evaluate the primary hurdle for judging between virtue signalling and actual belief. An epistemelogical proof of belief if you will. Follow me a minute. 1/n
I hold a pretty cynical view that no matter what political party, country, background you come from when you are telling me loudly about your belief, it's probably BS. Why? I have no way of verifying anything you are saying. How do you verify a belief? How do you forecast 2/n
How someone will behave on a stated belief? You really can't. So how can we test whether a belief has moved beyond the ephemeral and into the tangible? Beyond observing them in the specific situation, I would posit what risks/costs are they willing to absorb in furtherance 3/n