| | | | Time's Up for Putin's Favorite Tactic | | The Trump administration announced Monday it is expelling 60 Russian diplomats, joining what British Prime Minister Theresa May has described as the "largest collective expulsion of Russian intelligence officers in history." Kadri Liik writes in The New York Times that this might be the moment that Moscow's preferred diplomatic play finally hits a wall.
"Since the annexation of Crimea, Russia has resorted to 'plausible deniability' again and again. The interference in the American presidential elections was a classic case: Mr. Putin has repeatedly emphasized that Russia has not intervened 'at the level of the government,' but he admits that some 'patriotic hackers' or trolls with Russian citizenship might indeed have been active," Liik writes.
"The problem is that 'plausible deniability' empowers all sorts of activists and proxies. Sometimes, these people act under the Kremlin's instructions; other times, they set out independently, trying to do what they think would please Mr. Putin. They cannot always be successfully controlled, and they may inadvertently commit blunders or cross lines that the Kremlin did not want to cross." - Twitter diplomacy, Russia style. Russia's ambassador to the United States warned the move was a "grave mistake." One of the Russian Embassy's first responses? A Twitter poll asking the public to choose which US consulate in Russia they think should be closed down.
| | Fareed: Why the Tech Honeymoon Is Finally Over | | | The revelations over Cambridge Analytica's use of Facebook data might be the straw that finally breaks the back of public faith in the tech industry, Fareed argues in his latest Washington Post column. "The other noticeable consequence has been the erosion of privacy, highlighted by the Cambridge Analytica/Facebook scandal. Because technology companies now deal with billions of consumers, any individual is a speck, a tiny data point. And since for most technology companies the individual consumer is also a product, whose information is sold to others for a profit, he or she is doubly disempowered," Fareed writes. "The tech giants would surely respond that they have democratized information, created products of extraordinary power and potential, and transformed life for the better. All of this is true. So did previous innovations such as the telephone, the automobile, antibiotics and electricity. But precisely because of these products' power and transformational impact, it was necessary for the government to play some role in protecting individuals and restraining the huge new winners in the economy." | | | President Trump announced last week that John Bolton will replace H.R. McMaster as national security adviser from April 9. Global Briefing asked Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, author of "A World in Disarray," and a GPS regular, what makes for an effective adviser. "The National Security Advisor must wear two hats. The first -- and most important -- is to provide staff support to the president and the national security process. This requires making sure intelligence and policy are integrated, that all departments with a legitimate stake in an issue get the opportunity to offer their assessments and policy recommendations, and that the president is made aware of both areas of consensus and differences," says Haass, who served on the staff of the National Security Council from 1989 to 1993. "He or she also needs to ensure that decisions are made in a timely manner, that all those who need to know are made aware of them, and that implementation is consistent with the decision and regularly monitored." "The second hat is to be a counselor to the president, offering up his or her own views and recommendations and an assessment of what others in the interagency process are putting forward. The biggest challenge is to make sure this second hat does not take get in the way of the former; to the contrary, the due process dimension of the job must take precedence over personal preferences if the system is not to break down." | | For Evangelicals, It's a Stormy in a Teacup | | Don't expect white evangelicals to turn on the President in the wake of Stormy Daniels' prime time recounting of her alleged affair with Donald Trump. "Voters' religious tenets" aren't what is driving their support for him, argue Andrew L. Whitehead, Joseph O. Baker and Samuel L. Perry for the Washington Post's Monkey Cage.
"[I]t's Christian nationalism — their view of the United States as a fundamentally Christian nation."
"Many voters believed, and presumably still believe, that regardless of his personal piety (or lack thereof), Trump would defend what they saw as the country's Christian heritage — and would help move the nation toward a distinctly Christian future. Ironically, Christian nationalism is focused on preserving a perceived Christian identity for America irrespective of the means by which such a project would be achieved," the authors write, citing their recent study.
"White Christian America is unquestionably in demographic decline. But one of its primary cultural creations — Christian nationalism — will continue influencing US politics and society for decades to come, particularly in response to waning demographic and social dominance."
| | Why the NRA Is Getting Nervous | | The marches across the United States this weekend calling for tougher gun controls underscore how badly the National Rifle Association has miscalculated. The kids-led protest is riding a wave of anger that gained strength with #MeToo and the Women's March, writes Francis Wilkinson for Bloomberg View. The "payback is unlikely to be pleasant."
"The NRA seized its advantage under GOP legislatures and a GOP Congress to promote a no-compromise agenda of guns everywhere for anyone. It went for all the marbles -- guns in bars, churches, schools, colleges, parking lots, playgrounds -- hoping to make them so pervasive that the cultural pendulum could never swing back," Wilkinson writes. "Instead of seeking to accommodate a changing world, it vastly overreached."
"Anxiety, it turns out, is not the exclusive purview of old white men uneasy about the empowerment of women and the racial composition of the nation. People afraid of being shot, or losing their children, willy-nilly because any fool can get a gun are also anxious."
| | Where the Arab Spring Dream Is (Just) Clinging On | | | Voting in Egypt's presidential election got underway Monday. It's "a depressing spectacle," writes Gideon Rachman in the Financial Times. But there's still reason to believe that the hopes of the Arab Spring haven't been extinguished quite yet. "The rule of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi is even more repressive than that of the Mubarak regime that was overthrown by the Egyptian revolution," Rachman writes. "Meanwhile neighboring Libya has descended into violent anarchy, leaving some citizens nostalgic for the relative stability of the Gaddafi dictatorship." "Defying the violence and repression in the wider region, Tunisia is governed by an elected coalition government. It will soon stage municipal elections, with a presidential poll to follow in 2019. The country was hit by two major acts of terrorism in 2015, but the security situation now seems under control and tourists are returning. The optimists hope that a democratic Tunisia could still, one day, serve as a role model for north Africa and the Middle East." | | | Thursday marks the start of the one-year countdown to Brexit, when Britain will formally leave the European Union. Paul Taylor writes for Politico EU that so far, the talks have been less a negotiation, and more a "managed surrender" on the part of the U.K. London has, for example, "agreed lock-stock-and-barrel to Brussels' terms for a 21-month transition period — shorter than Britain had wanted — during which the U.K. will have to apply all EU laws without any say in the bloc's decisions, in exchange for keeping its current market access." The US and South Korea are scheduled to resume joint military exercises Sunday with the Foal Eagle and Key Resolve drills. Kim Gamel writes for Stars and Stripes that despite a US vow that the exercises wouldn't be scaled back, "the messaging and a shortened timetable suggest the annual drills will be kept low-key to avoid provoking the North Koreans as delicate diplomacy is underway." | | | | | | |
