Daniel Fogg on Security

A brief period away...

2009-07-25T18:13:00.005+01:00

A brief period away while I take care of business. In the meantime...

Check the twitterscope for regular headlines and status reports.

Check the Tumblr account for photos, music, video, or comment. All photos by myself. All music is by friends or creative influences. All video by myself or pulled through the tubes from elsewhere.

Fencing is the Reason Guns were Invented

2009-06-20T14:05:00.004+01:00

Living with two fencers (EdWin + HutchiBaby), this article is was particularly fascinating.

"Since it has aristocratic roots, fencing still carries an elitist reputation that American fencers would like to shed. Still, the fencers I met confirmed the stereotype that this was a sport for agile brainiacs. I talked at random to three women competitors whose professions were biostatistician at the National Cancer Institute, naval engineer, and director of a think tank.

I asked several fencers why they are drawn to the sport. They all mentioned that it was good exercise, but they were much more interested in the intellectual discipline. Fencing requires finely honed mental reflexes, enjoyment in being intimidating, and a love of deceit. They liked that there was no reliance on a team: instead, it's one person alone with a sharp object trying to defeat another. I bet college fencers read a lot of Ayn Rand."

Dannatt does a Gates: Spend on What We Need, Not What We Think We Will Need

2009-05-16T16:01:00.006+01:00

Following on from the below article, it appears General Dannatt is proposing the British Armed Forces adopts a frugal approach to defense spending. This will involve ditching 'big-ticket' defense projects and re-focussing defense spending on immediate needs, such as supporting 'stability operations', and away from post-Cold War strategic defense spending.

General Dannatt describes the current British security situation thus:

"We are in an era of persistent conflict. Iraq and Afghanistan are not aberrations, they are signposts to the future. We risk becoming irrelevant if we do not adapt right across the board."

The General also accepts that, wrongly or rightly our reputation as a powerful ally to America and global military force has been "called into question" due to Iraq.

"Credibility with the United States is earned by being an ally that can be relied on to state clearly what it will do and then do it effectively. Credibility is also linked to the vital currency of reputation and in this respect there is a recognition that our national and military reputation and credibility, unfairly or not, have been called into question at several levels in the eyes of our most important ally as a result of some aspects of the Iraq campaign."

Channel 4's Krishnan Guru-Murthy interviewed the General shortly after his speech at Chatham House (click through to the link if the video is not displayed below).

Not surpisingly, General Dannatt is ferociously sharp and his points clearly well considered. The recording of yesterday's speech reminded me more of a presentation by a corporate management consultant, than a military general. Quite fitting I feel, considering once you cut through the euthamisms his proposed solutions are all too common: we must raine in unecessary spending, take stock of our needs and requirements, and focus on what we do best.

GSRD on Evolutionary Defense

2009-05-15T19:57:00.003+01:00

Unfortunately I missed this (but for good reason).

A Perspective on the Nature of Future Conflict

Friday 15 May 2009 13:30 to 14:30
Location

Chatham House, London
Participants

General Sir Richard Dannatt, Chief of the General Staff, British Army
Chair: Dr Robin Niblett, Director, Chatham House

In strategic and inclusive terms the speaker will give a view of future conflict, dominated by the concept of hybrid operations. He will explain the implications of this for the land environment in particular, showing how the campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan have acted as a catalyst for 'transformation in contact' and describe how the Army could continue to evolve so that it can better contribute to defence and security in the future.

The question and answer session in this meeting was off the record.

But you can catch the audio here.

http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/events/listen/-/id/1153/doc/audio/

Embeded

2009-05-15T19:26:00.007+01:00

VBS.TV has been at the fore-front of programming that is sometimes clueless but deeply hilarious. and other times crucially . They boldly go where most people don't care to look. This is excellent.

INSIDE AFGHANISTAN WITH BEN ANDERSON
In Inside Afghanistan VBS joins BBC correspondent and former Iranian captiveBen Anderson to review some of the footage he shot on his latest foray to the colossally mismanaged logjam that is NATO's war against the resurgent Afghani Taliban. Here's what Ben had to say about what he shot (we mean with a camera).

"This series is about 24 hours in Helmand, Afghanistan's most violent province. I was with the Queen's Company, British soldiers who normally guard Buckingham Palace. Their job was to train the Afghan National Army while fighting the Taliban, an almost impossible combination. On the day this was shot, we were ambushed late in the morning, then surrounded in a small house belonging to a terrified Afghan family. The battle to get out of the house lasted eight hours. The two most senior soldiers there - both veterans of Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Northern Ireland - agreed that it was the most intense day they had ever experienced. I spent two months in Afghanistan, and I'm sure that what I saw in Helmand is going on in many other parts of the country. We could be there for decades."

PS: If you're in Britain this week, also check out Ben Anderson's Jack: A Soldier's Story on BBC Three.

Watch it here

http://www.vbs.tv/video.php?id=1834373791

Obama & Lavrov: It's Business Time

2009-05-08T09:06:00.002+01:00

Despite international events suggesting otherwise, Russia and America yesterday stressed the positive working relationship between their governments on a broad range of issues. President Obama and Secretary Lavrov expressed their professional respect of each other and their counterparts, ushering in an era of pragmatic co-operation. Check out the video of the resulting press conference here - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8039346.stm

Chiming with this sentiment, Secretary Clinton recently remarked; "It is, I think, old thinking to say that we have a disagreement in one area, therefore we shouldn't work on something else that is of overwhelming importance."

Smoking Men Shuffles and Bad Trainers

2009-02-26T22:14:00.003Z

Danger Room, as always, has it...

Robert Gates isn't the only Bush-era Pentagon appointee that'll keep on working for Team Obama. So will defense poobahs like: intel undersecretary (and retired Air Force Lieutenant General) James Clapper; Air Force Secretary Mike Donley; and assistant secretary for special operations Michael Vickers, of "Charlie Wilson's War" fame.

Please also note the bad trainers advertised on this page.

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/02/top-spook-air-f.html

The Video

2009-02-26T21:57:00.003Z

or hit the link and see video in top-right...

http://www.terraplexic.org/review/2009/2/12/the-cybernetic-way-of-warfare-at-the-ica-23-feb.html

CTLab: Feral Cities and the Scientific Way of Warfare

2009-02-26T19:58:00.003Z

The guys over at CTLab are really on to something at the moment. I attended a lecture at the ICA (with my partner in academic crime) on Monday given by Antoine Bousquet who speaks here. So what does happen when the command and control structure is flattened...

Putin to Obama: 'Let's See What You Got, Player'

2009-02-09T20:45:00.003Z

The Financial Times' international affairs editor Quentin Peel pulls together the pieces of Putin and Medvedev's recent foreign policy surge.

'First, they leaked details of naval and air bases to be established on the shores of the Black Sea in the breakaway Georgian province of Abkhazia, whose independence is recognised by Moscow alone. Then they signed an air defence treaty with the former Soviet republic of Belarus, apparently paving the way for an anti-missile defence system to counter one planned by the previous US administration across the border in Poland. Moscow appears to have persuaded the Central Asian republic of Kyrgyzstan to oust the US from its air base at Manas, outside Bishkek, in exchange for $2bn (€1.6bn, £1.4bn) in loans, and $150m in financial aid.'

That all amounts to quite a few moves on the great chess board. However this is a common trend amongst post-Soviet and pseudo-democratic states; the external projection of strength is designed to distract the gaze from internal weakness.

HST: Fear and Loathing in the Era of Terror

2009-01-10T23:24:00.005Z

It was Fear and Loathing in Last Vegas, Hunter S Thompson's most famous work, which helped me through my GSCEs. I found the sheer energy and drug-fueled hyper-reality he wrote of truly exhilarating. This is not an uncommon opinion on Fear and Loathing, a book which is unquestionably a modern classic. It's both a buddy-story bender through early-70s Vegas, and a dark satire on the American dream, set as the optimistic warmth of modernism slips from view leaving cold, multi-layered reality to usher in the cynical era of post-modernity. In such a setting, who can blame the two protagonists for such heroic levels of consumption.

Since this first encounter I've read most of his other works from 'Hell's Angels: The Strange and Terrible Saga of the Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs' through to the broadest and best collection of his work 'The Great Shark Hunt: Strange Tales from a Strange Time'; which in finest HST-style reports on high-minded politics, violent bar room scuffles and everything in between.

Not long before his tragic death in 2005, Thompson gave a fascinating interview with an Australian journalist on the state of post-9/11 America (download the interview here). He come across as eloquent and intelligent political analyst but also a rambling, contradictory, deluded paranoid. His remarks in this interview are highly provocative and deeply insightful. Classic Thompson.

Recently Read

2008-12-27T21:36:00.004Z

I've recently read a number of books which I intended to review at great length here on the blog. It never happened. So as an alternative to long exhaustive book reviews I will be posting short 100 word summary-reviews of relevant texts and sometimes novels (cheeky) here on the blog over the next few weeks. Your thoughts, comments, and suggestions of similar reading are welcome and actively encouraged.

Contained in the biography...

2008-12-25T11:58:00.003Z

Searching for 'Daniel Fogg' and 'blog' in Google yields no results leading to my page. Understanding how the Google search algorithum works, I do not find this surprising. However, I came across the website of another Daniel Fogg. Although this character does not seem particularly interesting (something in the name perhaps), he has a mean eye for a good quote.

“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” George Bernard Shaw - writer, Nobel laureate (1856-1950)

Hiatus - hi⋅a⋅tus [hahy-ey-tuhs]

2008-12-25T11:53:00.001Z

–noun, plural -tus⋅es, -tus.
1. a break or interruption in the continuity of a work, series, action, etc.
2. a missing part; gap or lacuna: Scholars attempted to account for the hiatus in the medieval manuscript.
3. any gap or opening.

Places that don't Exist: The Caucuses

2008-09-30T10:34:00.001+01:00

While at university several years ago a little-known BBC4 documentary series became popular amoung my (Politics and International Relations) course mates. First broadcast in early 2003, journalist Ben Anderson posing as aninquisitive 'tourist' presented a strangely knowledgable travel programme from the six countries President Bush had recently described as an 'Axis of Evil'. This excellent series applied a long-standing television-format to some of the least known countries of the world and provided a highly entertaining, much-needed backdrop to our daily studies. The cult success of the series allowed it's producers to take the idea and run with it.

As a result, in May 2005, following on from Holidays in the Axis of Evil, journalist, potential boy-band member, and thoroughly nice-bloke Simon Reeve picked up where Ben Anderson left off. Titled 'Places that don't Exist', Reeve travelled to the world's breakaway states and unrecognised nations. One of best shows in this series covered the Caucuses and the regions several states that were trapped in international limbo. You can check out an interview with Reeve here, download the video here, or watch a full version of the Caucuses episode below.

The reason this show has so much value is the snap-shot it provides of life in Georgia, South Ossetia, and Abkhazia before the Russia-Georgia conflict. Throughout the episode, Reeve warns of the real possibility of the stalemate in the region flaring into a full-scale military conflict. When watching, I remember being sceptical of Reeve's claims, but why wouldn't I be? Russia entering into post-Cold War military conflicts? Really?

How rapidly the game has changed.

Hope on the Korean peninsula provided by an 'informed observer'

2008-09-26T15:35:00.009+01:00

Over at Danger Room, Jeffrey Lewis through the help from an 'informed observer' offers an alternative to the current failing US policy on North Korean nuclear disarmament.

'...informed observers are floating the idea of “provisional delisting” that allows the North Koreans to move first privately, but save face in the process — here is how it goes:

North Korea agrees to a verification protocol that is limited to the 38 nuclear-related sites in the North Korean declaration, which includes anytime access and environmental sampling. Pyongyang hands this agreement over to the Chinese, who hold it in escrow.

The President of the United States publicly announces that North Korea is not involved in terrorism (which, by happy coincidence, is true) and that he is de-listing North Korea provisionally on the expectation that North Korea will resume disablement activities and agree to a verification. If North Korea fails to agree to a verification scheme within some decent interval, he can simply place Pyongyang back on the list, right between Iran and Sudan. (For some reason, the State Department tends to list the states alphabetically, instead of by date of listing.)

The Chinese release the North Korean agreement, held in escrow, announcing that the North Koreans have in fact agreed to a verification proposal acceptable to the US. “How wise,” Wang Yi will opine, “of the Great Power to move first, allowing the smaller, weaker party to save face.” He will say this without any hint of irony, which is an advantage to being Chinese.

It sounds smart, but does President Bush have the stomach for such a move? Perhaps, anything can happen in the final months of a lame-duck presidency.

Everything else looks nicely in order; a face saving technique for the isolated regime, a back-room statement of intentions by the North Koreans to settle US nerves, and the Bush Administration able to claim a late success while North Korea talks of triumph in the face of the Evil Satan. It is certainly the only sensible solution which has emerged to pull North Korea away from beginning re-processing, so I support it.

A quick note on my tubing system...

2008-09-26T11:55:00.004+01:00

As this blog develops I aim to deliver more than my current offering of written comment and analysis. I will be hosting downloadable and streamable video and audio from here onwards. As I am unlikely to be the creator of this content, this probably places me in contravention of numerous copyright and intellectual property laws. More so as most of the content I will be posting will be difficult to obtain in a blog-friendly format anywhere else. So I would like to present this disclaimer as an appeal to any disgruntled content providers.

Your content is posted here with no intention of deriving profit, influence, or any personal gain from it's distribution. I am including this content on the blog in the spirit of fair use. I do not seek to undermine your copyright or the intellectual property of the content's original creator. I am posting this content to provide further information to the readers of this blog, and to act as further reference to the ideas and comments contained within the blog. If, as a content provider, you feel I have unfairly used this content within my blog, please contact me requesting the content is removed and I will be happy to assess the legitimacy of your complaint. If I feel your request is valid, I will remove the content from my blog.

Scenes from Mesapotamia

2008-09-23T20:46:00.007+01:00

The Boston Globe's outstanding Big Picture blog offers up some recent images from Iraq.

Myself an amateur photographer, I've always taken a strong interest in photo reportage and the imagery of war. A powerful photograph will burn deep into a persons memory and not only outlast the most salient of arguments, but transcend it.

The War of Terror has like Vietnam before it been defined by the the imagery of photo journalists. Now with the democratisation of comment and ready access to tools such as camera phones, we also have the advent of the citizen journalist. This has given a striking new aesthetic to photo reportage from the worlds trouble spots, whether it be a US soldiers photographs of the Abu Gharib torture or a suicide bombers final words. This development is to be celebrated for imagery is essential in human understanding, especially in the complex psychological environment of war. But make no mistake, there will still always be space for the stark beauty and silent commentary which only the 'magic eye' of the photojournalist can generate and detect.

Buried under the rouble [updated]

2008-09-16T13:36:00.004+01:00

I posted recently on the financial cost Russia has paid for it's war with Georgia. Although this conflict has certainly had a significant affect on the current state of the RTS Index, it appears the downturn is part of a wider trend which began in May.

The New York Times presents the figures. Here are the headlines:

'The benchmark RTS index has lost 46 percent of its value since its peak in May, representing a paper loss of about $700 billion for Russian companies.'

'On Friday the RTS, which peaked in May at 2,487, rebounded slightly, rising 3.36 percent to close at 1,342. The country’s other main stock exchange, the MICEX, was rose 6 percent on Friday, after weeks of heavy losses.'

'...one indication that Russian politics lubricated the market slide here, however, investors have pulled nearly $5 billion this year from emerging market funds with a heavy Russia weighting, according to EPFR Global.'

'For next year, Russian officials are projecting federal revenue growth of 1.8 percent, compared with an estimated 13.8 percent this year. Just in the last week, the value of Russia’s hard currency reserves has dropped $8.9 billion. The ruble is down 6 percent since the war in Georgia.'

Why is this happening? Too much state ownership, too much manipulation, too much politics, too much violence and too much risk in the market.

Sarah Palin in a 'very dangerous world'

2008-09-15T18:55:00.008+01:00

Despite my previous objection to commenting on Sarah Palin, the US Republican Vice Presidential candidate has entered the US national security debate in a big way, making her fair game. The excellent Danger Room picks up on the story and highlights this quote, stating her view that NATO should expand to include Georgia.

GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?

PALIN: Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you're going to be expected to be called upon and help ... We have got to make sure that that is the group that can be counted upon to defend one another in a very dangerous world today.

Hawkish to say the least. I can't believe these comments are unadvised, which makes me worry further about the trajectery of the McCain political team. Speaking of which, I thought John McCain was the foreign policy and defence expert?

Almost within the same news cycle, Sarah Palin drew a direct comparison between Iraq and 9/11, a connection which has already been widely discredited and finally disproven by the press, opposition and adminsitration alike.

Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would "defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans."

She continued...

"I believe that America has to exercise all options in order to stop the terrorists who are hellbent on destroying America and our allies," she said after several questions on the topic. "We have got to have all options out there on the table."

You can find the full article generated from this interview including a section of the original interview here.

Not more of the same, but worse.

United Nations, NATO and the world Beyond Westminster

2008-09-14T18:38:00.012+01:00

On Saturday (13th September 2008), BBC Radio 4's Beyond Westminster hosted a fascinating discussion on the nature and future of North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the United Nations. Those invited onto the programme did an excellent job of examining the complex world both organisations now find themselves deeply involved in. I have no further comment to add to this discussion, so I have posted my (very) rough notes below.

You can download the programme here.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

UN & NATO relied upon by the Western world as the ‘twin pillars of peace’.

John Bolton (former US Ambassador to United Nations). UN is at best an irrelevance and at worst an obstacle. The two biggest threats to the world are terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The world sees its existential threats as the same as America. Feels the UN has an inability to ‘resolve’ conflicts. Peacekeepers are stationed on conflict lines and can remain there for decades arguably helping maintain the status-quo/maintain the unresolved conflict. A proponent of the creation of a League of Democracies.

David Hanney (Britain’s Ambassador to the UN). Skeptical of the possibility of removing the veto power for certain nations. He was the author of 100 recommendations made to Koffe Annan, UN Secretary General, on how to reform the ‘outdated’ organization structure. These recommendations included the ‘responsibility to protect’ idea, stating that the UN had a responsibility to protect the people of a country if the country was unable to do so. In contrast to John Bolton’s view, he believes the UN to be ‘indispensable but not very effective’.

Maurice Jochams (Senior NATO Official and Director of NATO Operations in Afghanistan). Since 9/11 the geographical scope of NATO has increased dramatically. He believes that although Georgia joining NATO could be perceived as provocative by the Russians, it should be in their interests as having democratic countries on their borders will increase stability.

Simon Jenkins (Author and Journalist). Believes NATO should be disbanded as it is outdated and outmoded. Russia and Britain have been belligerent in recent years. As an organisation which prevented Soviet expansion into Europe, it was excellent. Now though, there is nothing positive to be gained from taunting Russia by allowing membership from Poland, Czech Republic, etc. Russia will eventually respond aggressively to what it views as an aggressive threat. Russia is not stable enough to start enraging. NATO has gone back to being an ‘artificial confrontation organisation’ and it is dangerous. UN Security Council membership should be decided on some definition of power and some idea of a ‘being a policeman in an area where there is none’. The UN is a vast gravy train, and it is a wonder that anything gets done at all. It is at its best when it is a forum.

Dr. Paul Cornish (International Security Programme – Chatham House). NATO mishandled the build-up to and aftermath of the Georgia war but did not cause Russian tanks to cross into Georgian territory. Russian attempts to join NATO were mischievous. The recent conflict in Georgia will now be used by numerous Balkan and Caucus states as proof of their need to join NATO so as to shield them from the Russian threat. The war in Afghanistan is not going well and it is due to the lack of cohesion between the NATO members. On the UN, he believes that as spheres of influence, diplomatic conflicts and the high-wielded power of the veto become more commonly used [following the post-9/11 example of the United States perhaps] the UN is again becoming paralysed.

Margo Light (Professor of International Relations - LSE). Believes NATO to be the cause of the Georgia war which it now fights to contain. NATO has expanded too far already and should not accept the Ukraine and Georgia as members. The UN has benefited hugely when the US has acted as one of the main protagonists of the UN. In recent years all the US has sought to do is undermine the organisation and this significantly discredits and disarms the organisation.

11.09.01 / 08.08.08

2008-09-14T11:24:00.006+01:00

On the anniversary of the World Trade Center attacks, President Dmitry Medvedev drew a direct comparison between 9/11 and the recent war in Georgia/South Ossetia.

"The world has changed and it occurred to me that 8 August 2008 has become for Russia as 11 September 2001 for the United States. This is an accurate comparison corresponding to Russian realities. Humankind has drawn lessons from 11 September tragedy and other tragic events. I would like the world to draw lessons also from these events [in South Ossetia]."

This is one of many Western-Russian comparisons the Kremlin tag-team has been drawing recently. Commenting on the poor diplomatic relationship between the UK and Russia, Vladimir Putin indicated why he thought they were unlikely to improve.

"Why do you allow UK territory to be used [as] a launching pad to fight Russia? Imagine if we gave sanctuary to armed members of the IRA - that's why its not possible to build normal relations with Britain."

Relationships between countries are very much like relationships between people. Each country has it's own specific culture, like each person their own unique personality. Some people's personalities are immediately compatible, due to similarities in taste or attitude, and as a result people become friends. Some people have shared similar experiences or have shared a particular experience, and are drawn together as a result. It is in this way that relationships between people take shape and in a similar manner, so to do relationships between cultures, peoples, and states.

These comparative statements provoke a gut reaction that is difficult to ignore; a rejection of the comparison, the very suggestion showing an unsympathetic attitude and a strong feeling that it is based on a gross misunderstanding of fact. But taking action based on this feeling is deeply wrong.

For decades Russia and the West have understood each other as opposites. 'Democratic capitalist USA' and 'authoritarian communist Russia' - content in themselves, at ease with their polar opposite, and so settled in their relationship. The West and Russia were best understood, as was their relationship, by comparisons. This framework is now obsolete.

Russia is attempting to build a relationship built on similarities and should be implored for doing so. As I have indicated before, I am of the firm belief that a strong Russia can also be a benign Russia. But in their zealous drive for equal friendship, they find a largely sceptical Western audience.

For the West, it is difficult to ignore the rife political violence, the sham democracy, the transparently cynical foreign policy and capitalist gangsterism which has come to define Putin's eight years in office. With no real break from the Putin-era, Medvedev rests on a cursed thrown. And so recent history looms large and relatively recent historical precedent, as irritating as Russia may find it, is quite hard for the West to ignore.

Let us remember, Russia is not the only state to be defined by terrible acts and riddled with hypocrisy. Their old adversary the United States lectures on human rights and liberal democracy while propping up oil-rich Gulf states and running a shameful PoW camp in Cuba. And who, they say, is Britain to tell us of Empire.

How then will these individuals replenish their relationship? Unfortunately, I have no answer only that time will tell.

A developing theme

2008-09-10T13:46:00.007+01:00

A theme is developing in my posts, that of Russia and international security. This is partly intentional as I find the security situation that Russia (and the world as a result) currently finds itself in as utterly fascinating.

As the ultimate practitioners of realpolitik the Russian state, steered by the siloviki who control it's upper echelons, has awoken from the slow-times endured during the 1990's and appears to be 'back in the game'. Although countless UK/US commentators would have you think otherwise, a strong Russia is not necessarily a malign Russia. The country's slide towards authoritarianism over the past 8 years is well documented and doubtlessly a cause for concern. But we should remember, this is Russia! Previously a world super power, with the largest land mass on earth, 25% of fossil fuel reserves, the second largest nuclear arsenal on the planet and widely accepted as having produced the finest, although at times unscrupulous, intelligence service of the modern age. With all this power apparatus under it's control, you better believe that after sitting on the bench for over a decade Russia wants back in the game.

So in this blog I will be charting Russia's continuing rise, and possible stagnation, on a daily basis. This not to say I will be writing solely on this topic, far from it. I will be addressing topics like cyber-security, online and digital culture, Middle Eastern security, and the global private security industry. But if you are expecting 15 posts per day on Sarah 'Whiskey Tango' Palin's family, you may find yourself disappointed.

Burried under the rouble

2008-09-08T21:40:00.006+01:00

The FT brings forward evidence of the financial cost Russia has paid for it's war with Georgia.

"The rouble has dropped by 4 per cent against its euro/dollar basket since before the Georgia conflict [7th August 2008]. More broadly, the conflict has ensured that, probably for years, investors will continue to demand a higher risk premium for Russia. It has thrown into doubt President Dmitry Medvedev’s liberal credentials and commitment to his investor-friendly reform agenda. That could lead to suboptimal growth, and delay or derail Russia’s sorely needed economic modernisation."

(Hat-tip to Charles Crawford A.K.A Blogoir)

Taking the plunge...

2008-09-07T22:01:00.005+01:00

BBC News reports that "...the Russian stock market has plunged more than 30% since the country's invasion of Georgia last month."

My first thought on this development was, 'good, that'll give them pause for thought'. My hope was that such a sharp reversal in investment would show the Kremlin that while an adventurous wars can manipulate oil prices to their benefit, it will also significantly affect the level of financial risk investors are exposed to. This uncertain climate will inevitably cause investment to flood out of the country, which it did, with the foreign capital draining from Russian markets at $670 million dollars on average per day since the war in Georgia began. Feeling the pinch, this newting of the hawkish but pragmatic leaders in the Kremlin would force a draw-down and encourage Russia to cease it's action.

On reflection however, it must be remembered that Russia successfully managed to avert market-capitalism for over 80 years while amassing a colossal military machine to challenge the richest nation in the world - a very costly exercise. It should also be noted that the ex-CIS countries, Russia's closest trading partners after the EU, has a population of 278 million which are at the least obliged to purchase first from Russia. And then there is the oil which for every $1 per barrel increase provides Russia with an additional $1 billion per year. The Russian economy appears better equipped at weathering economic storms than was first thought.

"...striking a bleak and rather cautious note about the future..."

2008-09-07T16:31:00.007+01:00

James Shear, head of the Russia and Eurasia Programme at Chatham House, offers his sobering thoughts (not that strategic analysis is ever anything but sobering) on EU-Russia relations and what shape the relationship may take in the near future.

Download the interview here.

It's good to hear a rational analysis of recent Russian movements, ignoring the forced framework of the 'nu-Cold War' which I reject for it's simplicity and analytical constraints.

A heroic attempt

2008-09-07T15:52:00.003+01:00

I've been mulling over the idea of heroic failures recently. Wikipedia, that tome of communal knowledge, offers the following definition:

"[A] heroic failure describes a person or group failing to accomplish their goal, but somehow gaining the moral upper hand or becoming ennobled in the attempt."

There's something deeply comforting in this idea; something very human. The thought that even if you fail to achieve your goal, you have still succeeded or achieved in some way.

And with that comforting thought, I conclude my first post. :-)