Diplomacy & Crisis News

In his famous 19th century work Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville wrote that “… a democracy is unable to regulate the details of an important undertaking, to persevere in a design, and to work out its execution in the persistence of serious obstacles. It cannot combine its measures with secrecy, and it will not await their consequences with patience.”(261) Unfortunately, it was these traits, de Tocqueville argued, that lead nations towards successful foreign policies over the long term. For decades American foreign policy has fallen to each of these traps.

Inconsistent messaging and even more inconsistent policies have become a complication for the United States both at home and abroad. 

The American economy appears to be heading towards a downturn- months of rising prices, increasing interest rates, and supply shortages all make this point crystal clear for consumers. These challenges are not only apparent to everyday Americans- policy makers ranging from President Joe Biden and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen to Fed Chairman Jerome Powell have each recognized this issue through their public statements. However, despite the broad recognition that the economy appears on the brink of a downturn, leading policymakers offer different justifications for the tough times that appear ahead.

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen infamously referred to inflation as “transitory” before being forced to walk back those comments. President Biden has suggested that economic challenges are, in large part, a consequence of Russian aggression in Ukraine. While Chairman Powell has pointed to a post-pandemic economy as a leading cause of economic turbulence. 

This communications debacle is evidence of the inconsistencies intrinsic to democratic government that de Tocqueville describes- more importantly, it leaves Americans pessimistic about our economic prospects, divided about who is to blame, and unsure of how to move forward.

In a similar way, officials from the State Department have regularly been called upon to clarify statements given directly by the President. This weak messaging both domestically and abroad creates an opportunity for America’s rivals to fill the void, and it is worth considering how they have chosen to do so.

Reviewing the content of Russia Today* (a state-controlled media company with headquarters in Moscow) offers insights about how leadership in the Kremlin wants its readers to understand the state of the American economy. A visitor to the site might expect to find articles arguing that Russia was defeating the United States in Ukraine, and that America’s economic uncertainty is a consequence of challenging Russian might. Instead, a visitor will find articles arguing that American economic uncertainty is a self-inflicted wound. Additionally, instead of articles highlighting the military prowess of the Russian army, they would find stories highlighting the resilience of the Russian economy despite American efforts to limit Russian exports.

Despite what might appear to be an obvious opportunity for nationalistic chest-thumping, an apparent plurality of Russia Today’s articles highlight examples of disfunuction in the U.S. lead NATO bloc. RT features disputes between American policy makers, stories of American media censorship, and polls suggesting that Americans have a grim outlook about their economic prospects. The United States is not the only nation targeted by these efforts- others in the EU and NATO have their institutions scrutinized as well.

This highlights something important about the way that the Kremlin leverages its role in Russian media. Rather than display examples of military victories, Russian media praises the resilience of the Russian people and the stability offered by leadership in Moscow. Instead of arguing that American economic uncertainty is a consequence of challenging Putin, RT presents the economic downturn as a self-inflicted wound. In truth, the publication goes out of its way to highlight how few Americans blame the autocrat for their economic woes. 

Russian state media does not work to persuade Russians that their lives are somehow better than the lives of people who live in democratic nations. Instead, these outlets make the nihilistic argument that all governments make promises they can’t keep, that all institutions are corrupt, and that the average American is just as far away from real political influence as the average Russian. The message is not competition, but a sense of shared hopelessness… and at least Putin offers stability in the chaos.

This one insight, however, reveals a second insight. The reality that the Kremlin has been hesitant to “take credit” for America’s stumbles highlights the potential that, one day, Putin might begin to accept that credit and Russian state-media might take on a more competitive tone. To date, the Kremlin has suggested that “Western” institutions have either failed or have been corrupted, and that this fundamental weakness has resulted in a floundering economy and a toxic political environment. Should Kremlin supported media outlets begin to frame American “vulnerability” as a consequence of the United States losing a direct contest with Russia, it might suggest that Putin is preparing for an even more egregious action that would require popular support (much less knowledge).

Poorly managed communications, finger pointing, and a sporadic U.S foreign policy vision has created a vacuum in messaging. Russia, along with other American rivals, have exploited this opportunity.

None of this speaks to the importance of clear and positive messaging in the Southern Hemisphere, where the United States is already bidding for influence against an expanding list of rivals. 

Addressing this problem means considering foreign policy choices more seriously, and more consistently both locally and in Washington D.C.. It means going out of our way to learn about the world’s most pressing problems, and it means using that knowledge to ensure that the leaders we elect guide the nation’s foreign policy with the long view in mind. 

The success of American foreign policy, far more than in autocratic regimes, is dependent on a citizenry that is informed and engaged. A more informed and engaged body of citizens would demand a higher quality of messaging from elected leaders both for internal consumption and international ears.

Ultimately, our ability to shore up these liabilities comes down to our ability to overcome the hazards that de Tocqueville predicts. It is our responsibility to be educated about key global issues, and to press representatives in Washington to prioritize long sighted foreign policy decision making. 

Only by learning to plan, persevere, and await the consequences patiently will American foreign policy be able to move forward in a wise and consistent direction. 

—

*Russia Today is a state-media company that is registered as a direct agent of the Russian government. Neither the Foreign Policy Association nor the author espouse the views that are expressed on that platform. 

Peter Scaturro is the Director of Studies at the Foreign Policy Association

51T6 SH-11 Gorgon exoatmospheric ABM Transporter/Loader, an older type designed as part of a defensive missile ring around Moscow.

A peculiar occurrence happened recently where what looks to be a Russian BUK missile turned around after launch and impacted the area around its own launch vehicle. Speculation on how and why this occurred was painted by many narratives on the conflict. While it may be assumed that the missile or system may have been hacked or manipulated, it is likely the result of poor manufacturing errors or the use of older advanced equipment with degraded safety abilities. While systems like the SA-11 BUK-M1 was high tech for its time and is still extremely effective, it is a complicated system that is filled with several checks before a launch can occur. With so many things that can go wrong, crew training may have not been able to stop that type of accident. The video of that launch can be seen here.

Despite Russia has suffering many losses, the assumption that there is no longer a major threat by Russia towards Western Ukraine and Europe seems to be taken in light humour by some G7 leaders, while those countries bordering Russia and Ukraine are on constant and urgent high alert. NATO soldiers have been training those fighting in Ukraine outside of the territory since the beginning of the war with some reports showing that expanded NATO training inside Ukraine may have already been established. Speeches at the G7 seek to pressure Russia further, but the resulting pressure has increased the value of Russia’s energy so greatly that there economic effects on Russia’s oil exports have done little damage to the value of the Rouble.

Backing Russia into an economic corner without expanding the displacement of its energy exports with North American energy will never be successful as Europe is still largely dependent on Russian energy exports. Other BRICS nations continue their purchases of Russian oil and food into their own economies and seem to have closer relationships with other OPEC members the US is begging for energy assistance. It is clear that Russian export revenues through its energy products is enabling it to continue the conflict, even if it is being depleted of its weaponry. Adding more direct NATO involvement may create a more dangerous situation as opposed to taking a serious commitment in displacing Russian energy exports. While inflation is having a direct and notable impact in Western nations, Russia can still escalate the conflict outside of Ukraine greatly with their long range missile capabilities.

Poland was able to secure later types of the Patriot missile systems after years of delays in obtaining a proper missile defense option for itself. The later models of the Patriot system, called PAC-3, is able to shoot down other missiles, a feature which is now needed as Russia’s proximity and the ability to fire medium range ballistic missiles puts Polish forces at great risk. While the effectiveness of the PAC-3 against fast moving targets has not been properly tested in combat, the lack of response to North Korean missile tests and the fact that some Russian missiles like the Kinzhal can travel as high as Mach 10, makes it difficult to counter some of Russia’s missile systems.

Soviet missile defense technology was always a game changer during the Cold War. Russia’s own defense is tied to that of a early 90s Soviet defense doctrine. While invading Ukraine was always going to be difficult as it was also designed to repel a NATO advance with defense technology from 1990s era equipment, so does later generations of missiles like the S-400 air defense systems make the airspace over Kyiv dangerous for Ukrainian interceptor jets. An advancement of NATO deeper into Ukraine will pull the conflict outside of the range of a Javelin missile type conflict, towards one where Russia has a large ballistic missile advantage. One thing that is certain, is that Russian missile technology is above and beyond other equipment in their arsenal and is often equal or better than their Western counterparts. This has been worked on for a few generations as even a strike on Moscow could be repelled in theory, as Russia has had a significant ABM(Anti-Ballistic Missile) system since the 1950s that is continually upgraded with special missiles designed to repel a nuclear attack and the latest S-500 system. Mobile missiles like TOPOL and SARMAT have been put in position towards Europe, and even have been moved to Northern Russia to target the Arctic Region and North America. In light of the reality, we should expect our leaders to keep their focus on reducing a wider conflict before testing their comedy routines during G7 meetings.

With less than five months until the 2022 World Cup, Qatar is making final preparations to host millions of fans. FIFA permitted Qatar to host the 2022 games back in 2010. Since then, Qatar has spent an estimated $220 billion on new stadiums, roads, hotels, and other necessities to accommodate incoming fans. The burden of labor to create this infrastructure has fallen on migrant workers. Migrant labor dominates economies in the Gulf – it constitutes an average of 70% of all labor in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries.  In Qatar, it constitutes an astonishing 95% of all labor, according to Human Rights Watch. For the last decade, Qatar has faced increasing criticism regarding its system for migrant labor. The Kafala System, utilized by all Gulf countries, leaves employees extremely vulnerable to the will of their employer. By perpetuating uneven power dynamics without much oversight, this system exposes millions of workers to exploitation and abuse. This exploitation and abuse runs rampant amongst workers hired to build infrastructure for the 2022 World Cup.

The Kafala system invites exploitation by giving employers permission to act as a sponsor for individual workers. The employer covers all travel and housing expenses for the migrant. In return, employers have relatively unregulated control over employees’ autonomy. Employers control migrant workers’ legal status, visa status, and often retain important documents such as passports. Employers also have control over workers’ ability to change jobs. By refusing to transfer documents to the new employer, previous employers can essentially force workers to remain in place. Employers can also render employees as illegal migrants by refusing to renew visa documents – upon discovery by authorities, an undocumented migrant can face severe fines and jail time. The extremely unequal power dynamic gives the employer, or sponsor, full control over the worker’s mobility, autonomy, and livelihood. Additionally, migrant workers regularly face issues of delayed wages, long hours, and extremely dangerous working conditions. Since 2010, over 6,500 migrant workers have died in Qatar.

In 2017, the International Labor Organization (ILO) acknowledged these issues. They entered into an agreement with Qatar aimed at tackling the country’s labor problems. This agreement looked to reform the Kafala System, increase workers’ access to justice, improve health and safety for workers, and regulate wages. In return for these changes, the ILO promised to withdraw its request for the World Cup to be moved elsewhere. Qatar passed several new pieces of legislation in line with the agreement. While the situation has improved over the last five years, much of the new legislation addresses the situation in name only. Migrant laborers still face a multitude of life-threatening issues. Of the 6,500 workers who have died in Qatar, many died during dangerous construction jobs, from heat-related incidents, in road accidents, or from unsafe living conditions in labor camps. The World Cup will occur as planned in November, despite this devastating human toll. FIFA appears to be taking little to no action. Major international players, including the ILO, UN, and governments like the United States, need to acknowledge the reality of the situation. The enjoyment of soccer fans across the world comes at the cost of abused and exploited workers. The international community needs to do better.

Qatar’s new legislation has addressed some of these issues. It removed the exit permit requirement, which gave employers control over migrants’ ability to leave the country. New legislation also removed the ability of employers to prevent workers from changing jobs. Qatar established a new minimum wage, a wage protection system, new labor dispute committees, and a workers’ insurance fund. However, weak implementation requirements have left millions of workers without knowledge of their rights. Many employers continue to utilize unsafe practices. Passport confiscation continues to occur, employees still experience harsh working conditions, and wage theft is common. In July 2020, Amnesty International found that around 100 employees who built Al Bayt Stadium had been denied their wages for nearly seven months.

The 2022 World Cup will occur only thanks to the hours of dangerous labor completed by underpaid and mistreated migrant workers. While the 2017 ILO agreement marginally improved labor rights in Qatar, it did not successfully defend the two million individuals it was created to protect. It seems as though everyone, including the ILO, has turned their backs on some of the world’s most vulnerable. Amnesty International has called for FIFA to donate around $440 million to the migrant workers who worked on the World Cup. This money would be intended to cover the “loss and abuse” they suffered over the last ten years. FIFA acknowledged Amnesty International’s request but only promised to implement a “due diligence process.” It seems unlikely migrant workers will ever receive any reparations. The World Cup provides a massive platform to raise awareness for migrant labor issues. The governments of participating teams should take the opportunity to voice concern over working conditions and the general status of human rights in Qatar. If FIFA refuses to acknowledge its complacency with labor exploitation, participating governments need to step up.

Trois ouvrages récents permettent d'aborder le Proche-Orient par des temporalités différentes. Dans Symptômes morbides, Gilbert Achcar détaille les événements survenus ces cinq dernières années en Syrie et en Égypte . Le développement « enchevêtré » de la situation a abouti à des « conflits triangulaires » (...) / Égypte, États-Unis (affaires extérieures), Liban, Libye, Proche-Orient, Russie, Syrie, Tunisie, Géopolitique, Histoire, Islam, Politique, Religion, Géographie, Yémen, Conflit israélo-palestinien, Frontières, Réveil arabe 2011- - 2017/06

À cause du réchauffement climatique et des politiques économiques suivies, la situation des éleveurs nomades du Sahel, traditionnellement difficile, se dégrade. Au point que de nombreux Peuls prennent désormais les armes pour faire entendre leurs revendications. Majoritairement musulmans, ils (...) / Agriculture, Armement, Conflit, Islam, Violence, Climat, Afrique centrale, Afrique de l'Ouest, Néolibéralisme - 2017/05

/ France, Élections, Politique, Société, Travail - Politique / France, Élections, Politique, Société, Travail - Politique

Contrairement à ce que suggère un certain théâtre démocratique remis en scène à chaque scrutin, ce sont moins les électeurs qui choisissent leurs représentants que les formations politiques qui sélectionnent leur électorat. Censée « rassembler » une majorité de « citoyens » autour de grands thèmes (...) / France, Élections, Inégalités, Parti politique, Politique, Sondage d'opinion, Travail - 2017/05

A deep dive into this very American food.

This week in FP’s international news quiz: NATO summitry, protests in Ecuador, and Independence Day around the world.

As Israel ups the ante of covert warfare, Iran scrambles to respond.

The United States can no longer afford to buy geopolitical allies with market access.

Do NATO countries have the stomach for a long war?

La puissance de l'idéologie réactionnaire en France explique-t-elle la difficulté de la gauche à conquérir le pouvoir et à le conserver ? Ou est-ce plutôt les insuffisances de celle-ci qui ont favorisé sa perte d'influence dans les milieux populaires, dont l'extrême droite a tiré parti ? Ces deux (...) / France, Parti politique, Socialisme, Politique, Presse, Médias, Idéologie, Social-démocratie, Extrême droite, Intellectuels, Élections - 2022/07

The 30-nation alliance is worried about a growing strategic partnership between Beijing and Moscow.

With the Taliban at loggerheads and Afghanistan in chaos, one politician has a plan to stave off civil war.

Indigenous people are being forced out from so-called protected areas.

Here’s how Washington can fight back.

One of the leading voices on the Senate foreign affairs panel weighs in on the conflict, Turkey’s change of heart, and NATO’s turn to Asia.

Delving into the past to make sense of current affairs.

Yes, fiscal and monetary policy seemed stuck for too long in expansionary mode. But the era also saw the rebalancing of the world economy.