Diplomacy & Crisis News

Cette recension a été publiée dans le numéro d’automne de Politique étrangère (n°3/2017). Rémy Hémez propose une analyse de l’ouvrage d’Antulio J. Echevarria, Military Strategy: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford University Press, 2017, 144 pages).

Cet ouvrage, publié dans la ­collection « Very Short Introductions », ­équivalent britannique des « Que sais-je ? », est signé d’Antulio J. Echevarria, rédacteur en chef de Parameters, revue de l’U.S. Army War College. Il définit la stratégie militaire, objet de son étude, comme la recherche de la réduction de la capacité physique et de la volonté de combattre d’un adversaire. Sa mise en œuvre se fait en temps de paix ou de guerre, et peut impliquer, directement ou indirectement, l’emploi de la force. L’auteur nous offre un propos synthétique et stimulant, utilisant systématiquement des exemples historiques pour l’étayer.

Echevarria débute son passage en revue des stratégies militaires par les catégories de l’annihilation et de la dislocation, qui répondent le plus souvent à la volonté ou au besoin d’un des belligérants d’emporter rapidement la victoire. Par l’annihilation, on cherche à réduire significativement, ou à détruire, la capacité physique d’un adversaire en une ou deux batailles décisives. La dislocation vise, elle, à vaincre par une manœuvre inattendue qui déstabilise l’adversaire. Ces deux stratégies supposent généralement une prise de risque élevée.

L’auteur passe ensuite à l’étude des stratégies d’attrition et d’épuisement. La première vise à consumer les ressources matérielles de l’adversaire. La deuxième se concentre sur la détérioration de sa volonté de combattre – c’est donc, autrement dit, une « attrition psychologique ». Ces deux méthodes impliquent des conflits longs, et des coûts socio-économiques élevés.

Le troisième duo regroupe dissuasion et coercition. La dissuasion entend persuader l’adversaire que l’on dispose de suffisamment de capacités physiques et psychologiques, soit pour défaire un agresseur, soit pour que les coûts de l’agression dépassent les bénéfices attendus. La coercition consiste, elle, à prendre des mesures punitives, d’intimidation, de récompense, etc., afin d’imposer sa volonté à l’adversaire.

L’auteur étudie ensuite la terreur et le terrorisme. Une stratégie de terreur peut prendre, par exemple, la forme de bombardements massifs indiscriminés, comme pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Echevarria revient dans cette partie de son ouvrage sur le débat qui cherche à déterminer si le terrorisme constitue une tactique ou une stratégie. Il estime que, généralement, il s’agit d’une tactique, mais qu’employé systématiquement pour la poursuite de buts politiques, le terrorisme est bien une stratégie.

L’auteur s’attache enfin à expliquer les stratégies de décapitation et d’assassinats ciblés. Les deux reposent sur le présupposé qu’éliminer physiquement les leaders d’un mouvement peut résoudre un problème plutôt que l’aggraver – ce qui n’est guère évident. Les dilemmes moraux et légaux sont ici également prégnants. Ces stratégies, facilitées par l’accroissement de la portée et de la précision des armements, sont pourtant de plus en plus privilégiées par les gouvernements occidentaux, du fait de leurs faibles coûts matériels et politiques.

Ce court ouvrage, agréable à lire, permet de bien appréhender les grandes catégories des stratégies militaires, et il sera utile à toute personne, étudiant comme praticien, qui cherche à clarifier ses idées sur ce sujet.

Rémy Hémez

S’abonner à Politique étrangère

Current negotiations between Canada, Mexico and the United States to revise and modernize the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) have been characterized by notable disagreements and heavy demands across parties, as well as threats from US President Donald Trump to exit the current agreement altogether. However, the energy sector – and North American energy independence specifically – is a potential area of cooperation that might save NAFTA in the long-term.

The original 1993 agreement excluded rules and regulations for the energy sector largely because Mexico still had a nationalized energy industry. However, current President Enrique Peña Nieto enacted sweeping reforms in 2014 that opened up the industry to private and foreign investment. The renegotiation of NAFTA therefore presents an opportune time to harmonize the three countries’ large and diversified energy industries. Theoretically, this would create an entire region of energy independence and affordable and reliable access to fuel.

Cross-border energy commerce already strong

Canada, Mexico and the United States possess more than enough natural energy reserves to achieve full energy independence if a free trade agreement induces affordable prices and accessibility. The US Energy Information Administration projected in its 2017 Annual Energy Outlook that the three NAFTA countries’ combined production of petroleum and other liquid fuel sources is on track to very soon surpass consumption. The US also now ranks as the world’s largest joint producer of oil and natural gas.

The North American energy industry also already boasts a significant level of trade in oil and refined products, gas, and electricity, even without a specific provision in NAFTA. According to the US Department of Energy, as of 2012-2013, the United States had $140 billion and $65 billion in trade of energy products with Canada and Mexico, respectively. Canada is the United States’ largest source of trade in energy products, and Mexico already purchases around 60-65 percent of US gasoline and natural gas exports. The approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline earlier this year, while highly controversial from an environmental standpoint, now enables 108,000 barrels daily of refined petroleum to flow from the US to Mexico. The US already manages 17 pipelines that carry over four billion cubic feet of natural gas a day to Mexico. These statistics indicate a fast-growing market for US energy products.

Furthermore, while NAFTA energy integration would be dominated by fossil fuels in the near future, North America’s diverse range of climates and topography make the region poised to become a major player in cleaner, renewable energies, particularly solar, wind and ethanol. Mexico has grown significantly under NAFTA to become a competitive, middle income country. This growth has translated into a rapid increase in demand for electricity; Forbes estimates that, in the next 25 years, Mexico’s power use will double.

Approximately two-thirds of Mexico’s energy growth will come from natural gas, but the remainder is expected to come from renewables. Accordingly, Mexico has rapidly expanded its capacity for wind energy, with a 400% increase expected from 2014 to 2018 and the US has witnessed a similar level of growth in wind energy capacity. This has already created major demand for turbine equipment from US companies such asGeneral Electric, with considerable space for additional growth.

Political commitment to North American energy independence

Encouragingly, all three NAFTA leaders have signaled that they view North American energy independence as a major priority, demonstrating a potential major area of consensus in the midst of otherwise tense negotiations. In 2016, Presidents Obama, Peña Nieto and Trudeau stated a joint goal to make renewable energies constitute 50 percentof North America’s electricity by 2025, up from 37 percent in 2015. This goal may be deprioritized under Donald Trump, but his administration is most certainly focused on energy independence in general. In a June speech at the US Department of Energy, Trump announced his desire for “US energy dominance.” Moreover, the US Trade Representative’s NAFTA renegotiation objectives, released July 17, emphasized support for North American energy independence, indicating buy in from the US in this arena.

Leading industry associations in all three countries have echoed these goals. Earlier this year, the American Petroleum Institute, Asociación Méxicana de Empresas de Hidrocarburos and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers issued a joint proposal urging reforms that liberalize trade of energy goods and integration of North American energy supply chains. These commitments provide an opportunity to integrate a new export sector into NAFTA that could help eliminate the United States’ trade deficit with Mexico, a particular point of contention regularly raised by Trump. They also provide an opening to create a holistic set of common cross-border standards around energy production and usage for both traditional and renewable fuel sources.

Political risks to energy sector integration

The biggest political risk to achieving these energy integration goals will be Mexico’s leading candidate for the presidency in 2018, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO), a leftist populist whose platform has been elevated, largely in response to harsh rhetoric from Donald Trump towards Mexico. AMLO has threatened to reverse the 2014 reformsthat opened up Mexico’s energy sector to more private investment.

Second, the investor-state dispute settlement mechanism (ISDS) will be critical to keeping the three countries’ energy policies and regulations in harmony, but the Trump administration has proposed scrapping this vehicle from NAFTA. For example, each country currently provides different levels of subsidies and standards for what exactly qualifies as renewable energy. These disparities could theoretically lead to conflicts between foreign companies and the state with regard to tax breaks and fair competition. Consequently, the ISDS provides a critical independent judicial body and risk management mechanism to protect their international investments.

Energy sector integration across North America is a lofty goal to achieve, especially amongst three heads of state with vastly different political philosophies and political headwinds in 2018, indicating potential for further polarization. However, current trends in cross-border commerce and domestic economic objectives make NAFTA renegotiations an appropriate forum to address the issue.

 

This article first ran on Global Risk Insights, and was written by Samuel Schofield. 

The post How the drive for North American energy independence could save NAFTA appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.

One of the most iconic tools for bringing down the Soviet Union was the distribution of information from the West and the promotion of an anti-Soviet narrative that was forbidden behind the Iron Curtain. In societies where the control of information was a necessity to controlling the narrative and beliefs of a society, challenging the ruling elite and the Politburo created a distrust of the Soviet leadership and promoted dissident movements inside the Soviet Union. This tactic was so effective because information and the freedom to challenge the government were limited to those at the upper echelons of the Communist Party. In a one party state, opposition in any form and the treatment of different opinions as dissidence makes any challenger a soon to be martyr. In societies where a small group of people seeking justice and revolution are scripted into the national character, challenging the powerful control of elites dominating a corrupt system is something most citizens are receptive to in their daily lives. For this reason the organisation Radio Free Europe was created, broadcasting behind the Iron Curtain to promote Western ideas or freedom of speech and democracy inside of Eastern Europe at the time.

In all societies there is a natural inclination to have justice prevail so citizens with little power do not have to live under the repression of powerful elites and work fruitlessly for the sole needs of a few corrupt individuals. In most societies where the free press is protected, there is the ability to challenge whatever narrative and information is distributed publicly. The damage to a Communist society does not have the same weight as there is no coercion following the distribution of ideas in free societies. Blocking or repealing thoughts and ideas should not become acceptable because no thoughts or ideas can exist in such societies without the ability of being challenged in some fashion. Coercion to block freedom of speech is often illegal in those legal systems, and that is how modern democracies should function. When someone in a free society with complete freedom of speech is touched by a real event that is reported in a manner that people close to an incident know not to be true, it is not the same as listening to a challenged report behind the Iron Curtain. Focusing on their opinion and attempting to sully, damage or threaten an individual for voicing whatever opinion they hold is and should be considered a gross violation of their rights in free societies. This is the case because if an idea is dangerous and is not creating a direct physical threat, it means it is breaking the control of someone or a group of people, and that power structure likely should not exist in the first place to take justice away from people in a society who dare to voice their opinion. Even if information contains bias, the ability to challenge it should be paramount as blocking it creates the impression that there is a lack of justice in the process of banning that form of speech.

Many will then ask, how do you know if a news source is reliable? In reality you do not know how reliable a source may be as there is no oracle that can be relied upon to disseminate such information to an extremely reliable degree. It is best to measure the source of the information and whether or not their information is distributed to benefit those that run that organisation. Bias in reporting will exist, but if that bias is to help a cause the reader sees as just, it can be seen as reliable as much as it is agreed upon by various groups and interests. Another good measure is to be extremely skeptical of any source that focuses or divisive policies or targeting thoughts, ideas or individuals without contributing new information to a narrative. News that acts as an attack advert against other news agencies, groups or individuals mirrors Soviet era overreactions in the pre-Glasnost era. Any negative media against open ideas that go beyond debating the ideas and moves into attacking a person or their character is likely a disservice to an open society. These tools are usually used by political elites to win elections, and would be best described as propaganda as opposed to a story published by a journalist who works in a professional manner.

Journalism and its role in society is paramount. It is so crucial that stories are not banned, but challenged, as the truth often comes with justice. While laws are changed or lawyered into different meanings, justice and equity tend to be at the core of values in a free society no matter how much suppression is applied against free thinkers. Justice is so powerful that even a lack of truth did not save the Soviet Union from the effects of Radio Free Europe and other measures to remove that elite structure from existence. Half-truths and coercion against free speech almost always make for martyrs in societies, and when ideas are suppressed the natural imbalance and lack of justice becomes intolerable to individuals, and they react, they always react.

The post Lessons from the Cold War in Alternative Media appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.

Cette recension a été publiée dans le numéro d’automne de Politique étrangère (n°3/2017). Thibault Boutherin propose une analyse de l’ouvrage de Cécile Jouhanneau, Sortir de la guerre en Bosnie-Herzégovine (Karthala, 2016, 384 pages).

Voici le résultat d’un travail audacieux, d’une qualité et d’une ampleur qui méritent d’être soulignées. Il est né sous les meilleurs auspices : il s’agit d’une version remaniée de la thèse de doctorat en science politique soutenue par l’auteur à l’Institut d’études politiques de Paris en 2013, sous la direction de Jacques Rupnik et Marie-Claire Lavabre. Travail ambitieux : il entend tester la validité – d’aucuns préciseraient la réfutabilité – des lectures des débats et des antagonismes politiques en Bosnie-Herzégovine selon des lignes de rupture strictement ethno-nationales. Les processus de stabilisation, de construction étatique et, à terme, d’intégration européenne ont un préalable impérieux : celui de la pacification du pays, dans toutes ses composantes et notamment nationales, y compris à l’échelle locale. Or, celle-ci est conditionnée par un travail de mémoire tel qu’il a dû s’opérer dans d’autres régions d’Europe et du monde.

Le travail de recherche de Jouhanneau s’est penché sur la politisation des discours de mémoire et sur l’effectivité de ces tentatives. Les lignes de fracture politique mises en scène entre Bosniaques, Croates et Serbes se retrouvent-elles en réalité dans la vie, la vision, la parole des citoyens bosniens ? Pour mesurer cela, l’auteur s’est intéressé à la figure du détenu de camp, qui constitue depuis l’éclatement de la guerre un point sensible, puisqu’il incarne la figure paroxy­stique et symbolique de la victime/héros de guerre. Or les définitions du détenu, du camp, de l’intention des belligérants sont sujettes à un débat encore très politisé aujourd’hui. Cécile Jouhanneau a choisi d’éprouver ces concepts et l’approche qui en est faite en allant sur le terrain (à Brcko, district au statut spécifique au sein de la Bosnie-Herzégovine, qui représente parfaitement le morcellement du territoire selon des lignes ethno-­nationales), pour y interviewer sur place d’anciens détenus de camps et des associations les représentant. Elle en a recueilli les témoignages qui l’ont aidée à observer une différence conséquente, non anodine, avec les discours que les leaders politiques (et certains chercheurs) veulent y plaquer.

À l’appui d’une observation scientifique, fondée sur une méthode rigoureuse qui assoit la valeur de ce travail et de ses conclusions, l’ouvrage met en exergue des schémas qui s’avèrent grossis ou biaisés par rapport à la vision qu’en ont les victimes elles-mêmes et les citoyens de façon générale. Il ne se limite pas à souligner la résistance des récits et de la mémoire des victimes de la guerre en Bosnie-Herzégovine. Il met aussi en lumière, au quotidien, sur le terrain, un évitement des sujets porteurs de conflit ou de désaccord. Ce que l’auteur appelle « civilité » constitue un levier indirect de la pacification du pays, et peut-être une clé pour sa stabilisation et la transition, qui semble tarder à se traduire dans le discours politique, vers le parachèvement d’une construction nationale.

Par son approche spécifique, et l’apport de ses conclusions, le travail de Jouhanneau permet de dépasser la rhétorique et les postures des dirigeants politiques, et offre un aperçu éprouvé de la réalité sur le terrain 20 ans après les accords de Dayton, dans un territoire qui expose clairement les limites de ces derniers. En cela, cet ouvrage comptera certainement comme une référence dans le monde francophone de la recherche sur la région des Balkans occidentaux.

Thibault Boutherin

S’abonner à Politique étrangère

A month after its independence referendum, Iraqi Kurdistan is seeing its economic future threatened.

The Islamic State has ramped up its Russian-language recruitment.

And Western countries need a plan to defuse the threat they pose.

Critics fear Trump administration will politicize diplomatic corps with unprecedented pick.

En compétition à Cannes en 2014, sacré meilleur film aux Césars en 2015, Timbuktu, du Mauritanien Abderrahmane Sissako, qui évoquait l'occupation djihadiste de Tombouctou en 2012, a rassemblé plus d'un million de spectateurs. Ce triomphe n'a pas pour autant incité les distributeurs français à prêter (...) / Afrique, Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, France, Francophonie, Mali - 2017/11

In Vienna, the center-right and populist right are vying for power. All of Europe is watching.

An officer wards off boredom with bad food, booze, and Russia Today during a layover in Al Udeid.

“Having served as an infantryman for four and a half years, I learned more about tactics and how to employ Marines more effectively in the 10 days spent at the experiment in the desert than I did in the entirety of my service."

Air Force paying to build contractor fighter force; South Korea says no nukes.

The Spanish region’s leaders believe punishment can be a path to redemption – as long as they’re not the ones who suffer.

As sectors of the domestic and world economy become more dependent on the internet and the cloud, their vulnerability to new forms of attack and disruption increases. Cybersecurity is not just a national defense issue, but must also become a cost of doing business.

It is clear that the shipping industry is susceptible to cyber-attacks. These attacks can be as harmful as the damage caused by storms. In many ways, they might be more harmful, because they can come out of nowhere.

Maersk and NotPetya

In June 2017, Maersk was subject to a cyber-attack centered in Ukraine. The malware, called NotPetya, is a variation on the ransomware called Petya, but NotPetya does not appear to be supported by a desire to get rich, just a willingness to cause mayhem.

Unlike Petya, which did act as ransomware, NotPetya scrambles the target computer’s file system — everything is lost. No possibility of paying in Bitcoin exists.

The NotPetya attack knocked out Maersk’s network for several days, and Maersk expects the total loss from the attack to be in the neighborhood of $200-$300 million. While operations resumed quickly, the attack led to the complete shutdown of Maersk’s operations worldwide.

Vulnerabilities

The industry relies on computers to function, and GPS equipment is connected to worldwide networks. Engines are run using computers.

The number of vulnerability points, both on-shore, and at-sea, is large and growing. If the construction of self-driving ships becomes a widespread reality, more vulnerabilities will appear.

Email systems are vulnerable to hacking. Cyberkeel, for example, discovered hacking activity in a shipping firm’s systems. A virus planted in the system monitored emails originating in or destined for the finance department. The virus changed the text of the message to change the bank account number to that of the hackers.

It cost the company several million dollars before they noticed.

Cyberkeel was founded three years ago and established to provide cyber security. One of their programs was to provide penetration testing of shipping firms’ systems. At first, they met with little success, because firms were complacent with their systems. Perhaps the greatest vulnerability is complacency.

Many shipping systems are not encrypted. The lack of encryption makes the shipping line and its vessels vulnerable to cyber attacks. Regardless of encryption, many ships’ crews are not trained in cyber security. One survey indicated that in 2015, 43% of crew members were aware of their company’s cyber security policies, while only 12% had received training.

Piracy

One shipping firm was hacked by pirates — sophisticated pirates.

Instead of seizing a vessel and holding the crew hostage pending ransom payment, these pirates gained access to sensitive information regarding ships, cargos, containers and contents. They boarded the vessel, opened the specific containers containing the valuables and left with the loot.

Unlike what happens in many hijackings, the pirates released the crew and never asked for a ransom.

The company eventually became suspicious, determined the pirates had hacked the computerized manifest, and they took steps to prevent further unauthorized access.

Propellers and Charts

Another vulnerability is in the systems which control a ship’s operation. One container ship in an Asian port was shut down when a switchboard which managed the power supply to the propeller, and other mechanical components were shut down by ransomware.

Electronic Chart Displays are rarely protected by anti-virus software. Charts are, of course, crucial to navigation, especially in restricted and coastal waters. The chart display of one tanker in Asia was infected by crew carelessness.

A crew member brought a USB flash drive on board to print paperwork. The flash drive was infected with the malware, which only activated when another crew member tried to update the charts before departure, also using USB. The problem was detected while still in port, and it was fixed. Had the problem occurred at sea, however, the situation could have become dangerous.

Taking Control

Independent cyber security firms and analysts are confident that hackers could cause catastrophic results. It is possible to take control of the systems from afar and cause a collision. They have performed tests on the systems and succeeded in penetrating them.

An attack could also change the coordinates displayed by GPS, although in coastal waters the crew would likely spot the difference and adjust for it. But at least one ship’s open satellite system had the username “admin”, which needed to use the password “1234” to access the system, which means that someone at the shipping company was careless.

It is likely hackers did not cause the recent collisions between USS Fitzgerald and John S. McCain and merchant vessels. The U.S. Navy aggressively encrypts its systems, which should deter hackers from invading their confidential information. Current indications are that crew and command errors led to the collisions. There’s no indication the merchant vessels were hacked, either, but both collisions are under investigation.

South Korea reported that 280 vessels had to return to port in April 2016 due to problems with their navigation and other systems. South Korea believes North Korea was responsible for these hacks.

In addition, jamming devices fitted to lighthouses have been tested and can affect GPS receivers up to 16 nautical miles. Some GPS devices died, while others provided false information. Jamming devices on ships can cause even more chaos.

Solutions

The industry has begun to recognize the risks it faces. Awareness that a problem exists is always the first step toward solving the problem.

Shipping lines — and the industry as a whole — should follow a set of guidelines for cyber security, and those guidelines should be strong and effective.

You must train your crews and alter their behavior. Make crews aware of the cyber risks and what they can and can’t do with the computer systems on board. While printed copies of bills of lading and other information remains important, ensuring computers and printers can’t be compromised by an infected flash drive should be a top priority.

The industry also needs to create standards to allow insurance companies to cover damage from cyber-attacks. You must identify the risk so insurance underwriters can evaluate what you identify.

Cyber security is as necessary as physical security. Companies expend significant resources ensuring their buildings remain safe. Companies should realize their electronic systems are just as vulnerable to attack, and extend the same level of resources ensuring the safety of their ships and crews — and business.

—

Cory Levins serves as the Director of Business Development for Air Sea Containers.  Cory oversees the development and implementation of ASC’s internal and external marketing program, driving revenue and profits from the Miami FL headquarters.

 

The post Could the Shipping Industry Be Susceptible to Cyber-Attacks? appeared first on Foreign Policy Blogs.

We need to demand accountability from social media companies — and from U.S. diplomats.

The war against the Islamic State concealed the Kurds' political and economic weaknesses. The loss of Kirkuk has made them impossible to ignore.

Le photographe Sebastian Castelier a accompagné Damien Lefauconnier lors d'un déplacement dans le cadre de son enquête sur l'une des centrales nucléaires les plus dangereuses du monde, à Metsamor, en Arménie. Tous deux ont obtenu l'autorisation de visiter les lieux. Les clichés reproduits ci-dessous (...) / Arménie, Énergie, Nucléaire civil, Santé - 2017/11

For years, the U.S. military secretly flew Russian aircraft. Now it needs a cheaper option.

The “sonic attacks” in Cuba aren’t the first suspected instance of invisible attacks on U.S. diplomats.