FACEbook

Saturday, May 17, 2014

French Foreign Minister: '500 Days To Avoid Climate Chaos'

    Secretary of State John Kerry welcomed French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius to the State Department in Washington Tuesday to discuss a range of issues, from Iran to Syria to climate change. Or, in the words of the foreign minister, "climate chaos." Kerry and Fabius made a joint appearance before their meeting, and the foreign minister warned that only 500 days remained to avoid "climate chaos"[emphasis added]:
Well, I’m very happy to be with John. There is no week without a phone call or a visit between John and myself, and we have on the agenda many items, many issues – Iran, because negotiations are resuming today; the question of Syria, and we shall meet next Thursday in London together; Ukraine as well; and very important issues, issue of climate change, climate chaos. And we have – as I said, we have 500 days to avoid climate chaos. And I know that President Obama and John Kerry himself are committed on this subject and I’m sure that with them, with a lot of other friends, we shall be able to reach success on this very important matter.
    It is unclear what the foreign minister had in mind with the 500 days.  However, France is scheduled to host the "21st Conference of the Parties on Climate Change" in December 2015, about 566 days from now.


Note: A version of this post first appeared at The Weekly Standard.

Friday, May 16, 2014

U.S. Ambassador: Sanctions Against Russia Are '21st Century Use Of Force'

    Given the lack of foreign policy success with "red line" threats of military force, the Obama administration has apparently broadened the definition of "use of force" to include financial threats of red ink against Russia for recent actions in Ukraine.  U.S. Ambassador to the U.K. Matthew Barzun wrote an editorial on May 10 for the U.K. Daily Mail newspaper where he refers to sanctions on Russia by the US, Britain and EU as a "21st Century use of force," and said that Russia is in danger of "profound economic costs."  The ambassador insists the mockery and criticism of the sanctions overlooks their "potency":
The reaction of the US, Britain and the EU to Moscow’s malign interventions in Ukraine has been to introduce calibrated, comprehensive and co-ordinated sanctions. We are raising the economic costs on Russia. 
And this week, John Kerry will be in London to discuss with William Hague and their EU counterparts what appropriate next steps might be. Were Putin to take steps that hinder or attempt to prevent the elections, he will bring more costs on Russia. 
There has, however, been criticism of our response. One British paper belittled it by depicting a shirtless Putin on board a tank driving past a sign which said: ‘Stop. Or the West will put you on the naughty step.’ 
This characterisation of our approach ignores the potency of this 21st Century use of force. No longer is the choice between hand grenades or hand-wringing.
    The shirtless Putin in the tank appeared on the cover of the March 22, 2014 issue of The Economist shortly after the first sanctions were put in place in response to the Crimean crisis but before the more recent aggressive actions by Russia and pro-Russian separatists in other areas of eastern Ukraine. Nonetheless, Barzun asserts the sanctions are exacting a "steep price":
Sanctions are making Russia pay a steep price for its actions. Its credit rating has been downgraded to one step above ‘junk’ status, stock prices and economic growth are weakening, and the central bank has spent close to $30 billion (£18 billion) to prop up the rouble.
    Ambassador Barzun closes his editorial with unequivocal confidence that ultimately the sanctions, or, in his words, the "21st Century use of force," will have the desired effect once Russia's "current nationalistic fever" breaks:
Unless Putin changes course, the current nationalistic fever in Russia will soon break. When it does, it will give way to a cold realisation of the profound economic costs of his policies. 
This crisis is one of his own choosing. Now he faces another choice: to leave Ukraine in peace and work with us to create a strong Ukraine – one that is not a buffer between East and West, but a bridge to both.
    An email to the State Department seeking further explanation of the ambassador's words has not yet been returned.

UPDATE: After this post ran at The Weekly Standard, the State Department press office replied: "We don’t have anything on this."


NOTE: A version of this post first appeared at The Weekly Standard.

Tuesday, May 13, 2014

From Here to Eternity... Or Election Day, Whichever Comes First

    In James Taranto's Tuesday edition of his Wall Street Journal Online column The Best of the Web, Taranto quotes from a recent article by the Journal's Gerald Seib: "[S]ix months is an eternity in modern politics."  The phrase sounds very familiar to even the casual consumer of political media, but just how hackneyed the formulation has become may surprise even grizzled political veterans.  The Bible tells us in Ecclesiastes 3:11 that God has set eternity in the hearts of men, but clearly eternity is also set in the pens of pundits.  With barely a research effort to speak of, here's an abridged compilation of this most versatile of politics memes:
  • "Fifteen months is an eternity in politics, so Sen. Lautenberg has plenty of time..." Rutgers
  • "Thirteen months is a long time between now and election day. Thirteen months is an eternity in politics." New York Times
  • "...two weeks is a long time in politics, eleven months is an eternity." Canada Free Press
  • "There are also still nine months left in 2014 – an eternity in politics." Breitbart
  • "Eight months is an eternity in politics..." PolicyMic
  • "...seven months away, an eternity in American politics." Bloomberg
  • "Six months is an eternity in modern politics..." WSJ
  • "They say a day in politics is a long time. A little over four months would perhaps qualify as an eternity..." CVMTV
  • "Now we’re under a month to go until the November 6 election, at which point today will seem like an eternity ago." Reuters
    To be clear, I could have gone higher than sixteen months, but since this is not a political campaign, I didn't have eternity to work on it.  And time also fails me to tell of the eternal nature of political days, weeks, and years.
    But the trail leading to the apex of hyperbole doesn't end here. Politico (as reposted by CBS News) managed to squeeze eternity into a single hour back in 2007:
    The grand prize, however, goes to Michael Green writing in the Federal Political News from Joyce Communications in Nevada. Green bests Politico by a factor of sixty:
  • "Much can change in that long a period, since a minute is an eternity in politics." Joyce Communications
    But on second thought, maybe Michael Green was on to something.  After all, many candidates watching returns crawl in on election night could certainly identify with the words of Franz Kafka: "L'éternité, c'est long ... surtout vers la fin." Eternity is long, especially near the end.

Monday, May 12, 2014

White House: Obamacare Made This Mother's Day "Particularly Special"

    Rahm Emanuel famously declared early in the Obama administration that "you never want a serious crisis to go to waste." Apparently the White House feels the same about holidays.  On Sunday, a blog post appeared on the official White House website entitled "Happy Mother's Day, from the ACA":
This Mother's Day is particularly special for millions of families this year. 
More than 8 million Americans have signed up for coverage through HealthCare.gov. And for families across America, that's making a difference – providing peace of mind for parents and kids alike.
    After several examples of children and mothers who benefited from coverage under the Affordable Care Act, readers are invited to click on a link to answer the question, "What has getting covered meant for your family this Mother's Day?"


Note: A version of this post first appeared at The Weekly Standard.

Friday, May 9, 2014

U.S. Consulate in Nigeria Asked Clinton State Dept. Why Boko Haram Wasn't Called 'Terrorist Organization'

    Boko Haram, the militant group responsible for the recent kidnapping of 276 girls in Nigeria, was not designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) by the State Department until November of 2013 despite a long record of violence.  Hillary Clinton has now come under fire, as reported by Josh Rogin at The Daily Beast, for resisting calls for the FTO designation for Boko Haram during her tenure as secretary of state.  Rogin says that "[t]he refusal came despite the urging of the Justice Department, the FBI, the CIA, and over a dozen senators and congressmen."  But in 2012, even U.S. State Department diplomats in Nigeria seemed mystified about why the government was "reluctant" to issue the designation.
    On September 20, 2012, then Bureau of African Affairs Assistant Secretary Johnnie Carson appeared on a State Department "Live at State" webchat regarding "U.S. Policy Toward Sub-Saharan Africa."  Questions from journalists and other individuals via webchat were posed to Carson by the host, Holly Jensen. At one point, a question was asked by the "U.S. Consulate in Lagos [Nigeria]":
MS. JENSEN: The U.S. Consulate in Lagos wants to know: Why is the government reluctant to designate the Boko Haram sect as a foreign terrorist organization? 
AMBASSADOR CARSON: Thank you very much. We look at the issue of Boko Haram as a major concern not only to Nigeria but also to Nigeria’s neighbors and Niger and Cameroon and Benin as well. Boko Haram, we believe, is not a homogenous, monolithic organization, but it is comprised of several different kinds of groups.
    Carson went on to note that while the organization itself was not designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, three individuals within Boko Haram were designated as Specially Designated Global Terrorists in June 2012:
We have, indeed, recently designated three individuals in Boko Haram as individuals who are involved in terrorism, and we have done so because we believe those three individuals have established contacts with foreign terrorist organizations, have gone out and sought to get financing from foreign terrorist organizations, and have tried to establish broader networks and relationships with them.
     In his Daily Beast report, Josh Rogin said that Johnnie Carson "defended the decision to avoid naming Boko Haram a terrorist organization in a Wednesday phone call with reporters."
[Carson:] “There was a concern that putting Boko Haram on the foreign terrorist list would in fact raise its profile, give it greater publicity, give it greater credibility, help in its recruitment, and also probably drive more assistance in its direction[.]”
    But in the September 2012 webchat, Carson seemed to suggest that the State Department did not even consider the "Boko Haram movement," as he called it, to necessarily be a terror organization, but rather several groups simply "focused on trying to discredit the Nigerian Government":
But we believe that the bulk of the Boko Haram movement is – they’re focused on trying to discredit the Nigerian Government, trying to do everything in its power to show that the government is ineffective in the defense of its people and in the protection of government institutions, so we have not designated the entire organization. We constantly keep that under review, but we have, in fact, designated the three top leaders in Boko Haram who we believe to be out establishing broader terrorist networks and who have a broader jihadist agenda that goes beyond simply discrediting the Nigerian Government.
    In any case, the State Department eventually applied the FTO designation to Boko Haram under secretary John Kerry.  But questions remain about why Hillary Clinton's State Department fought so hard against the designation contrary to the opinions of not only the FBI, CIA, the Justice Department, and lawmakers, but apparently of State Department personnel on the ground in the country where Boko Haram was carrying out its campaign of violence.


Note: A version of this article first appeared at The Weekly Standard.  
Note: Jim Geraghty at National Review and Ed Morrissey at Hot Air each referenced the post, and Josh Rogin tweeted a link. 

Monday, May 5, 2014

John Kerry On Religion: 'Something That Was Written Down a Thousand Plus, Two Thousand Years Ago'

    During a talk to the U.S. embassy staff in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia at the first stop on his trip to Africa, Secretary of State John Kerry remarked about what he called the "different cross-currents of modernity" and the challenges they present on the African continent. The comments seem to contain a veiled reference to religion and the part that religion might be playing in some of the current conflicts in Africa:
This is a time here in Africa where there are a number of different cross-currents of modernity that are coming together to make things even more challenging. Some people believe that people ought to be able to only do what they say they ought to do, or to believe what they say they ought to believe, or live by their interpretation of something that was written down a thousand plus, two thousand years ago. That’s not the way I think most people want to live.
    The words "something that was written down a thousand plus, two thousand years ago" appear to refer to the Bible, or the Koran, or perhaps both.  More than one conflict in Africa today has either implicit or explicit religious connections:
  • In Nigeria, the Boko Haram, which the State Department has called a "violent extremist organization with links to al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb" has been "responsible for thousands of deaths since its conception in 2009, including large-scale attacks against Muslim and Christian religious communities."
  • In the Central African Republic, the State Department recently expressed that the United States is "deeply concerned by attacks on both Muslims and Christians[.]"
  • Further, the so-called Lord's Resistance Army with its leader the self-proclaimed prophet Joseph Kony has wreaked havoc in numerous African nations.  The State Department has offered a $5 million reward for information leading to Kony's arrest or conviction.
    Besides military conflicts, other issues with religious connotations have come to the forefront in recent years, from Uganda's recent anti-homosexuality law to some Islamic groups' attempts to institute Sharia law in some countries.
    The press office of the State Department declined to parse Kerry's remarks, instead referring questions to the traveling party accompanying the secretary on his Africa trip.  An attempt to contact State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki, who is with Kerry in Africa, to clarify the remarks has so far been unsuccessful.


Note: A version of this post first appeared at The Weekly Standard.

Thursday, May 1, 2014

HHS Spokesperson: "No One Likes to Watch the Daily Show Make Fun of HHS"

    In October 2013, as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), a division of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), was launching Healthcare.gov, CMS also launched a quieter initiative. As part of Ignite, an internal HHS program designed to spur innovation, a team within CMS's press office designed a system to help CMS communicate more quickly and efficiently with the press. The team envisioned that such a system, if functioning well, could also improve CMS's portrayal in the media.  As project leader Emma Sandoe, CMS's Medicaid spokesperson, put it in her presentation of the team's report to other CMS employees, "no one likes to watch the Daily Show make fun of HHS and our job here in the press office is to make sure that doesn't happen as often as it sometimes does[.]"
    The CMS team called their project the Coordinated Press Response Strategy.  In her presentation, Sandoe noted the irony of the project's launch coinciding with that of Healthcare.gov: "We launched this tool in the month of October, which - you may have heard [laughter] we also launched a little website, Healthcare.gov..."
    Ms. Sandoe further said that her team hoped to "develop a coordinated press response strategy in order to get better media and diffuse more media bombs."  "Media bombs" referred back to the beginning of Sandoe's presentation when she likened the atmosphere in a government press office to an episode of the TV terrorism drama "24."  The "ticking time bombs" are reporters' deadlines that the press office is hoping to defuse, but whereas Jack Bauer only had one bomb at a time to worry about, a press office may have dozens.  Sandoe's audience seemed to appreciate the anaolgy.
    The system Sandoe and her team developed was intended to be a "memory vault" to remind press officers what statements they had already made and what cleared information had already been released.  The system was designed not only for official press statements, but a variety of off the record and background information, as well. According to Sandoe, the ease of access to information allowed the CMS press office to cut its average response time on press inquiries from 49 hours to 22.5 hours while the project was in operation.  Sandoe expressed the desire to expand the tool beyond CMS to the press offices of all departments of HHS.
    In addition to improving the response time for inquiries, Sandoe also hoped the project would improve relations with the press and perhaps result in more favorable coverage for her agency.  In Sandoe's words, "if a reporter likes you and the reporter likes working with you, they will write better stories about you; so we're working to improve the stories that are written about HHS."  She later added, "[T]he worst words that you can see in the newspaper as a press officer is 'CMS did not comment.'"
    The Project Summary for the Coordinated Press Response Strategy presented the results in terms of "Time (hours) spent between report inquiry and official response to the inquiry" and "Attitudes of the press officers (via survey)":
The team saw a 52% decrease in the response time for reporter inquiries and a generally positive view from staff of the design. In order to continue the testing and implementation, CMS would like to see increased utilization throughout the department achieved through greater exploration of this workflow model with communications specialists across HHS that are working directly with media.
    To seek clarification and further explanation of the details of the project, THE WEEKLY STANDARD contacted the CMS press office, the Media Relations Group, via email and inquired about what percentage of inquiries CMS responds to and what percentage go unanswered, does CMS prioritize which news outlets will be responded to first, and does CMS usually only respond to 'mainstream' news outlets, or also to less traditional outlets, such as bloggers.  About nine hours later, CMS responded, but with just a single line: "This was an internal project initiated by staff to test a way to improve our operating procedures and increase efficiency within the office."
    A follow up email was sent to CMS: "I assume from your reply that CMS is not prepared to share any further details about the project or whether the system is still being used within CMS’s press office?"
    Shortly thereafter, CMS replied again, this time with but a single word: "Correct."


Note: A version of this post first appeared at The Weekly Standard.