Koba Politik

Radovan Karadzic: captured at last

koba1879 — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 03:28:55 +0000

Karadzic was the world’s most wanted man before 9/11, and has finally been captured. He originally went on the run in 1996. Why does this matter by the way? It took 12 years to find one man, dependent on his relatives and close friends, in a small region in a small country. The only thing that changed was the political willpower in Serbia. The U.S. public does well to take this lesson to heart. Our military doesn’t have Bin Laden today, and more than likely won’t have him for a while.

1. – The U.S. isn’t going to prop Musharraf up. He is not going to stick his neck out in the interests of a country that isn’t going to keep him in power. He is fighting enough people just to avoid the gallows, he has neither the will nor the capability to tackle the Taleban in his country. It’s been that way for 20 years, and it’s going to stay that way.

1a. – Pakistan is so 2001, our new buddy in the region is India. With the U.S. aiding India’s nuclear development, why should the country that will more than likely be on the receiving end of Indian nukes fall over themselves to help us?

1b. – The Taleban is the real deal. They can wait, they can win, they can hold it. Afghanistan is the asshole of U.S. interests in the region. We made just enough of a commitment so that Karzai can hold a few parades a year in Kabul without being assassinated. Everybody knows it too. We aren’t fully committed, we’re not going to be fully committed, the U.S. public is bored with Afghanistan. Pakistan knows better than to cross it’s capable neighbor/roommate the Taleban, because the Taleban would be more than happy to kick Musharraf out of Pakistan altogether.

Conclusion: It takes more than tough talk and a few thousand troops to track down these super fugitives. It’s the long game that yields these kinds of results. Today, in Afghanistan, the U.S.’s long game doesn’t look so strong. If it seems like no one else there is fully committed, they aren’t. We are just going to have to wait for Bin Laden to screw up royally in order to catch him.

Africa, the new Chinese sphere of influence?

koba1879 — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:40:11 +0000

It seems that almost every news story coming out of Africa these days mentions a world power that just seems out of place, China. Despite having no geographic, and minimal social connections to Africa, the PRC seems to be the major player both economically and politically today in the “dark continent”. China is Africa’s champion when dealing with Western political pressure; as seen by recent issues such as Sudan-Darfur, and Zimbabwe. Chinese economic investment is also apparent in over a dozen African countries.

OK you say, whoopdie-freakin-doodah; China is on the prowl for natural resources, what’s new or big about that?

1. This is China’s first foray into international politics. Up until now China has been mainly interested in it’s neighbors or it’s economic ties with Central Asia. China is going to bat politically for its economic partners in Africa. These actions have set the tone for China’s future foreign policy.

2. Africa now has a partner that doesn’t care about it’s human rights and democracy concerns. China is not a democracy, and most certainly not a state that cares about human rights. Many African regimes adopt a democratic facade to avoid European condemnation (read severance of aid monies). Many African states are now choosing genuine Chinese investment over string-attached European welfare.

Conclusion: The Chinese have begun to radically alter the playing field in Africa. Cheap Saudi oil and the lack of a viable rival have allowed the Western Powers to ignore Africa excepting tough talk and token charity. I think China will groom the vast majority of African states into it’s satellites. The US and Western Europe will do what they always do, give “symbolic” donations and brow beat less than democratic states. In the long run, the protests will begin to fall on deaf ears, and the hands will close.

What do you think? Am I right? Which is more important for African nations: a chance for prosperity, or a chance for freedom? Will the US adopt a hard line? Will the West learn to deal with tyranny?

It’s Europe, what did you expect?

koba1879 — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 23:15:17 +0000

Was my reply to a friends recent comment that the G8 deserved to have their move for sanctions on Zimbabwe blocked in the security council. It is my experience that Western Europe as a whole is loathe to apply hard power outside their spheres of influence. Every time that an international conflict arises (by international I mean outside of their spheres of influence), the Western European powers RARELY consider military action as a response. In my opinion, this is as it should be. Western Europe is a region with serious tax burdens and domestically concerned citizens. The average German/Frenchman/Brit/Belgian/Italian/etc simply will not stand to see money and lives thrown away for some military pursuit half a world away. I don’t blame them, nor do I see them as selfish for thinking that way. They (like Americans) don’t see African and certain Asian problems as their concern. And, you know what? It’s NOT any of their concern. When the Western European powers propose the harshest penalties possible, and these are soft power, I simply see it as another day of things functioning as they usually do. The only group of people I can hold negligible is the African Union; they refused to give Zimbabwe even a thorough tongue lashing, instead opting for a weak one. The AU is composed mostly of tyrants of various potencies, hence why none were interested in speaking out against naked tyranny. Or, heaven forbid, actually doing something about it; considering these are the states with proximity, interest, and the black market ties that support rogue states such as Zimbabwe.

Conclusion: The AU needs to go, as well as the tyrants that occupy it. Nothing new in my opinion.

What do you think? Am I right? What’s your BCA (best course of action) for solving the mess?

First Post

koba1879 — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 04:00:30 +0000

Being my first post, let’s start with what this blog is:

-My opinions on issues that matter to me (global politics and the like)

-A gathering of interested readers with the intention of sharing ideas related to the topics of the day

-Pure, unadulterated opinion. I support opinions with facts, and that’s all I ask of anyone else

-A great place to discuss global politics, economics, social changes, etc. I am damned curious about these things, and even if I don’t bring up a topic, I will almost always show a strong interest

And, what this blog is not:

-A haven for bigotry, ignorance, abuse, or irrationality. I’m not interested in other people’s emotions, or save the drama for your mama, whichever suits you best

-A place to discuss things that do not relate to global politics in some fashion

Pretty simple if you ask me, if you don’t think so, please ask.

A little about your host; some of you know me, and some of you don’t. Any questions, just ask, any problems, just bring them up. I’m a nice and interested person until you use bigotry, ignorance, abuse, or irrationality. I do use evil nasty vulgar words and offensive terms. So sue me, I’m also a selective asshole. If something I say offends you I’M SORRY (<= only apology you’re gonna get). If I hurt your feelings, just leave, it’s what’s best for everyone.

Stay Classy Detroit!