On World Government

Tony Blair gave his farewell speech to the World Economic Forum at Davos on Sunday. According to the Washington Post, he will probably step down as Britain’s Prime Minister this summer. In his speech, he outlined the need for global government based on “global values” in order to combat three of the world’s biggest challenges: world trade, climate change, and Africa.

Blair’s speech is compelling. He is an astute global leader and he defends the neo-conservative nation building agenda far more eloquently than most of his American counterparts.

But just what are the values on which he proposes to base the wielding of power by global alliances? Blair acknowledges what he calls “narratives” that are opposed to “tolerance, freedom, openness and justice for all.” Two of those are the “perversion of Islam” championed by al-Quaeda and other radical terrorists and the other is national selfishness.

Not every country in the world wants what Blair and Bush have to offer. It is naïve to think that if international institutions were fine-tuned, suddenly the United Nations would have the power to impose democratic self-government in countries gripped by generations of poverty and dictatorial leadership. If Iraq has taught us anything it is that you can’t force a nation to make good decisions.

Presidential Campaign Season

It's about that time again. Senator Clinton has announced that she's forming an exploratory committee to prepare for a possible run for the presidency. So far it's a crowded field, and neither side looks like it has a clear nominee for president.


Karl Rove, President Bush's main political adviser and the mastermind behind the Republican Party for the last 8 years, believes that presidential elections are about the personality of the presidential candidates, that it all boils down to whether you trust the guy (or gal) asking for your vote more than the other option. I don't know if that's true, but here are some issues that are important to me this campaign season.

1. Iraq - More than a guarantee for victory, I want to make sense of what's going on there and I want to feel that our commander-in-chief is in touch with the situation on the ground. I'm really not looking for magic, just some straight talk and realism.

2. Corruption - This last week, Governor Huntsman gave his State of the State address and made some pretty significant changes to the way the Executive Branch is going to do things. There won't be any nepotism, gift receiving, and former employees will have to wait at least two years to lobby their former employers. I am waiting for someone in Federal government to accomplish something significant in ethics reform. The Democrats are promising to do it in the House, and I am waiting to see what happens. This is important to me.

You'll notice that Republicans or Democrats could accomplish my first two policy agenda items. I mean it. These are my highest priorities and I don't care if Hillary Clinton or Sam Brownback comes up with a good approach to these questions, I'm willing to hear them out on the rest of their policies.

3. Spending - The Budget deficit is bigger under a Republican President and a Republican Congress than ever before. What is wrong with this picture. I think PAYGO is a great idea and I look forward to see how well it works. Once again, DEMOCRATS passed PAYGO.

The Republican party is going to have to step up this election season. They are going to have to propose solutions to these and other problems and, maybe, even have to take responsibility for causing some of them.

How about you? What do you care about for this election cycle?

Misunderstanding Iraq

I'm writing this post during President Bush's address on a new course for Iraq. I don't have T.V., so I can't watch it, but ABC reports that the new plan will require a "surge" of about 20,000 troops. Additionally, the President is announcing new tactics for the way combat troops will be used in Iraq. Baghdad will be divided into nine sections and the troops will be based in the same neighborhoods they patrol. This is a dramatic shift from the old tactics in which U.S. troops would frequently clear areas of the city and leave only to have the violence increase after they left.

Now I'm going to do the cliche thing and analogize some of the "lessons" from Vietnam.

As many, have pointed out, things aren't going so well in Iraq and it might be time to cut our losses. I'm not so sure about that because chaos in Iraq could have devastating consequences. Iraq could become a haven for al-Quaeda terrorists who could strike against Jordan, Saudi Arabia, or even outside the region. Iran could intervene and trigger a massive regional war. If Iraq did descend into a full-scale civil war, the humanitarian crisis could be even more disastrous than it is now.

Here are a few of what I understand to be the lessons of Vietnam that are relevant to Iraq.

1. You have to isolate insurgencies. During Vietnam, the Viet Cong got support from Laos and Cambodia and used those countries as safe havens to launch attacks against the South. Iraq is receiving help from Iran and foreign fighters are adding energy to the sectarian violence. It is nearly impossible to fight insurgents who have help from their nearby neighbors.

2. You have to protect the people. Part of winning the hearts and minds of the people living in these insurgent areas is to show them that you can protect them. Bush's plan tries to do that by protecting the neighborhoods of Iraq. If the new plan is successful, it is possible that the U.S. troops might make some progress toward stability, but the tropps haven't yet shown that they can protect any of the territory that they "clear" of insurgents. The green zone, for example, is one of the more dangerous parts of the country.

3. You have to understand the people. The United States is not a terribly culturally sensitive place right now. Fighting an insurgency is a cross between military and police work. You are fighting people with big guns (military), but you have to find them from among a lot of peaceful people (police). Police work requires rapport with the local people and you can't get that rapport without language skills and cultural understanding. A year and a half ago, I worked at a law firm in Argentina. I speak decent Spanish, but I did not understand Argentine culture. I couldn't get assignments, my supervisors were constantly frustrated with me, and I ended up translating documents that had already been translated and reading Atlas Shrugged at my desk. There is a huge learning curve to understand a new culture and I don't know if we have the time to bridge the gaps.

If the President's strategy had been tried three years ago it might have had a chance. I'm worried that it is too late. I think that the first two problems (and there are many others) can be addressed pretty quickly if they become major priorities to the Administration. But, the third will take time. And in light of the November election, I don't know if Americans have the patience.

Lawyer's Ethics

I just finished reading the assignment for one of my classes from a book called "The Law and Ethics of Lawyering." I know. It's an oxymoron. There are no ethics for lawyers.

I wonder if law school really has deadened me to the basic morality that we should take for granted. I wrestled with some of the problems in the reading. But then I talked about them with my wife and they didn't seem difficult at all to her.

For example, in one case, two people are in a car accident. Victim (V) sues the driver (D) for the damages he suffered. But V doesn't know that he has an aneurysm that might have been caused by the accident. When D's doctors examine him, they find the aneurysm and tell D's lawyers. Now, should D's lawyers tell V that he could die if he doesn't get an operation even if they might have to pay more at trial? Clearly they should. But what if D - the client - doesn't want to? What should D's lawyers do? They promised that they would do what D told them to do, and that they would keep confidential everything they found out about the case.

My wife didn't hesitate. "But someone's life at stake. Is God going to be mad at you for betraying your client to save someone's life?" She's right. It doesn't matter what the ethical rule is. You have to do what's right. I just wish that it had been clearer to me what the right thing was. That's what three years of law school will do to you.