What IR can learn from the NHL
Both Gary and Rebecca cited Marc Lynch recommending “intervening” in Libya:
The appropriate comparison is Bosnia or Kosovo, or even Rwanda where a massacre is unfolding on live television and the world is challenged to act. It is time for the United States, NATO, the United Nations and the Arab League to act forcefully to try to prevent the already bloody situation from degenerating into something much worse.
I petulantly asked whether Mark Lynch had ever seen an intervention he didn’t like.
The answer, of course, is yes, which a moment’s thought about pseudonyms would have made clear. My social radar remains a perfect contraindicator.
But that leaves several questions, not the least of which is “with what Army”? Certainly not the U.S. one, which is overextended in battles of—let us be polite&dubious optimal cost.
NATO and The United Nations suffer similar issues, along with “institutional inertia” (unlike the U.S., they do not jump into wars without a strategy, a purpose, and a plan).
This leaves the Arab League, which has several members—Egypt, Lebanon, Somalia, Bahrain, Iraq, Libya (being the issue at hand), Yemen, the Sudan, Tunisia, and possibly Saudi Arabia and Jordan come immediately to mind—that are rather preoccupied themselves.
It’s not just that the very sharp Mr. Lynch conflates genocides with civil war; it’s that he chooses the wrong strategy for ending the process.
Watch NHL fights. Here’s a good example (fight starts ca. 0:55):
Note that the fight isn’t ended until half a minute later. The referees (especially the one on the left side of the screen) are paying attention the entire time—fallen gloves get picked up or kicked out of the way—but they don’t even attempt an intervention until the players are on the ice.
The corrolary is that as soon as a player falls to the ice, they intervene.
The question for those advocating military action should be seen in that light: how can we quickly and efficiently get the battle to the point where intervention does not involve getting in the middle of two moving targets.
This is an economics blog, so, yes, you can bet that my answer will be economics-related.
If you want to stop a dictator from killing his people, freeze any of his personal assets that are held out of the country.
In cases where the dictator is likely to fall, it sends a clear signal to other countries. (In cases where the dictator is likely to succeed, the worst case scenario is that banking relationships will be damaged, a consideration that the domestic government would have considered before making the decision to freeze the assets in the first place.)
The purpose of financial in lieu of military intervention is to balance the tradeoff. A dictator whose funds will remain unencumbered no matter how many of his people he kills will not change his behavior. A dictator who stands to lose a large (and increasing) portion of $70 billion faces a scenario where extending his time in office may well appear too costly.
(There is the added signalling benefit of the proliferation of asset-freezings that occur. Since each country and institution that freezes the assets is weighing their decision based on political outcomes, the more places that freeze his assets, the more clear it becomes that his efforts are not expected to succeed.)
Again, I premise this on the idea that Tom Friedman’s basic premise is correct: that economic activity mitigates the chance of military activity. But the idea here is much easier to implement uni-, bi-, or multilaterally than managing the logistics of moving soldiers, machinery, and rations to an area that may have ended activities by the time you can start to have an effect. (Even ignoring if the effect will be negative.)
IR recommendations should follow the lead of NHL referees: make it as easy as possible for the fighters to be separated, but don’t put your body between them until then.
What the US doesn’t need is another “intervention”. We intervened in the Rush Limbaugh “oxycotin” addiction and where has that led.
No. The US should protect the oil supply with rapid deployment “scorched earth” fire fights against anyone shutting down the oil flow and get out.
The diplomats can do their job, confiscating the oil revenue on it’s way to the Swiss bank accounts and set up a trust fund for each and every one of the Libyan people, excluding the dog shit Khadifi. That’s how we stop the shit, stop the Swiss.
What the US doesn’t need is another “intervention”. We intervened in the Rush Limbaugh “oxycotin” addiction and where has that led.
No. The US should protect the oil supply with rapid deployment “scorched earth” fire fights against anyone shutting down the oil flow and get out.
The diplomats can do their job, confiscating the oil revenue on it’s way to the Swiss bank accounts and set up a trust fund for each and every one of the Libyan people, excluding the dog shit Khadifi. That’s how we stop the shit, stop the Swiss.
What the US doesn’t need is another “intervention”. We intervened in the Rush Limbaugh “oxycotin” addiction and where has that led.
No. The US should protect the oil supply with rapid deployment “scorched earth” fire fights against anyone shutting down the oil flow and get out.
The diplomats can do their job, confiscating the oil revenue on it’s way to the Swiss bank accounts and set up a trust fund for each and every one of the Libyan people, excluding the dog shit Khadifi. That’s how we stop the shit, stop the Swiss.
Prior to the cold war and the US’ perpetual war mentality with its war profits and unwarranted influence the US did not think in terms of military action as the hammer for every job in the world.
It was NSC 68 drafted by Paul Nitsche, because Keenan the fellow who devised “containment” of Stalin thought it too belligerant, which caused the shift from State running foreign policy to the pentagon abd war profiteers directing US policy abroad.
US needs to sit back and show some restraint and mothball 6 of the world’s largest aircraft carriers and 12 of the Marine Corps’ landing ships……………………..
Or is it the Bankers from Israel ? Who knows in this cloak and dagger world of fear and misconception ?
Look at the dweeb from Wisconson acting as if his job was to manage the people when all along his description of his job is to direct the people. Ronald Reagan, IMO, was a total asswipe, and this guy is no Ronald Reagan. What this country needs is to eliminate the agricultural subsidy and to make all the proposed cuts to social security and medicare etc payable by the current recipients. All the “hey you welfare queen crap” would instantly go away. Get it.
The welfare queens are raising hell with our lives.
I have suffered through the politically correct period long enough. The Republicans are bat shit crazy and the Democrats are corrupt.
As an aside, I grew up Catholic and I understand why John Boehner cries,
His conscience hurts. When he asks Christ, God, to forgive him for what he is about to say and do, he cries because he knows that God will not forgive him his trespasses. As the figurehead of the Republican movement, he is dismantling the FDR legacy at the behest of Herod. He dismantles a legacy made possible by a brotherhood of shared pain in the great depression and WWII. He knows this, and cries as he supports Rupert Murdoch against the naive, uneducated, sick, and even the strong. He was never there, and will never be there. He has made his choice and the weight of the evil makes him cry, as it does me.
Sandi,
An ancient Hebrew curse: May they stand the judgement.
There is an ancient Hindu story, sort of long but I will get to the punch line: the villain is condemned to a thousand lives an ant because industry with no soul is not virtue.
Next time do not crush that ant it is a republican.
Islm
Thanks, beautiful. (I crush no bug minding it’s purpose).
In a round-a-bout way, what I am about to say is related to the topic, Because it goes to the motivation of our society, as we tear the very things that made us who we are, apart.
When in Hell are the governors from the welfare queen agricultural states like Wisconsin, North Dakota, Montana, Georgia, Florida, calling the shots ?
They want cuts in Federal spending ? Let’s give it to them. Cut the agricultural subsidy, now. We have been trading manufacturing jobs to sell subsidized agricultural products. Get it.
The more we sell the more the tax payer pays and the more the consumer pays! Let’s start talking about who is really screwing the welfare of our society, it ain’t the so called “entitlements”.
We, Harvard economics dept, discuss the problems as presented by Rupert Murdoch Framing as if the argument was valid. Duh ! Who is that man behind the curtain, Dorothy.