Quote of the Month
"Why, then, do wretched men stand awe-struck at tyrants? Savage though they be, their mad rage has no real power. If we renounce all fear and expectation, Intemperate anger will be stripped of all its weapons. But he who all atremble is fearful or delirious, Through lack of inward staunchness or self-mastery, Has thrown away his shield, and deserted his station. He forges the chains which confine his shackled progress." - Boethius, The Consolation of Philosophy, I.4.11-18
What I’m Reading:
1. The world isn’t multipolar, so stop saying it is
Why you should read it: In Foreign Policy, Norwegian defense scholar Jo Inge Bekkevold pushes back against the fashionable notion that the world has entered an era of multipolarity.
“But despite what politicians, pundits, and investment bankers tell us, it is simply a myth that today’s world is anywhere close to multipolar… Polarity simply refers to the number of great powers in the international system—and for the world to be multipolar, there have to be three or more such powers. Today, there are only two countries with the economic size, military might, and global leverage to constitute a pole: the United States and China. Other great powers are nowhere in sight, and they won’t be any time soon. The mere fact that there are rising middle powers and nonaligned countries with large populations and growing economies does not make the world multipolar… And while it is true that the United States’ share of the global economy has been receding, it retains a dominant position, especially when considered together with China. The two great powers account for half of the world’s total defense spending, and their combined GDP roughly equals the 33 next-largest economies added together.”
“So, if the world is not multipolar, why is the multipolarity argument so popular?… First, for many people who advance the idea of multipolarity, it is a normative concept. It is another way of saying—or hoping—that the age of Western dominance is over and that power is or should be diffuse. Guterres regards multipolarity as a way to fix multilateralism and bring equilibrium to the world system. For many European leaders, multipolarity is seen as a preferred alternative to bipolarity, because the former is believed to better enable a world governed by rules, allow for global partnerships with diverse actors, and prevent the emergence of new blocs… A second reason that the idea of multipolarity is in vogue is that, after three decades of globalization and relative peace, there is a great deal of reluctance among policymakers, commentators, and academics to accept the realities of an intense, all-encompassing, and polarizing bipolar rivalry between the United States and China… Third, talk about multipolarity is often part of a power play. Beijing and Moscow see multipolarity as a way of curtailing U.S. power and advancing their own position.”
Why it matters: “…advocating a multipolar world when it is clearly bipolar could give the wrong signals to friends and foes alike. The international stir caused by [French President Emmanuel] Macron’s statements during his visit to China in April illustrates the point. In an interview on his plane during the flight back to Europe, Macron reportedly emphasized the importance for Europe to become a third superpower. Macron’s willingness to muse about multipolarity did not go down well with French allies in Washington and Europe. His Chinese hosts appeared delighted, but if they confuse Macron’s reflections about multipolarity with French and European willingness to support Beijing in the U.S.-China rivalry, they may have gotten the wrong signals… In the long term, the world may indeed become multipolar, with India being the most obvious candidate to join the ranks of the United States and China. Nevertheless, that day is still far off. We will be living in a bipolar world for the foreseeable future—and strategy and policy should be designed accordingly.”
2. How China cornered the market on minerals
Why you should read it: Wall Street Journal columnist Greg Ip details the ways China dominates critical minerals like cobalt and lithium—and explains why Beijing won’t be able to use this dominance as an economic weapon in the way OPEC once used oil.
“No one weaponizes interdependence more than China. It regularly bars imports and exports with countries that cross it politically, and discriminates against foreign companies to bolster its own national champions. In July it said it would restrict exports of two minerals vital for semiconductors, missile systems and solar cells… These minerals aren’t actually in short supply. The U.S. alone boasts copper deposits equivalent to 20 years’ worth of its own demand, S&P notes. The problem is accessing it; the firm estimates it takes 15 years on average for a mine to go from discovery to production.”
“Oil was in some ways unique. Easier to transport and store than wood or coal and far more efficient, oil lent itself naturally to international trade—and efforts to control that trade. Its critical role in transportation, including for army trucks, tanks, aircraft and warships, made its availability a matter of national survival, influencing the course of both world wars… Export restrictions or attempts to form an OPEC-like cartel [for minerals] would in time elevate prices and spur the hunt for alternatives, much as higher oil prices in the 1970s spurred production in the North Sea and Alaska’s North Slope. A recently discovered lithium deposit in a volcanic crater along the Oregon-Nevada border could be the world’s largest, according to the magazine Chemistry World. Permitting delays would shrink in an emergency. After Russia cut gas shipments, Germany built a liquefied national gas terminal in less than a year, a project that normally takes five years.”
Why it matters: “Perhaps the greatest obstacle to the future weaponization of energy is that we are entering an era of unprecedented variety. The data site Our World In Data notes that until the 1900s almost all energy came from coal and biomass, such as wood. Over the last century, those were joined by oil and gas. With the growth of nuclear, hydro, wind, solar and, in time, hydrogen and biofuels, the world’s energy supply will be more diversified than at any time in history.”
3. Why China’s Belt and Road Initiative ain’t all it’s cracked up to be
Why you should read it: Political scientists Francis Fukuyama and Michael Bennon chart the outcomes of China’s massive Belt and Road Initiative of international development financing and find its outcomes wanting.
“This year marks the tenth anniversary of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative, the largest and most ambitious infrastructure development project in human history. China has lent more than $1 trillion to more than 100 countries through the scheme, dwarfing Western spending in the developing world and stoking anxieties about the spread of Beijing’s power and influence…But over the last few years, a different picture of the BRI has emerged. Many Chinese-financed infrastructure projects have failed to earn the returns that analysts expected. And because the governments that negotiated these projects often agreed to backstop the loans, they have found themselves burdened with huge debt overhangs—unable to secure financing for future projects or even to service the debt they have already accrued. This is true not just of Sri Lanka but also of Argentina, Kenya, Malaysia, Montenegro, Pakistan, Tanzania, and many others. The problem for the West was less that China would acquire ports and other strategic properties in developing countries and more that these countries would become dangerously indebted—forced to turn to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other Western-backed international financial institutions for help repaying their Chinese loans.”
“Major Chinese-funded projects have generated disappointing returns or failed to stimulate the kind of broad-based economic growth that policymakers had anticipated. Some projects have faced opposition from indigenous communities whose lands and livelihoods have been threatened. Others have damaged the environment or experienced setbacks because of the poor quality of Chinese construction. These problems come on top of long-standing disputes over China’s preference for using its own workers and subcontractors to build infrastructure… The biggest problem by far, however, is debt. In Argentina, Ethiopia, Montenegro, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Zambia, and elsewhere, costly Chinese projects have pushed debt-to-GDP ratios to unsustainable levels and produced balance-of-payments crises. In some cases, governments had agreed to cover any revenue shortfalls, making sovereign guarantees that obligated taxpayers to foot the bill for failing projects. These so-called contingent liabilities were often hidden from citizens and other creditors, obscuring the true levels of debt for which governments were liable. In Montenegro, Sri Lanka, and Zambia, China made such deals with corrupt or authoritarian-leaning governments that then bequeathed the debt to less corrupt and more democratic governments, saddling them with responsibility for getting out of crises.”
Why it matters: “The stakes for Kenya and the rest of the developing world are enormous. This wave of debt crises could be far worse than previous ones, inflicting lasting economic damage on already vulnerable economies and miring their governments in protracted and costly negotiations. The problem goes beyond the simple fact that every dollar spent servicing unsustainable BRI debt is a dollar that is unavailable for economic development, social spending, or combating climate change. The recalcitrant creditor in today’s emerging market debt crises is not a hedge fund or other private creditor but rather the world’s largest bilateral lender and, in many cases, the largest trading partner of the debtor country. As private creditors become more keenly aware of the risks of lending to BRI countries, these countries will find themselves caught between squabbling creditors and unable to access the capital they need to keep their economies afloat… China’s BRI does pose problems for Western countries, in other words, but the primary threat is not strategic. Rather, the BRI creates pressures that can destabilize developing countries, which in turn creates problems for international institutions such as the IMF and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, to which those countries turn for assistance. Over the last six decades, Western creditors have developed institutions such as the Paris Club to deal with issues regarding sovereign default, to ensure a degree of cooperation among creditors, and to manage payments crises equitably. But China has not yet agreed to join this group, and its opaque lending processes make it hard for international institutions to accurately assess how much trouble a given country is in.”
4. Why America needs to relearn how to build heavy-duty icebreakers
Why you should read it: Wall Street Journal reporter William Maudlin explores the industrial and design challenges confronting American shipbuilders and steelmakers as they aim to build the nation’s first new heavy-duty icebreaker in decades.
“U.S. officials are racing to procure new polar icebreakers because one of only two that the Coast Guard now sails has reached the end of its life, and the one assigned to the Arctic is out of service for maintenance every winter. Delivery of the first new icebreaker has slipped to 2028 from 2024 as designers, engineers and welders grapple with something the U.S. hasn’t done in decades: reliably shape hardened steel that is more than an inch thick into a curved, reinforced ship’s hull… Out of practice, U.S. shipbuilders have had to relearn how to design and build the specialized vessel, say officials in the industry and the government… The machinery and skills to build the hulls of most oceangoing vessels aren’t sufficient for the specialized icebreakers. The hull plates need a bespoke alloy and specialized heat-treatment, with a process to form and weld massive curved plates… In addition to the technical challenge, American yards are reckoning with a shortage of shipwrights. Employment in ship and boat building totaled just 154,800 in July after peaking at 1.3 million during World War II, according to data from the Federal Reserve. ”
“Receding sea ice in the Arctic due to climate change is, paradoxically, increasing the need for icebreakers and other vessels that can handle rough conditions in and around the Arctic Ocean, officials say. Russian vessel traffic in the northern reaches of the globe is rising, including liquefied natural gas bound for China… For the Coast Guard, a branch of the armed services that is part of the Department of Homeland Security, the goal is to launch a new class of armed icebreakers—called polar security cutters—that can tackle problems ranging from environmental disasters to strategic confrontation in icy waters. The total estimated cost of the polar security cutter program increased to $13.3 billion in 2021 from $9.8 billion in 2018, according to the Government Accountability Office.”
Why it matters: “The science-focused Healy medium icebreaker, which is normally assigned to the Arctic, has to undergo repairs and refitting annually in California or Washington. The other, the heavy icebreaker Polar Star, is nearing the end of its useful service life… Russia has three dozen national icebreakers suitable for the Arctic, according to the U.S. Coast Guard, and China has four, including two icebreaking research ships that regularly appear at high latitudes. U.S. officials suspect those have strategic purposes.”
5. How troll power is reshaping global politics
Why you should read it: Foreign Policy columnist Elizabeth Braw observes that social media provocateurs and thin-skinned autocrats like Xi Jinping threaten to create new geopolitical mountains out of molehills.
“In an extremely online age, insulting foreign governments is a superhighway to fame and notoriety. Turkey President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban have already proved handy tools for such provocateurs. Those autocrats’ skin, though, seems positively rhino-like compared with what may be coming our way from China. Planned new legislation will make it illegal to offend ‘the Chinese national spirit’ or hurt ‘the feelings of the Chinese people.’ The proposed legislation is a recipe for diplomatic disputes with the West—especially in a social media culture where provocation has become a course for fame.”
“2023 has already been the year of the foreign policy-focused provocateur, who has gone straight for the ego of overseas leaders. At the beginning of the year, Sweden—where nothing less than accession to NATO is at stake—turned out to be a perfect staging ground for Danish agitator Rasmus Paludan, who realized he could get massive attention by burning a Quran just as Erdogan was weighing how to view the Swedish NATO application… If you have the mindset of a Rasmus Paludan, you’re willing to cause harm simply to gain fame or notoriety. And you can gain even more fame by taking your stunts to a dangerous realm, all in the safe knowledge that your home country will move mountains to rescue you if you get into trouble. China’s planned legislative amendment, in fact, creates a new and tantalizing opportunity for thrill-seekers to expose themselves to a bit of geopolitically infused harm without having to be very creative… Of course, Chinese law has always provided any excuse to arrest people, from hazy charges of ‘picking quarrels and provoking trouble’ to jumped-up claims of espionage. But the new atmosphere creates even greater potential for a feedback loop between potential provocateurs, angry home audiences, and authorities looking to build their own nationalist credentials. Combine that with the post-COVID resumption of air travel to China and the opportunity to gain fame and social media revenues through ill-considered stunts and you could see why provocateurs may soon be booking flights to Beijing or Shanghai.”
Why it matters: “To be sure, China remains a crucial trading partner, and those involved in business or other essential work there should clearly be able to enter the country and expect consular support in emergencies. Those wishing to visit the country for less essential reasons, though, should have to sign a waiver declaring they’re aware of the dangers and won’t expect consular support. Today, geopolitics is so sensitive that there’s no place in it for pranksters, not even accidental ones.”
6. Why Trump’s Electoral College advantage seems to have vanished
Why you should read it: New York Times data cruncher Nate Cohn and visualizer Alicia Parlapiano note that, contrary to widespread assumptions, former president Donald Trump does not appear to have much of an edge in the Electoral College in the coming 2024 presidential election—unlike in 2016 and 2020.
“But there’s a case that [Trump’s] Electoral College advantage has faded. In the midterm elections last fall, Democrats fared about the same in the crucial battleground states as they did nationwide. And over the last year, state polls and a compilation of New York Times/Siena College surveys have shown Mr. Biden running as well or better in the battlegrounds as nationwide, with the results by state broadly mirroring the midterms… He’s faring unusually well among nonwhite voters, who represent a larger share of the electorate in noncompetitive than competitive states. As a consequence, Mr. Trump’s gains have probably done more to improve his standing in the national vote than in relatively white Northern states likeliest to decide the presidency, like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.”
“Midterm results typically don’t tell us much about the next general election. Polls taken 15 to 27 months out don’t necessarily augur much, either. But the possibility that Republicans’ Electoral College advantage is diminished is nonetheless worth taking seriously. It appears driven by forces that might persist until the next election, like Mr. Biden’s weakness among nonwhite voters and the growing importance of issues — abortion, crime, democracy and education — that play differently for blue and purple state voters… But at this point, another large Trump Electoral College advantage cannot be assumed. At the very least, tied national polls today don’t mean Mr. Trump leads in the states likeliest to decide the presidency… The shrinking gap between the key battleground states and the national popular vote wasn’t just because of Democratic resilience in the battlegrounds. It was also because Republicans showed their greatest strengths in noncompetitive states like California and New York as well as across much of the South, including newly noncompetitive Florida. Democratic weakness in these states was just enough to cost them control of the House of Representatives, but did even more to suppress Democratic tallies in the national popular vote, helping erase the gap between their strength in the battlegrounds and the national vote.”
Why it matters: “The polls so far this cycle suggest that the demographic foundations of Mr. Trump’s advantage in the Electoral College might be eroding. Mr. Biden is relatively resilient among white voters, who are generally overrepresented in the battleground states. Mr. Trump, meanwhile, shows surprising strength among nonwhite voters, who are generally underrepresented in the most critical battleground states. As a consequence, Mr. Trump’s gains among nonwhite voters nationwide would tend to do more to improve his standing in the national vote than in the battleground states… With more than a year to go, none of this is remotely assured to last until the election. But at least for now, a tied race in the national polls doesn’t necessarily mean that Mr. Trump has a big lead in the Electoral College.”
7. How a small number of primary voters drive American politics batty
Why you should read it: Washington Post opinion editor Karen Tumulty holds “a surprisingly small sliver of [primary] voters” responsible for “a situation in which a handful of clownish nihilists [in the House of Representatives] are calling the shots for their supposed leaders.”
“There are a couple of familiar forces that put the ‘chaos caucus’ in charge: the Republicans’ razor-thin majority; the fact that Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) is beholden to the tiny minority for the gavel that it took 15 ballots for him to claim — and thus to the extremism that has come to define the Republican Party in the Trump era… These days, only 82 of the 435 House districts across the country are competitive enough that both parties start out with a decent shot at winning, according to the Cook Political Report’s David Wasserman.”
“That is only half the number of swing districts that existed in 1999, and it has effectively eliminated much of the incentive that the two parties once had to find middle ground on contentious issues. Members of Congress know that playing to instincts and impulses of their populist bases are their surest tickets to reelection, and that they will have little protection if they don’t… Whatever the reason, the reality is that the vast majority of congressional elections are decided in the primaries. And that, as it turns out, puts outsize power in the hands of a tiny minority of highly engaged and intense partisans who bother to show up and vote in those often overlooked contests.”
Why it matters: “We don’t have a House that represents voters because most voters don’t participate… There are ways to fix this. One is to open up the primaries so that anyone, or at a minimum people who register with no party affiliation, can vote in them. The current system, in which 30 states hold primaries in which only registered party members can vote, effectively disenfranchises 140 million voters in the elections that count… But tinkering with the system can go only so far, so long as voters themselves are too apathetic to recognize how politics actually works in a polarized country and to take their own responsibilities seriously. It starts with understanding that, increasingly, the elections that matter don’t take place in November.”
8. How civil rights strategist Bayard Rustin challenged progressive orthodoxies
Why you should read it: Journalist and opinion writer James Kirchick examines the life and career of civil rights strategist Bayard Rustin in the New York Times and finds him far more willing to challenge left-wing orthodoxies than latter-day encomiums that focus almost exclusively on his race and sexual orientation.
“Bayard Rustin, a trusted adviser to Martin Luther King Jr. and chief organizer of the 1963 March on Washington, was a towering figure in the fight for racial equality. Remarkably for a man of his generation and public standing, he was also openly gay… Mr. Rustin is today often extolled as an avatar of ‘intersectionality,’ a theoretical framework popular among progressives that emphasizes the role that identities play in compounding oppression against individuals from marginalized groups. While it’s admirable that Mr. Rustin is being recognized for something he never denied (according to one associate, he ‘never knew there was a closet to go into’), these tributes studiously ignore another aspect of his life: how, throughout his later career, Mr. Rustin repeatedly challenged progressive orthodoxies.”
“Mr. Rustin, who was characterized by The Times in 1969 as ‘A Strategist Without a Movement’ and, upon his death, an ‘Analyst Without Power Base,’ would most likely find himself no less politically homeless were he alive today. A universalist who believed that ‘there is no possibility for black people making progress if we emphasize only race,’ he would bristle at the current penchant for identity politics. An integrationist who scoffed at how “Stokely Carmichael can come back to the United States and demand (and receive) $2,500 a lecture for telling white people how they stink,” he would shake his head at an estimated $3.4 billion diversity, equity and inclusion industry that often prioritizes making individual white people feel guilty for the crimes of their ancestors while ignoring the growing class divide. A pragmatist who noted, ‘There is a strong moralistic strain in the civil rights movement which would remind us that power corrupts, forgetting that the absence of power also corrupts,’ he would have no patience for social justice activists unwilling to compromise. And a committed Zionist — supportive of the state but likely critical of its government — he would abhor the Black Lives Matter stance on Israel and the recent spate of antisemitic outbursts by Black celebrities. Mr. Rustin’s resistance to party dogma is a neglected part of his legacy worth celebrating, an intellectual fearlessness liberals need to rediscover.”
Why it matters: “A descendant of slaves who was himself a victim of brutally violent racism, Mr. Rustin never let his country’s many sins overshadow his belief in its capacity for positive change. His patriotism was unfashionable among progressives while he was alive and is even more exceptional today. ‘I have seen much suffering in this country,’ he said. ‘Yet despite all this, I can confidently assert that I would prefer to be a black in America than a Jew in Moscow, a Chinese in Peking, or a black in Uganda, yesterday or today…’ Mr. Rustin’s life offers a sterling example of moral courage and personal integrity. Resisting the temptations of tribalism, standing up for one’s beliefs even when it angers one’s ‘side,’ advocating on behalf of the least among us — Mr. Rustin embodied these virtues to an uncommon degree. And undergirding it all was a bedrock belief in our common humanity.”
9. They're burning all the witches even if you aren't one—so light me up
Why you should read it: On his Substack, British journalist Nick Cohen explains that contemporary progressive identitarian politics are so vicious because it gives moral legitimacy to people’s baser social instincts.
“Novelists and psychiatrists make better political commentators than supposedly worldly journalists. Like a school teacher watching children turn vicious in a playground, they understand that sadism has an appeal of its own. If given sanction by authority figures, many people who consider themselves good and responsible will welcome the chance to bully and ritually humiliate scapegoats in the name of a righteous cause… Woke politics, or if you don’t like the term, identitarian politics, allows adherents to torment others ‘with the approval of their own conscience.’ It gives licence to the modern equivalents of the righteous persecutors who threw stones at criminals in the stocks or made women wear the scarlet letter in New England. It thrives in frightened environments where rights to free speech and dissent are suppressed and people go along with authoritarianism for fear of being punished themselves.”
“There are interesting historical questions on how social media allowed the growth of cancel culture and unnerved liberal institutions. But the basis for understanding it must surely lie in grasping the perennial human urge to seek approval by denouncing the outsider and the non-conformist... And although I have no trouble in dumping any amount of blame on America’s proto-dictator, it does seem a bit rich to blame the far right for the internecine wars of the left. It turns progressives into children without independent agency… Why does identitarian politics exist in the UK, for instance, when Trump has never won an election here. But the hardest question to answer is that, if woke witch hunts were caused by Trump taking power, why didn’t they stop when Trump left the White House?”
Why it matters: “You can blame Donald Trump for a great deal. And if America’s and the world’s luck runs out and he is re-elected you will be able to blame him for a great deal more. But you cannot blame him for the inquisitorial turn of woke or identitarian culture. The left did that all by itself. Building a better culture will depend on reforming liberalism, not removing Conservatives from power.”
Odds and Ends
How Mick Jagger has held the Rolling Stones together for more than sixty years…
A review of historical brews from the first Paleolithic ales to the modern craft beer revolution…
How Taylor Swift’s music kept one California convict feel connected to the outside world…
How an Australian icebreaker carried out the nation’s first-ever medical rescue mission from its outpost Casey Station in Antarctica…
Why a French submariner worried about the safety of the submersible Titan—and why he went on its ill-fated dive to the the wreck of the Titanic last summer anyway…
What I’m Listening To
“Sweet Sounds of Heaven,” by the Rolling Stones featuring Lady Gaga and Stevie Wonder off their forthcoming album Hackney Diamonds.
A cover of Bruce Springsteen’s Nebraska track “State Trooper” by Deana Carter.
“Cult of Personality” from the late 1980s hard rock band Living Colour.
Image of the Month
