A safer 2008

At least in conventional international relations terms the world seems safer this month than last, particularly over potential future conflicts with Iran and Russia.

 


First the US National Intelligence Estimate on Iran released last week assesses that Iran is not actively pursuing a nuclear weapons capability, virtually ending the possibility of a US attack on Iran.

Then today President Putin anointed as his successor Dmitry Medvedev. Although relatively young, Medvedev does have a considerable domestic track record. But the significance here is more in who Putin didn't choose. His recent appointment of Viktor Zubkov suggested to some that he could be Putin's nominee, but effectively be a front for Putin's continuing control. The other widely touted possibility was First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov, who has a background in the security apparatus, marking him out as a likely hawk. Overall this suggests a more constitutional Russia, focused more directly on domestic concerns (too early to say reforms) than confrontational international posturing for a domestic audience.

Today also saw think tank Demos launch their major report on national security, partly in anticipation of a National Security Strategy promised by the government for the end of the year. IPPR are also in the midst of a major review, possibly on the same scale as the Comission on Social Justice they ran in the 90s.

So while evidence suggests traditional threats are retreating, the combination of instability in many regions alongside growing global interdependencies, means there is a growing recognition that traditional approaches to international relations and national security are increasingly risky. 



Display: Sort:

Re: A safer 2008 (#1)

Great post.

It is comforting to see a threat recede slightly - more comforting that the two Koreas have today resumed their first regular train service since the war in the fifties.

I'd love to be more confident that there would be definitely be no confrontation with Iran.

Re: A safer 2008 (#2)

Good post. Wonderful news that the U.S. NIE is finally making a similar assessment to independents like the 2005 ISIS assessment.

But we should recall everyday risks, such as that 31,845 people were killed or seriously injured on UK roads in 2006 (about 264 deaths/month). We need to evaluate national security spending against benefit that could be achieved by spending to reduce car/motor-bike usage, or better road safety measures.

Re: A safer 2008 (#3)

Thank goodness somebody's got their head screwed on the right way. I've been saying this for years: that this terrorism business has got to be put in perspective.

Compared to the casualties on our roads and the rogue killers at large, the number of deaths a terrorist bombing icident would cause simply does not compare.

Re: A safer 2008 (#4)

however, these terrorist incidents can exacerbate international threats, which can be far more threatning to stability than car crashes.

Re: A safer 2008 (#5)

I doubt it. The Algerians will simply bring in even more repressive measures which will add to their problems, rather than ease them. This latest atrocity in Algeria claimed the lives of 60+ innocent people. These terrorists are dispicable people in going for soft, civilian targets. One of these days, the tide of revulsion will turn against them and Al Queida will be torn limb from limb and they won't get any sympathy from me.

Re: A safer 2008 (#6)

Al-Qaeda couldn't organise a factory, their sources of power in Afghanistan and Pakistan disintegrated after 2001. But other cause of fundamentalism will be powered by terrorist atrocities.