Nik's Laws: Don't Spit in Eyes

Hey, Bibi.

Nik's Laws: Don't Arm your Future Enemy

Hey world (and Barack and the useless heap of Congress) are you listening?

Five Rules to Guide Syria Policy

1. Don't let Iran win the Syrian civil war
2. Don't fall into the trap of being the World Police. Athens, Constantinople, Rome, and England already tried that
3. No matter which Syrian faction you choose to ally with, 75% of the country will hate and resent and fight you. Don't pick sides
4. Because of #2, the only acceptable justification for intervention is on humanitarian grounds
5. Syrian peace is not a vital US interest. It IS a vital interest of Syria's neighbors: Lebanon, Jordan, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and (gasp) Israel. They are getting flooded with refugees. They are at risk of receiving SCUDs. They are at risk of spill-over instability. They should lead any intervention. They should build humanitarian supply/evacuation lines. They should host any refugees (humanely). To the extent they don't want to participate, they should fund intervention. If they lack specific technical capabilities, they should request US assistance. The UN, thanks to Russia and China is useless. Don't waste your time with that

It may very well be that the best response is, until five-way peace agreements are signed, a total economic, commercial, and travel embargo of the country, supplemented by an oil-for-food style humanitarian plan, led and executed by Syria's neighbors.

Turkey, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia in particular are vying for recognition that they have "turned a corner" from their insular, murky, iron-fisted past into first-world regional powers. They should view the current situation as a grand opportunity to demonstrate they are world-class by acting world-class.

Rule #3 aside, and broader than the Syrian civil war, is the Kurd issue. Creating a Kurdish state or independent self-administered region would create stability and solve numerous simmering conflicts all at once. Kurdish regions of Turkey, Syria, and Iraq have proven largely stable, predictable, and trustworthy. They are able to generate relatively stable governance structures and effective economic activity even under very poor circumstances. Turkey, Iraq, and Syria need to mature their approach from current passive-aggressiveness to acknowledging that current borders simply don't reflect the cultural and national landscape. There is something for each of them to gain by ceding political control, economic control, and even territory in the interest of furthering regional peace and stability. While any mideastern solution seems to cause 20 new mideastern conflicts, this one might be a risk worth taking.

The Good the Bad and the Ugly

This one's short, sweet, and perhaps a little rough around the edges ...

The Good:
Geithner finally says something logical ... executive pay standards can be set by regulators but must be enforced by shareholders and boards.

He even said something smart: the US financial industry regulatory patchwork must be overhauled. The Fed should be put in the lead.

More generally, and as I will cover in detail in an upcoming blog, a sea change is coming in corporate accountability, focused, as I've always said it should, on the board.

Politicians are suddenly less paranoid about discussing healthcare.

The worst recession in 70 years turns out not to be the end of the world for most folks.

The Bad:
Promptly after saying something smart, Geithner proceeded to say something stupid. The holy grail of financial industry regulation most certainly is NOT a "council" of regulators. WTF good is this politicized talk-shop? Put someone in charge for chrissake. Make them independent for the love of God. I'm all for competition, even within government services, but it depends on what they're competing for. What are their incentives? How are they measured? The current incentive framework for these schmucks is: bloat their budget, cozy to the institutions they regulate, and kiss as much ass on the banking and FS committees in Congress as possible. Does he really think that the FDIC and OTS would have been any less of a joke as regulators if they had simply had more touchy-feely time with their fellow bureaucrats? How about getting out into the field and figuring out what's going on in the industry ... and then actually DOING something about the ugliness under the covers.

Worldwide equity and bond markets are turning around. We'll give back at least a third of what we've gained since January.

The Ugly:
This week we saw news of an "inquest" in Canada to figure out why a woman languished, entirely ignored, screaming and pushing the emergency button in a hospital for 4 hours before her husband had to single-handedly midwife her through birth. Duh.

In response, Obama decided that we should adopt the Canadian system. No lawsuits allowed, just like Canada. No guarantee of service levels, just like Canada. No responsible party, just like Canada. Obama's healathcare proposal is dreamware. Instead of injecting some reality, his crew and Congress have launched threats against anyone daring to speak reality (Elmendorf hang in there).

He was so busy thinking up this nugget that he forgot to check on those silly Iranian elections. Or maybe he saw the violations of basic human rights, international law, and his own past blathers ... and just didn't think they were important enough to disturb the lovely peace he's cultivating with his new Muslim BFFs. Maybe he's just being cooooool. Like he has been about the Dear Leader.

MLB players get to buy performance. NFL players get to buy their ay out of murder.

The Post Script:
There's a common thread to many of the "new" solutions that are being trotted out: the idea that more talk is the solution to every problem. I'm a massive fan of communication and information, but neither is an end in itself. These are means. These are methods. A car may need gas to get you from A to B ... but a can of gas is pretty damn pointless without a car ... or a road ... or the ability to drive ... or any of the other co-requisites.

Let's not take our eye off the ball.

Iranians vs. Iran ... Rick Steves and the Shahab-3

As I've said before, I really appreciate Rick Steves' European shows on PBS. When I found out he also maintained a blog (who doesn't these days?) I was instantly hooked! He gives hidden insights and sneak previews, but also shows the entertaining soft underbelly of his job (grumpy tourist office in England, stupid rules in Turkey). When he mentioned he would be going to Iran to separate the real from the rhetoric ... well, honestly I was nervous. This has been used frequently by the peaceniks among us as a euphemism for their peace-at-all-costs world view.

All told, it was a courageous and a valuable thing he did. We'll all be better off if we can humanize this conflict a bit. I agree with him that individual-to-individual contact can lead us all to greater understanding of each other. I share his hope that understanding breeds compassion and even solidarity.

But Rick showed his liberal underpants a bit. While his aim was to present an "even view" of the country, his result was to give glibly cursory coverage to the hate-mongering propaganda spewed forth by the insaniac Iranian government. Does he really mean to suggest that "Death to America" is just a cute figure of speech? I give him kudos for covering every smile and "we love America" he observed from the Iranian citizens. However, by over-emphasizing these, he showed he could not resist the temptation to counter-balance the White House's predilection for fear mongering. with opposite-but-unfortunately-equal myopia.

Here's my take on the Iran:

• To quote Reagan, "People do not make wars; governments do." In this context, the meaning is that the conflict does not really involve the common citizens of either country. On both sides, they're more interested in living their lives comfortably and being left alone than geopolitics. He went on to say, "A people free to choose will always choose peace." I saw this firsthand in the early 1990's in the former USSR - the people never did hate Americans. Had no reason to, except the fear preached them by their government. And they were just as afraid of their own government as ours. Rick did a good job of demonstrating that (many) Iranians are no exception.
  
• To repeat Reagan: "People do not make wars; governments do." His statement has a second meaning: Governments do, indeed, make wars on behalf of their countries. Acknowledging my first point (and Rick's) does not repudiate the fact that the Ayatollah Insane-y and the rabid Ahmadi-nejad army could cause great harm to life and limb in the US, Iran, and most likely anyone else who has the misfortune of getting their attention. Sanctions, containment, diplomacy, saber rattling, and outright aggression may well be necessary in response to their actions.

The fact that an American can traipse around Iran (with government minders) gathering smiles and hugs from children and grandmas alike calls attention not to the power of peace or the senselessness of war ... but to the tragedy of it. I'm quite sure the average middle-class, non-fundamentalist Iranian (if there are any left in that place) is as anti-war as his American counterpart.

However, that (mythical ?) average Iranian does not have his finger on the "launch" button of the new Shahab-3 nuclear-capable intermediate range missile. Nor does he have the key to the national purse. He has no vote on whether his own dire, hopless, poverty-stricken existence is worth the billions being wasted by the government on their nuclear program.

It is FOR, not AGAINST these people that aggression against their government may be necessary.

I'll let Reagan wrap up my argument: "We can not play innocents abroad in a world that is not innocent." We must engage Iran with respect, but from a position of strength. We don't need to be the world's daddy, but we do need to ensure our own safety.

If we can serve as a global role model of freedom and respectability, we achieve dual success of furthering our own self-interests while at the same time elevating the world's lowliest and most suppressed. To that end, we should be willing to expend our own treasure and flex our own muscle. It's a long-term proposition, which makes it politically dificult. Greatness is not for the short-sighted.

Photo credits:
Rick Steves in Iran: Rick Steves Blog (http://www.ricksteves.com/blog/index.cfm?fuseaction=archives&month=6&year=2008)
Iranian Missiles: Sepah News (http://www.daylife.com/words/Sepah_News) via AFP