The Human Race & Other Sports

Two Bids For Independence-A Study In Contrasts

Thy spirit, Independence, let me share;
Lord of the lion heart and eagle eye,
Thy steps I follow with my bosom bare,
Nor heed the storm that howls along the sky.
— Tobias George Smallett, Ode to Independence

It was quite a contrast. And that’s not to say that what Russia did was right. It’s just interesting for the outsider to contrast George Bush’s response to events in Kosovo with his response to events in Georgia. In examining the two responses one is made aware of the fact that Mr. Putin’s Russia and Mr. Bush’s United States have come far since George first met Vladimir and, exercising his parapsychology skills, looked into Mr. Putin’s soul and liked what he saw. What he saw in Mr. Putin’s soul was a reflection of his own cowboy mentality.

It was the cowboy mentality that enabled George Bush (who history may remember as Don Quixote’s direct descendant) to swagger into Iraq in pursuit of an imagined adversary. Not finding the sought-after enemy, he created one remarkably similar to the one he was chasing. (Don Quixote was less fortunate.) It was George Bush’s cowboy mentality that convinced him to place corrals in the form of radar installations inside the Czech Republic and missiles inside Poland, ostensibly to protect Europe from a nuclear strike should Iran succeed in developing nuclear weapons. In the eyes of Vladimir Putin and many foreign policy mavens, the installations were meant to protect Europe from “Russia”:.

Following Russia’s invasion of South Ossetia in support of South Ossetia’s bid for independence from the former Soviet Republic of Georgia, the cowboy in George Bush told George he should send his head wrangler off to Georgia to let the Russian cowboy know who was boss in that part of the world even though that part of the world is more closely related to the Russian cowboy’s sphere of influence than the Texan’s.

During Cowboy Dick’s visit to Georgia he not only assured the Georgian people of Mr. Bush’s support for Georgia’s insistence that the breakaway republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia remain part of Georgia, but promised the Georgians Cowboy George would continue his support for Georgia’s pursuit of NATO membership. Both positions were the equivalent of pushing a thumb into the eyes through which George had first gotten a glimpse into their proprietor’s soul since Mr. Putin opposes Georgia’s entry into NATO and supports the bids of South Ossetia and Abkhazia for independence from Georgia. What made the pronouncements even more interesting, however was that in opposing independence for the two break-away Republics George and Dick were taking positions diametrically opposed to the position taken by George only slightly more than one year earlier.

In June 2007 George visited Fushe Kruje in Albania before the vote was taken on whether or not Kosovo should be independent of Serbia and become an independent country. There were pictures of a back-slapping George Bush greeting people in Albania and expressing his support for Kosovo’s bid for independence from Serbia. According to a report of his visit in the Guardian Mr. Bush announced that he had made up his mind that Kosovo should be independent from Serbia and let it be known that if agreement were not soon reached permitting the U.N. Security Counsel to vote on its bid for statehood, he might encourage Kosovo to declare independence. Following that, said he, George and his people would give it diplomatic recognition. George said: “Independence is the goal. That’s what the people of Kosovo need to know. If it is apparent that is not going to happen in a relatively quick period of time, in my judgment, we need to put forward the resolution. Hence, deadline.” In a press conference in Tirana, the Albanian capital, Mr. Bush said: “Sooner rather than later you’ve got to say enough’s enough. Kosovo’s independent.”

Russia and Serbia opposed Kosovo’s bid for independence. Among other things Serbia was concerned that if Kosovo were independent Serbia would lose 15% of its territory. It also observed that the independence of Kosovo would create a dangerous precedent for secessionists in other places around the world (like South Ossetia?) although that was not stated. Responding to Mr. Bush’s meddlesome statements Mr. Putin said Russia remained firmly opposed to Kosovo’s bid for independence. Kosovo declared its independence in May 2008. Now South Ossetia’s independence has been recognized by Russia. George has responded by sending warships to unload humanitarian aid to those affected by the conflict. Watching the two cowboys one can only hope that George will leave the scene before he is able to sponsor a shootout at the OK Corral.

None of the foregoing is to suggest that Vladimir is a nice man. But then, as we all know, neither is George.

Sarah and The Polar Bear

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
— George Orwell, Animal Farm

Now that we’ve all gotten over our giddiness at the excitement of a former almost-beauty queen, mayor and short-term governor as John McCain’s running mate we should put to rest any thought that this was nothing more than a spur of the moment decision by John McCain. He only selected Sarah Palin after careful consideration of all the possible candidates for the post.
There are lots of things in her background that render her a highly qualified candidate. One that has not been extensively commented upon is her finding common cause with Canada in a fight with the United States.

In what might be perceived a disloyal act coming from a Republican, Sarah took Canada’s side with respect to the status of the polar bear as an endangered species. Neither Sarah nor Canada wants the animal’s continued existence to interfere with life as we have grown accustomed to it. A Canadian scientific panel released an April review of the polar bear’s status that said the bear population was a matter of “special concern” but not a population “endangered or threatened with extinction.” This finding directly contradicted last year’s U.S. Geological Survey prediction that “two thirds of the world’s polar bears could be gone by mid-century if predictions of melting sea ice in the Arctic hold true.” It also put Canada in direct conflict with the Bush administration’s decision in May 2008 to add the polar bear to the endangered species list. It was that decision that was promptly attacked by Sarah Palin. Within days after the ruling was announced, Alaska began a lawsuit demanding that the decision be reversed claiming that the climate models predicting the loss of sea ice were unreliable, a position that is reinforced by Sarah’s belief that global warming, if it exists at all, has nothing to do with human activity.

Explaining the reasons she opposed listing the polar bears as an endangered species, Sarah said that state wildlife officials had “found no reason to list the bears as threatened under the Endangered Species Act” even though three marine mammal biologists in the Alaska Department of Fish and Game agreed with the studies the Federal government relied on in declaring the polar bear endangered. In addition to opposing the rule because of her flimsy understanding of science, Sensible Sarah pointed out that the rule would make drilling for oil and gas more difficult.

Sarah’s approach put herself and her state squarely at odds with the Bush administration that had promulgated the new rule in May. Dirk Kempthorne, the U.S. Interior Secretary, said his decision to add the polar bear to the endangered species list was based on three findings: “First, sea ice is vital to polar bear survival; second, the polar bear’s habitat has dramatically melted; third, sea ice is likely to further recede in the future.” Those comments were remarkably close to the beliefs expressed by scientists, an alignment almost unheard of in the Bush administration. It wouldn’t last.

When the Bush administration discovered that it had come out on the side of science in connection with a sensitive subject, it quickly retreated thus lining itself up with Sarah. In August it was announced that a regulatory overhaul of the Endangered Species Act was proposed. Science would once again” be sent to the back of the bus. Instead of having independent scientific reviews to determine whether protected species would “be imperiled by agency projects” federal agencies comprising non-scientists would begin making those determinations, a conclusion reminiscent of the EPA’s decision to take issues away from scientists and place them in the hands of non-scientists. Dick Kempthorne, who so eloquently defended the May ruling, said the new rules were simply an attempt to “provide clarity and certainty to the consultation process under the Endangered Species Act.” Not everyone sees it that way.

Rep. Nick J. Rahall of West Virginia, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee said the rule gives “federal agencies an unacceptable degree of discretion to decide whether or not to comply with the Endangered Species Act.” Bob Irvin who is senior vice president of conservation programs at Defenders of Wildlife observes that most agencies do not have wildlife biologists on staff and, therefore, have no way to make qualified judgments on issues affecting wildlife. Dale Hall, director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serve disagrees and offers reassurance that all will be right with the endangered species. He says individual agencies will have to take responsibility if their projects do harm a protected species. “This really says to the agencies, ‘This law belongs to all of us. You’re responsible to defend it’” he explained. Those words are comforting. If the agencies err because of lack of scientific input they will be responsible for the consequences. The consequences will be extinction or reduction of the species. The agencies will almost certainly feel really bad about that.

The Wife and The Veep

Cosi Fan Tutte
—Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart

It was a wonderful week for women and it more than made up for the fact that Hillary Clinton is neither the Democrats’ presidential nor vice-presidential candidate. Both events took place on the Republican side of the aisle. It is hard to decide which was more significant so I shall relate them chronologically.

In a brilliant move that contrasted sharply with the activities of Michelle Obama during the week of the Democratic convention, Cindy McCain, a major shareholder in a $300 million a year beer wholesale and distributing company started by her father went off to Georgia (the one that used to be in Russia) on her first foreign policy mission. While Michelle Obama was giving her Monday night speech in the safety of Denver’s Pepsi Center, Cindy was flying to Georgia where she planned to meet with Georgian president, Mikheil Saakashvili and visit soldiers wounded in that country’s war with Russia that had ended, sort of, just a few days earlier. Although reports do not indicate what she intended to talk to him about it is safe to say it was a diplomatic mission and that she assured him that Georgia would enjoy the same level of support from a McCain administration that it has received from the Bush administration.

For John to send Cindy off on her first diplomatic mission less than a week before the beginning of the Republican convention was a stroke of genius diverting attention, as it did, from the activities in Denver. Cindy said that the trip was really part of the U.N. World Food Program in which she has been active, but her plans to visit the president and wounded soldiers shows that that was nothing more than a cover-up for real purpose of the trip. It showed that being a major shareholder in and chairwoman of the biggest beer distributorship in Arizona has prepared her to undertake sensitive diplomatic missions as her husband’s envoy should she become first lady. Indeed, Cindy told Time magazine that she had wanted to visit Georgia for some time and told the magazine that that kind of a trip is “an important part of what I’m about, what makes me tick.” As Nicolle Wallace, a McCain adviser told Time: “While she’s on the phone with the World Food Program, he’s on the phone with Saakashvili. It’s like this great picture of what they’ll be like in the White House.” I got quite a few goose bumps when I read that.

The other great news pertained to Senator McCain’s brilliant choice of a vice-presidential running mate-Sarah Palin. Sarah, like Cindy, has quite a bit of foreign policy experience. She comes from Wasilla, Alaska, a town that is not much more than 1500 miles from Russia as the crow flies. Being in such proximity to Russia has given Sarah a unique perspective and sensitivity to the relations between the United States and that country. Sarah is also a fast learner.

Politico reports that as recently as a month ago Sarah told an interviewer that she didn’t know what the job of vice-president entailed and said it didn’t seem like a “productive” job. Presumably she was comparing it to the important kinds of things she did as mayor of Wasilla, a town with a population of less than 8000 people and a budget of approximately $20 million or perhaps her work during her short tenure as governor. (As mayor she oversaw the Police Department and its 25 officers as well as the city’s public works projects.) She was quoted in Politico as saying: “As for that VP talk all the time, I’ll tell you, I still can’t answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day? I’m used to being very productive and working real hard in an administration.” My guess is in the interim she had a chance to interview Dick Cheney and learn that in his case, at least, he ran the country although George got most of the credit. She no doubt understands that she’d not have quite the same authority being unable to match Dick Cheney’s knowledge of how a vice-president can make government do what he wants it to do rather than what the framers intended.

Her selection is a stroke of genius and provides everyone the opportunity to see the kind of leadership choices John McCain will make if elected. In addition, Sarah will certainly attract many, if not all, the women who were supporting Hillary Clinton. The only real differences between her and Hillary, after all, are their positions on abortion, what kind of person to appoint to the Supreme Court, drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, gun control, the death penalty, same-sex marriage and whether to teach intelligent design in the classroom. (Sarah favors it.) Those differences are insignificant given the fact that what they have in common is that they are both women. If you don’t believe me, ask the Hillary supporters who plan to vote for John and Sarah.

The Wandering Anti-Terrorist Funds

Little Jack Horner sat in the corner,
Eating a Christmas pie.
He put in his thumb and pulled out a plum
And said “What a good boy am I.”
— Nursery Rhyme

One of the purposes of anti-terrorism funds is to fight terrorism. There is, of course, a lot of money available for that purpose, and sometimes it is so tempting to use it for purposes other than those prescribed by Congress, that the temptation cannot be resisted. That’s what two reports in July suggested happened with at least some of the funds. Since the diverted funds were less than $300M they would not have been enough to make a difference in the fight against terrorism.

Most of the diverted funds went to help out George Bush’s great good friend, Pervez Musharraf who, when the money was diverted, was still the president of Pakistan. Although many terrorist groups are hiding out on the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan thus making the border a logical destination for those funds, they did not head for the border. They headed for an airport. Mr. Bush decided that $230 million should not be used in the border fight between Pakistani forces and the Taliban and al-Qaida, as dictated by Congress, but should be used to pay for, among other things upgrading Pakistan’s F-16 airplanes’ radar systems. (A cynical observer might wonder whether the upgrades of the radar will permit the planes to identify NATO aircraft, a feature that was not allowed on the planes when originally sold to Pakistan.)

Congress is upset with the diversion of funds. So is India. Congress is upset because when it says funds are designated for anti-terrorism efforts it expects them to be spent for anti-terrorism efforts. India is unhappy because one of the more obvious uses for the F-16s is to fight India should war erupt between those two countries. Mr. Bush called Manmohan Singh, the Indian prime minister, to let him know of the diversion of the anti-terrorist funds. Mr. Singh was reportedly, “disappointed.”

The other diverted anti-terrorist force funds found a use that has even less to do with fighting terrorism than the use to which Mr. Bush put his dollars. The Air Force diverted funds for the sake of comfort.

The Washington Post reports that Air Force officials have been using anti-terrorism funds to develop and install something initially called a “Senior Leader Intransit Comfort Capsule.” (The name was later changed to call the capsules “conference” capsules rather than “comfort capsules”. One officer suggested that may have been done to avoid the possibility that the word “comfort” would cause those loading the capsules to confuse the capsules with the pallets of latrines that are often loaded on military planes. It would for obvious reasons, be disastrous if upon boarding the plane a high ranking officer found himself seated in a latrine for a ride half way around the world instead of the luxury capsule he had been led to believe would be his.)

The Air Force says that the new capsules are needed so that important officers can “talk, work and rest comfortably in the air.” The folks who are actually going to go into combat do not need such comfort while flying since it would simply remind them that, as soon as they got off the plane and went into combat, there would be no comfort capsules to protect them.

The Air Force has been meticulous in its specifications for the capsules. The capsules must be “aesthetically pleasing and furnished to reflect the rank of the senior leaders using the capsule. ” One of the ways this goal was achieved was by spending $68,240 to change the seat color and pockets in the capsule because the officers responsible for deciding on the colors concluded that the colors originally supplied were not as practical as the colors ultimately installed. The entire project is estimated to cost $7.6 million and the funds have come from funds that would otherwise have been used in the anti-terrorism effort.

General Robert McMahon who is overseeing the project explained that he wanted to “create an environment that whoever was riding in that would be proud of”, the government would be proud of and “the people of the United States would be proud of.” He has certainly got that right. I can’t imagine anything that would make me prouder than knowing that high-ranking officers were flying in ultimate luxury. Unless it was knowing that funds were diverted from the anti-terrorism effort to give returning troops the best possible medical care. There’s no sense spending time imagining that. It won’t happen on George Bush’s watch.

The Citizen and the Passport

All persons born…in the United States…are citizens of the United States…
— Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States

August 2008 was a banner month for passports. They played a significant role in world events that garnered them rare publicity. Two of the events demonstrated how easy a government can make it to get passports and one demonstrated how difficult it can be.

In August, Russia and Georgia got into an argument over whether Abkhazia and South Ossetia should be allowed to leave Georgia and become independent or should remain part of Georgia. For the last several years Russia has been issuing passports to residents of South Ossetia, thus bestowing Russian citizenship on the holders. When invading South Ossetia, Russia was simply going to the aid of its citizens, albeit many of them Russian-come-lately. (If George Bush were clever he would have issued passports to Iraqis prior to invading their country and then announced he was simply acting to protect United States citizens.)

China, too, issued passports in furtherance of national objectives. In November 2007 an associated press release described the success of a young girl gymnast, He Kexin. He was one of the stars at China’s Cities Games in November 2007. Xinhua, the Chinese Government’s news agency reported on her success in those games and said she was 13 years of age. Olympic rules require that for a gymnast to compete in Olympic games the gymnast must attain age 16 in the year in which the games take place. For He to leap over the years that separate 13 from 16 in a mere 9 months was something that not even a gymnast as accomplished as she could hope to accomplish. It was accomplished instead by issuing a passport. In 9 months He aged 3 years and her team became the first Chinese women’s team to win a gold medal in gymnastics. Passports can, of course, be withheld in furtherance of a country’s foreign policy, as the United States showed.

A law that goes into effect next year requires anyone crossing between the United States and Canada or Mexico to present a passport instead of a birth certificate or driver’s license. As a result the thousands who cross borders daily because of employment must now obtain passports. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that many United States citizens who were born in South Texas are having difficulty obtaining passports.

Ordinarily a passport can be obtained by furnishing the issuing authority a certified copy of a birth certificate, acceptable identification and the appropriate fee. Whereas Russia made it easy for people in South Ossetia to get passports, the State Department has made it difficult for people in South Texas to get theirs. A birth certificate is not always accepted because the State Department has learned that some people in South Texas have fake birth certificates. Those people were delivered by mid-wives and some of the mid-wives were convicted of forging birth certificates for children born not in South Texas but in Mexico. The forgeries may have affected as many as 15,000 people. Although people in South Texas can vote, become border-patrol agents or president of the United States, they may not obtain passports without additional proof that they were born in the U.S.A. Here are some of the things these presumptively non-citizens can do to satisfy the State Department. They can obtain affidavits or testimony from the mid-wives who delivered them, assuming the midwives can be found and can remember whom they delivered dozens of years after the birth. They can produce newspaper announcements of their births or they can produce hospital records going back dozens of years to show they were treated in the hospital if, indeed, they were. Juan Aranda is someone who has been unable to get a passport and here is what he has done.

Juan submitted all the required documentation and when he was turned down sent in school records going back 38 years showing that his kindergarten records recited that his birthplace was Weslaco, Texas. He sent in a picture of his kindergarten class that included him. He sent in a baptismal certificate with a church seal reciting he was born in that town. He explained that pre-natal medical history was unavailable because his mother was too poor to have pre-natal care. The State Department told Mr. Aranda that he hadn’t “fully complied with the request for additional information” and he should start the process to become a naturalized citizen. Instead, Mr. Aranda hired a lawyer. If his lawyer is successful it may soon be as easy for an American citizen to get an American passport as it is for a Georgian citizen to get a Russian passport. Mr. Aranda’s success would be remembered as another example of the courts being invoked to protect the citizens of the United States from the administration of George W. Bush.