Nagasaki 66th Anniversary of Atomic Bombing

August 6th snuck up on me before I could get one of my annual atomic bombing essays posted, so here's a little something for Nagasaki: At WaPo, "Nagasaki remembers bombing, US sends first representative to memorial." And at New York Times, "Aug. 9, 1945 | U.S. Drops Atomic Bomb on Nagasaki, Japan."

Japan Stuns U.S. in Women's World Cup Final

I watched the final period and caught the Amy Wambach goal. The penalty kick final was something else. Japan's team had some magic going, and their goalie was on fire.

At Los Angeles Times, "Sentimental favorite Japan stuns betting favorite U.S. in Women's World Cup final":

It was the most gut-wrenching, most emotional and most dramatic final in the history of the Women's World Cup.

It produced the most surprising, most gloriously happy and most deserving world champion women's soccer has yet seen.

As far as Sunday nights in Frankfurt go, this one will take some beating. As far as fairy tales go, even Germany's Grimm Brothers could not have penned this story.

Japan, riding the emotions of a domestic tragedy and the overwhelming goodwill of neutral fans worldwide, won the sixth Women's World Cup, defeating the United States, 3-1 on penalty kicks, after a 2-2 tie in extra time.

Twice, the Japanese were on the canvas, or at least the green grass of Frankfurt's sold-out Commerzbank Arena. Twice, they got up off the ground and tied the score.

When it came down to penalty kicks, the Americans strangely lost their nerve while the Japanese held theirs.

The result was that the U.S. failed in its attempt to become the first three-time world champion, while Japan succeeded in becoming Asia's first Women's World Cup winner — barely four months after the nation was devastated by a magnitude 9 earthquake and a deadly tsunami.

RTWT.

RELATED: Steve Sailer, "Diversity Is Strength! — It’s Also, Paradoxically, All-White US Women's Soccer."

Click here for video [YouTube pulled].

Not So Fast on Japan's Chernobyl

From The Blog Prof, "Vlog: Fukushima is No Chernobyl, and Here's Why":

RELATED: At New York Times, "Data Show Radiation’s Spread; Frantic Repairs Go On at Plant." And more at Memeorandum.

Legacy of Hiroshima Heightens Fears in Japan

As we discussed the earthquake and tsunami on Monday in class, I noted that Japan was the world's only country that had previously faced a nuclear holocaust. The potential (and now real) meltdown of nuclear reactors there has an enormous historical significance for the Japanese, beyond the comprehension or experience of any other nation. At WSJ, "Hiroshima's Legacy Heightens Fears":

TOKYO—Mikiso Iwasa was 16 years old when the atomic bomb struck Hiroshima on Aug. 6, 1945. He was in the backyard of his house, a little less than a mile away from ground zero. He was smashed onto the ground by the force of the bomb.

Mr. Iwasa escaped, but the deadly effects of radiation caught up with him later: He suffered from skin cancer twice as well as prostate cancer. He lost his hair. His nose and gums bled. He developed rashes all over his body.

For the only country ever to have experienced the atomic bomb and the horrific effects of concentrated radiation exposure, the nuclear crisis escalating in Japan has had a crippling effect on the nation's collective psyche.

Japan Faces Potential Nuclear Catastrophe as Workers Flee Plant!

The front image at the New York Times' homepage includes an overhead picture with the caption, "The worst nuclear accident since the Chernobyl explosion in 1986 is unfolding in northern Japan at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant ..." The article link is here. See also Telegraph UK, "Japan crisis: third explosion at Fukushima nuclear plant" (via Memeorandum).

A fresh explosion rocked Japan's Fukushima nuclear power plant on Tuesday and some workers were ordered to leave the site, a sign that the situation may be getting more serious.

Japan Quake Toll May Reach Tens of Thousands

AP has that tsunami video that was replayed over and over on cable this afternoon.

And there's dramatic coverage at Los Angeles Times, "Japan quake toll could number in tens of thousands":

Reporting from Sendai, Japan, and Tokyo - With a death toll expected to climb into the tens of thousands, more than a half-million people displaced and a nuclear crisis continuing to unfold, rescuers converged Monday on Japan's devastated earthquake zone while workers in relatively unaffected areas struggled to return to offices and factories.

A new explosion rocked the stricken Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power complex, wire services reported, sending a plume of smoke into the air. Japan's nuclear safety agency said it could not confirm whether the hydrogen explosion at the plant's No. 3 reactor had led to an uncontrolled leak of radioactivity.

The government reported Monday that radiation levels again rose above legal limits outside the crippled nuclear complex at quake-battered Fukushima, about 150 miles north of Tokyo, where authorities have been pumping seawater into overheated reactors to try to cool them down. Several other nuclear installations were under close watch for potential problems.

Across a wide swath of earthquake-hit territory, hundreds of thousands of hungry survivors roused themselves from a third cold night spent huddled in darkened emergency centers, cut off from rescuers, aid and electricity. At least 1.4 million households had gone without water since the quake struck and some 1.9 million households were without power. Rolling blackouts to conserve energy were scheduled across much of the country on Monday.

The developments there have been rapid fire and overwhelming. Danger of radiation fallout is now exacerbated by news of a volcanic eruption. And the New York Times reports, "Minister Calls Disaster Country’s Worst Since WWII." See also, "Radioactive Releases in Japan Could Last Months, Experts Say." (More at Hot Air and Memeorandum.)

Radiation Scare as Japan Copes With Blast at Fukushima Nuclear Plant

At ABC News, "Radiation Dangers Heightened at Japanese Nuclear Plant: Nuclear Expert Recommends Emergency Distribution of Potassium Iodine to Children Within Range of Reactor":Also, update on developments at Stratfor: "Officials Claim Positive Signs on Japanese Reactor":

New developments at Japan’s earthquake-damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor No. 1 may suggest positive signs for authorities’ efforts to contain the problem. But many dangers and risks remain.

Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano said that while an explosion did occur at the plant, it did not damage the steel container around reactor No.1, where emergency workers are still struggling to cool down the reactor core after nuclear fuel rods were damaged following the failure of cooling systems due to the earthquake damage and short power supply. Edano said the explosion did not occur within the reactor container and thus did not lead to a large leak of radioactive material. The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency claims that radiation levels support the view that there has been no breach of the container around the reactor, though they have risen as a result of actions taken to relieve pressure in the container by releasing radioactive steam.

If accurate, these would be positive developments for the attempt to avert a meltdown in the reactor core ...

Also, previously at Time's science blog, "Nuke Plant Crisis Worsens as Radiation Levels Rise."

Plus, "Nuclear Meltdown at Fukushima Power Plant in Japan!", and "Meltdown at Japan's Fukushima Nuclear Plant?"

RELATED: At New York Times, "Japan Pushes to Rescue Survivors as Quake Toll Rises" (via Memeorandum).

Nuclear Meltdown at Fukushima Power Plant in Japan!

Well, maybe it's not as bad is it sounds.

Stratfor calls it a full meltdown, although still contained: "Red Alert: Nuclear Meltdown at Quake-Damaged Japanese Plant." (Via Mememorandum.) And a roundup at POWIP, "Video of Fukushima Nuclear Plant Explosion."

See also New York Times, "Explosion Rocks Japan Nuclear Plant After Quake," and Los Angeles Times, "Japan's fears mount with nuclear plant blast":

Officials try to calm residents wary of a possible radiation leak -- or worse -- at the Fukushima power plant, which lost its cooling system in Friday's massive earthquake. Nationwide, the death toll from the quake and tsunami could top 1,700.

Reporting from Tokyo and Beijing — A day after responding to one of the worst earthquakes on record and a massive tsunami, the Japanese government sought to allay fears of a radioactive disaster at a nuclear power plant on the country's battered northeastern coast.

The outer walls of the Fukushima power plant's No. 1 reactor were blown off by a hydrogen explosion Saturday, leaving only a skeletal frame. Officials said four workers at the site received non-life-threatening injuries.

The inner container holding the reactor's fuel rods is not believed to be damaged, said Japan's Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano, and workers were cooling the facilities with seawater.

In a press conference shortly after the explosion, which left the facility shrouded in plumes of gray smoke, Edano explained that the reactor is contained within a steel chamber, which in turn is surrounded by a concrete and steel building. Although the explosion destroyed the building, it did not occur in the chamber.

"The escape of hydrogen mixed with the air between the chamber and the concrete-and-steel building and led to the explosion," Edano said.

"Tokyo Electric Power Co. has confirmed that the inner reactor is undamaged," he added. "There was no massive release of radiation."

RELATED (WITH additional links and information): "Meltdown at Japan's Fukushima Nuclear Plant?"

Meltdown at Japan's Fukushima Nuclear Plant?

It's not looking good, actually.

See LAT, "Post-quake events at Japan nuclear plant raise concerns":

A portion of Japan's nuclear reactors have been shut down in the wake of the earthquake and subsequent tsunami, but officials are worried about the Fukushima plant, where the emergency cooling system is problematic.

About 18% of Japan's 33 nuclear reactors have been shut down in the wake of the magnitude 8.9 earthquake that struck offshore Friday and triggered a massive tsunami, but officials are particularly troubled by events at one of them — the 480-megawatt Fukushima No. 1 plant in Fukushima Prefecture, where the emergency cooling system has not been functioning properly.

Emergency authorities have ordered the evacuation of all civilians in a two-mile radius around the power plant, a total of about 3,000 people, and are planning to vent slightly radioactive steam from the plant, which is located about 160 miles north of Tokyo. Those within a six-mile radius were warned to stay in their homes.

See also NYT, "Quake and Tsunami Leaves Wake of Destruction Across Northern Japan." And "Japan Orders Evacuation Near 2nd Nuclear Plant" (via Memeorandum).

RELATED: At Scientific American, "How to Cool a Nuclear Reactor."

Bingo! Climate Change Caused Japan Earthquake!

Well, I promised I'd "update with progressive reports that climate change caused it ..." So, right on cue: "Climate Change Fanatics Blame Japan Earthquakes, Tsunamis on Global Warming" (via Memeorandum).

Hundreds Dead in Japan Earthquake and Tsunami

Dramatic headlines at Los Angeles Times, "8.9 Earthquake Kills Hundreds in Japan." Also, at New York Times, "Japan’s Strict Building Codes Saved Lives."



Also at Michelle's and Memeorandum. I'll update with progressive reports that climate change caused it, and of course, leftists are already exploiting the crisis to attack the evil GOP: "Tsunami Relief and Preparedness Cut in GOP Budget Proposal: National Weather Service."

Here Come Chinese 'Trophy Acquisitions' in the U.S.

In 1989, the editorial board of the New York Times asked, "Is the transfer of American assets to Japanese ownership something to worry about?"

The answer was no, "of course." But the Times board when on to suggest that this was "a sharp reminder of Japan's growing economic strength." So true, but within just a few years, by the mid-1990s, those fears of "Japan as Number One" quickly dissipated as that nation floundered in the fallout from its overheated bubble economy.

I'm reminded of this by the news this morning that China's Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Ltd. (ICBC) has made a bid for ownership entry into the U.S. financial market. See WSJ, "China's ICBC Bids for U.S. Entry":

CHICAGO—Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd. on Friday signed an agreement here to acquire a majority stake in Bank of East Asia Ltd.'s U.S. subsidiary, becoming the first state-owned Chinese bank to make an acquisition of a U.S. deposit-taking institution.

The deal, signed on the last day of Chinese President Hu Jintao's state visit to the U.S., represents what could be the start of big expansions by Chinese financial institutions in the world's largest economy.

The deal comes as both Beijing and Washington are calling for greater commercial ties between the two countries. China is prodding the U.S. to ease its export controls, especially those involving high-technology products, while the U.S. is asking for more Chinese purchases of made-in-America goods and services.

Still, the Bank of East Asia transaction promises to be carefully scrutinized by U.S. regulators, including the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, known as Cfius, because of the state-controlled nature of ICBC, China's largest lender. Bank of East Asia is a publicly traded bank based in Hong Kong.

RTWT.

And also at WSJ, "Why China’s ICBC Bank Deal is Important."

The Chinese are coming to America. And we'll soon see, no doubt, some "trophy acquisitions" that raise hollers far and wide. But as we've learned from previous experience, this hardly means the end of American world preeminence.

In any case, Daniel Drezner has a roundup on those "writers who vastly exaggerate China's rise!" See, "The most absurd edge of the 'China as behemoth' meme."

Related: Paul Krugman on China (via Memeorandum).

I'll have more later ...

Japan Shifts Military Posture to Defend Against Chinese Threat

I like it.

At New York Times, "Japan to Shift Its Military Toward Threats From China":

TOKYO — In what would be a sweeping overhaul of its cold war-era defense strategy, Japan is about to release new military guidelines that will reduce its heavy armored and artillery forces pointed northward toward Russia in favor of creating more mobile units that can respond to China’s growing presence near its southernmost islands, Japanese newspapers reported Sunday.

The realignment comes as the United States is making new calls for Japan to increase its military role in eastern Asia in response to recent provocations by North Korea as well as China’s more assertive stance in the region.

The new defense strategy, likely to be released later this week, will call for greater integration of Japan’s armed forces with the United States military, the reports said. The reports did not give a source, but the fact that major newspapers carried the same information suggested they were based on a background briefing by government officials.

The new guidelines also call for acquiring new submarines and fighter jets, the reports said, and creating ground units that can be moved quickly by air in order to defend the southern islands, including disputed islands in the East China Sea that are also claimed by China and Taiwan. These disputed islands are known as the Senkakus in Japanese and the Diaoyu in Chinese.

Details of the realignment, which had been delayed a year by the landmark change of government in September 2009, have been leaking out since large joint military drills earlier this month between Japan and the United States that included the American aircraft carrier George Washington.

More at the link.

This is especially interesting since I've been blogging East Asian security issues. Japan issued some of the most forceful statements on the recent North Korean artillery attacks, for example. And this discussion of Japan's emerging posture reminds us of realists argument on the constraining and shaping forces of international power dynamics. China's growth is clearly triggering some strategic thinking in Tokyo, and the growth of Beijing's power --- combined with the ambiguity surrounding the intentions of the Chinese leadership --- is pushing Japan even tighter into its alliance with United States. I've written more often on regime change North Korea, and not to mention some reflections on China's influence on the peninsula, but I just saw this recent piece from Elizabeth Economy, and it makes Japan's moves look quite natural considering: "The End of the 'Peaceful Rise'?"

69th Anniversary of Pearl Harbor Attack

The main story's at USA Today, "For a Few, Pearl Harbor Still a Vivid Memory."

Jim Morgan was sleeping a little late on the morning of Dec. 7, 1941.
His mother, Beryl, had tried to wake him up at about 7:30, but the 9-year-old, whose family lived at the Navy base at Pearl Harbor, didn't stir until she came back about 25 minutes later.

He got up just in time to witness history out his bedroom window.

"I said, 'Look, Ma! There's a fire at the submarine base.' "

At that same moment, Russell Meyne was sitting down to a plate of pancakes, bacon and eggs in the mess hall at Pearl Harbor's Hickam Air Base, 2 miles away. He was hoping to revitalize himself after a night of drinking beer with his buddies, celebrating their selection to a group that would be heading to the mainland for flight training.

Suddenly, everything changed.

"The table almost bounced up and down, and all the pots and pans in the kitchen started falling on the floor," said Meyne, an Army private at the time, now 91 and treasurer of the South Carolina branch of the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association.

"Then the bombing got really exciting."

Meyne and Morgan are among a dwindling number of people who can talk firsthand about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941. As the 69th anniversary is marked today, it coincides with a week-long meeting of the national Pearl Harbor Survivors Association.

The group's numbers have dropped so low, the possibility of shuttering it was discussed at the Honolulu convention, which runs through Friday. Association President Art Herriford on Monday said about 100 members decided against disbanding. Instead, the association will have four district directors around the country instead of eight.

Out of 60,000 military personnel on the island during the attack, the association estimates only about 3,000 survivors still participate in chapters scattered across the country.

"This convention is all-important for the Pearl Harbor survivors," U.S. Army Air Corps veteran Jim Donis, 91, of Palm Desert, Calif., said before Monday's meeting. "This is going to be the first time we talk about when we want to shut down the national organization."

And also earlier at LAT:

The view from the San Diego-bound Amtrak Pacific Surfliner on Saturday was Americana 2010. Morning garage sales, youth soccer games, joggers on the beach and surfers in the ocean all flicked past at 80 mph.

Inside it was pure 1941, right down to the 1940s-era first-class lounge car, vintage Navy blue uniforms, Yank magazines and packages of Clove chewing gum.

Sixty-nine years after the attack on Hawaii's Pearl Harbor, veterans and their families, railroad buffs and World War II reenactors in period dress took to the rails Saturday to mark Tuesday's anniversary.

For passengers on the Pearl Harbor Day Troop Train ride — an annual event organized by a pair of railroad enthusiasts for the last eight years — it was a chance to hear firsthand accounts of the war from the people who fought it.

RTWT.

Also at LAT, "Two Neighbors, Both Pearl Harbor Survivors, Are Decades-Old Friends."

China and Korean Reunification

Update to my earlier post, "Prospects for Regime Change in North Korea."

It turns out that the cable dump has some interesting information on Beijing's strategic thinking. See Simon Tisdall, "Wikileaks Cables Reveal China 'Ready to Abandon North Korea'." Check the link. China's ready to deploy troops to the border to prevent a massive influx of North Koreans. Personally, I doubt Beijing would let Pyongyang go so easily, and so is Professor Daniel Drezner (who rarely takes a controversial position while blogging). That said, here's this at LAT, "Beijing Support for Korea Reunification Not So Clear, Despite Leaked Cables":

Is China really willing to dump its old ally, North Korea? Would Beijing support a German-style reunification of the Korean peninsula in which economic powerhouse South Korea absorbed its wretchedly poor communist neighbor?

These may have been the impressions left by a stash of U.S. diplomatic cables relating to North Korea made public this week by WikiLeaks. But analysts who have followed the long entanglement of China and North Korea say that much of the information in the outed memos amounts to little more than dinner party chatter that reflects outdated opinion or wishful thinking.

RTWT.

Turns out that:

The reclusive Kim Jong Il has made two trips to China in 2010, receiving lavish red carpet welcomes, and in October, Chinese Politburo member Zhou Yongkang had a front row seat at a military parade where Kim's son and designated successor made his public debut.

Right.

And next they'll be throwing these guys out on their asses?

At the video, John Bolton's fairly sanguine on all of this — which is amazing for an EVIL NEOCON WARMONGER!!

Prospects for Regime Change in North Korea

At the clip below, with Donald Kirk of the Christian Science Monitor. He speaks toward the end on the extreme dangers of a military overthrow in North Korea, especially a refugee crisis. Interesting how these dangers are raised primarily in the context of outside intervention, and not in the case of an implosion of the dictatorship in Pyongyang. Most problematic is the size of the North Korean forces, with nearly 1,000,000 troops under arms. A military incursion from the south would only be feasible with a combined contingent of American and South Korean units. The U.S. would provide air support off shore through carrier battle groups. Tokyo has indicated its support for military retaliation --- and Japanese military forces were deployed to Iraq in the first outside operations since WWII --- so perhaps the operation could be multilateralized. And then there's China. We can only speculate, but it's unlikely any force options would be available without some kind of support from Beijing. Regime change North Korea would require buy-in from all the major actors, and so far I don't see much realistic discussion of it on the Chinese side. (But see, "Is China About to Throw North Korea Under The Bus?") Certainly China relishes the regional prestige from propping up its NoKo client. But should the Kim dynasty continue its bellicose actions, perhaps leading to the additional loss of life, the situation will be an increasing reminder of the false peace of 1930s Europe. A huge blowout of historic proportions could be expected.

Kirk's got a report from yesterday: "Disillusioned South Korea Weighs Response to North Korean Flare-Up."

And New York Times has another installment on the diplomatic cables: "Leaked Cables Depict a World Guessing About North Korea." And related news at Memeorandum.

Chalmers Johnson Obituaries

Following up my post, "Chalmers Johnson, 1931-2010."

WaPo published an obituary yesterday, "Renowned Asia Scholar Chalmers Johnson Dies at 79."

Dr. Johnson's interest in Asia began in 1953, after he graduated with an economics degree from the University of California at Berkeley and became an officer in the Navy aboard a landing ship tank, a shallow-bottomed cargo vessel.

During his wartime service, Dr. Johnson's ship ferried North Korean prisoners back across the demarcation line but often experienced mechanical trouble and was sent to Yokohama, Japan, for repairs.

While waiting for the vessel to be fixed, Dr. Johnson bided his time by learning Japanese and examining the country's culture, economy and longtime turbulent relationship with China.

When he returned to Berkeley in 1955, Dr. Johnson began studying political science and immersed himself in texts related to Asia. For his doctoral thesis, Dr. Johnson explored the rise of the Communist party in China, which he claimed was rooted in a contagious zeitgeist of nationalism shared among much of the country's poor.

To illustrate his point, he compared the rise of Communism in China to that of Yugoslavia shortly after the Germans invaded that eastern European country in World War II, where many peasants became fervently nationalistic and mobilized under the Yugoslav Communist party leadership.

He received a doctorate in 1961 and embarked on a year-long Ford Foundation fellowship in Tokyo. During that time, he revised his thesis and in 1962 it was released as a book - "Peasant Nationalism and Communist Power: The Emergence of Revolutionary China, 1937-1945," - the same year he joined the Berkeley political science faculty.

In 1982, Dr. Johnson released "MITI and the Japanese Miracle: The Growth of Industrial Policy, 1925-1975," where he reported on the Japanese government's control over the country's capitalistic market.

It was in the research to that book that Dr. Johnson said he initially became disillusioned with what he would later term "American imperialism" abroad and would lead him "to see clearly for the first time the shape of the empire that I had so long uncritically supported."

The full obituary at the link.

UC San Diego has a feature as well, "Leading Scholar on Japan - Chalmers Johnson (1931-2010) - Left Lasting Legacy at UC San Diego."

Chalmers Johnson, 1931-2010

Professor Chalmers Johnson has died.

Steve Clemons has reflections (via Memeorandum), and see also the links at Google so far. Leftists lionize Johnson --- not to mention paleocon America-bashers --- for his research on the purported American empire. Much more important is Johnson's work in comparatitve political science.

Below I've re-posted an essay on Johnson from January 31, 2007, "Chalmers Johnson and America's Imperial Decline."

*****

Chalmers Johnson's one of the nation's foremost experts on Japanese politics and international economic competitiveness. A professor emeritus at UC San Diego, Johnson's book, MITI and the Japanese Miracle: The Growth of Industrial Policy, 1925-1975, remains one of the most important selections on Japanese politics graduate syllabi. In recent years Johnson's been writing on trends in American foreign policy, particularly the consequences of America's clandestine intelligence operations and the "blowback" from U.S. strategic reach and ambition.

Johnson's got a new book out, Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Empire, which looks at what Johnson sees are threats to the republic from the country's massive military industial complex, which emerged from our post-World War II foreign policy of containing threats to U.S. national security.

Nemesis received an outstanding review by Tim Rutten in today's Calendar at the Los Angeles Times:

The thesis proffered here is that, since the end of World War II, the United States has been undergoing a kind of creeping coup in which the growth of an imperial presidency, the development of the CIA as a secret presidential army, the bloating of an outsized military establishment, and a venal and derelict Congress have conspired to undermine the American republic — perhaps irremediably.

Much of what Johnson denounces is the Bush administration's advocacy of executive branch supremacy in the realm of national security, manifest, for example, in the adminstration's early policies on the detention and torture of enemy combatants. But Johnson goes too far in making his case, essentially equating the Bush administration's excesses with the totalitarianism of Hitler's Nazi regime. Here's what Rutten says about that analytical overstretch:

Many of the conclusions Johnson teases from his shrewdly assembled and analyzed material are not so convincing. For example, appropriating Hannah Arendt's description of Adolf Eichmann — "desk murderer" — and applying it to Cheney, George W. Bush and Donald H. Rumsfeld isn't just histrionic, it's wrong on the merits, wrong in ways so fundamental that it renders moral judgment itself a uselessly blunt instrument. However horrific events in Iraq have been, they have nothing in common with Hitlerian Germany's "final solution," and it does violence to both reason and history to carelessly suggest otherwise for mere effect.

On the other hand, when Johnson argues that America "will never again know peace, nor in all probability survive very long as a nation, unless we abolish the CIA, restore intelligence collecting to the State Department, and remove all but purely military functions from the Pentagon," he presents a case that demands consideration.

That sounds pretty fair. Rutten goes on to give additional examples of the difficulties of Johnson's analysis. For example, even if the Bush administration succeeded in elevating White House power into an "imperial presidency," the election of a Democratic majority in the November midterms has already started the process of restoring the balance of power among the branches in the federal system. The democracy's not in jeopardy of succumbing to a military dictatorship any time soon, as Rutten ably points out.

(An interesting aside here is that Johnson's book shares its title, Nemesis, with the second edition of Ian Kershaw's authoritative biography of Adolph Hitler, Hitler: 1936-1945, Nemesis. I agree with Rutten, though, that comparing Bush to Hitler -- or U.S. foreign policy to Nazi foreign policy -- defies reason. The antiwar left, nonetheless, loves to denounce the Bush administration as fascist. Whether the shared title was deliberate or coincidental is an intriguing footnote to Johnson's scholarship.)

I've been reluctant to read Johnson's latest books. Upon skimming The Sorrows of Empire at Barnes and Noble, for example, I got the feeling the work was just a dressed-up, high-brow anitwar attack on the Bush administration war policies. Rutten's cool-handed review has convinced to give Johnson's writing a second look, however. There's a growing debate on America's continued leadership of the global system -- which I have discussed here and here, for example -- and Johnson's work certainly adds an important dimension to the discussion.

Post-Anti-Americanism?

I'm sure Howard Fineman is a good guy (hardly a netroots freak), but seriously, he should read some of the scholarly literature on hegemony and U.S. power. Signs in Europe of a post-post-9/11 anti-Americanism simply signal that continent's ever increasing irrelevance in great power international politics. See, "Europe can’t even be bothered to hate America any more":

I got on a recently completed three-week trip to Italy, Greece, Turkey, and the Black Sea. America is no longer admired, imitated, or feared. We remain—for now—a safe haven for dollars (of which there are too many in the world). But we increasingly are seen less as a model or as an empire than as a cautionary tale of national neglect and decline.



Some Europeans can’t quite hide their schadenfruede. The British—whose publications and personalities are increasingly (and annoyingly) influential in the colony they lost 227 years ago—are global leaders in condescension (think Simon Cowell). But for America they add a special twist of bitter lemon to their analyses. It’s the triumph of the doddering older brother who no longer has to be grateful to his junior. Memories fade, and the Brits no longer feel they have to be kind out of homage to our having saved them from Hitler.



A couple of examples from the genre. Writing in the Guardian, Timothy Garton Ash sees a Third World shabbiness when he visits the United States. “Every time I come back to the United States,” the Oxford don writes, “the airports, the roads, the public spaces look more tattered, battered, old-fashioned. Modernity is no longer self-evidently here.”



Edward Luce, a brilliant and diligent reporter for the Financial Times, surveyed the American landscape and came up with a mournful portrait that echoes, in equal measure, Diane Arbus, Walker Evans, and Robert Altman. Citing incontrovertibly bleak statistics about the struggles of middle-class Americans, and the growing disparity between the really rich and everyone else, he concludes that the U.S. is losing its essential character: it is no longer the land of opportunity and upward mobility; no longer the place where the future will surely be better, and more prosperous, than the past ...

Oh God ... tha's all I can read.



Folks are better off reading Michael Mandelbaum, "The Downsizing of American Foreign Policy." And Mandelbaum's no declinist, by the way. Let's get this economy pumping (ahem, President Obama), and we'll get America back on top in world public opinion (hope and change ain't doin' the trick).



RELATED: "Do States Ally Against the Leading Global Power?"

The Nukes We Need

Keir Lieber and Daryl Press, previously at Foreign Affairs, "Preserving the American Deterrent":

The success of nuclear deterrence may turn out to be its own undoing. Nuclear weapons helped keep the peace in Europe throughout the Cold War, preventing the bitter dispute from engulfing the continent in another catastrophic conflict. But after nearly 65 years without a major war or a nuclear attack, many prominent statesmen, scholars, and analysts have begun to take deterrence for granted. They are now calling for a major drawdown of the U.S. nuclear arsenal and a new commitment to pursue a world without these weapons.

Unfortunately, deterrence in the twenty-first century may be far more difficult for the United States than it was in the past, and having the right mix of nuclear capabilities to deal with the new challenges will be crucial. The United States leads a global network of alliances, a position that commits Washington to protecting countries all over the world. Many of its potential adversaries have acquired, or appear to be seeking, nuclear weapons. Unless the world's major disputes are resolved -- for example, on the Korean Peninsula, across the Taiwan Strait, and around the Persian Gulf -- or the U.S. military pulls back from these regions, the United States will sooner or later find itself embroiled in conventional wars with nuclear-armed adversaries.

Preventing escalation in those circumstances will be far more difficult than peacetime deterrence during the Cold War. In a conventional war, U.S. adversaries would have powerful incentives to brandish or use nuclear weapons because their lives, their families, and the survival of their regimes would be at stake. Therefore, as the United States considers the future of its nuclear arsenal, it should judge its force not against the relatively easy mission of peacetime deterrence but against the demanding mission of deterring escalation during a conventional conflict, when U.S. enemies are fighting for their lives.

Debating the future of the U.S. nuclear arsenal is critical now because the Obama administration has pledged to pursue steep cuts in the force and has launched a major review of U.S. nuclear policy. (The results will be reported to Congress in February 2010.) The administration's desire to shrink the U.S. arsenal is understandable. Although the force is only one-fourth the size it was when the Cold War ended, it still includes roughly 2,200 operational strategic warheads -- more than enough to retaliate against any conceivable nuclear attack. Furthermore, as we previously argued in these pages ("The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy," March/April 2006 [1]), the current U.S. arsenal is vastly more capable than its Cold War predecessor, particularly in the area of "counterforce" -- the ability to destroy an adversary's nuclear weapons before they can be used.

Simply counting U.S. warheads or measuring Washington's counterforce capabilities will not, however, reveal what type of arsenal is needed for deterrence in the twenty-first century. The only way to determine that is to work through the grim logic of deterrence: to consider what actions will need to be deterred, what threats will need to be issued, and what capabilities will be needed to back up those threats.

The Obama administration is right that the United States can safely cut its nuclear arsenal, but it must pay careful attention to the capabilities it retains. During a war, if a desperate adversary were to use its nuclear force to try to coerce the United States -- for example, by threatening a U.S. ally or even by launching nuclear strikes against U.S. overseas bases -- an arsenal comprised solely of high-yield weapons would leave U.S. leaders with terrible retaliatory options. Destroying Pyongyang or Tehran in response to a limited strike would be vastly disproportionate, and doing so might trigger further nuclear attacks in return. A deterrent posture based on such a dubious threat would lack credibility.

Instead, a credible deterrent should give U.S. leaders a range of retaliatory options, including the ability to respond to nuclear attacks with either conventional or nuclear strikes, to retaliate with strikes against an enemy's nuclear forces rather than its cities, and to minimize casualties. The foundation for this flexible deterrent exists. The current U.S. arsenal includes a mix of accurate high- and low-yield warheads, offering a wide range of retaliatory options -- including the ability to launch precise, very low-casualty nuclear counterforce strikes. The United States must preserve that mix of capabilities -- especially the low-yield weapons -- as it cuts the size of its nuclear force.

More at the link.

VIDEO HAT TIP: William Jacobson.