Terraforming Diplomacy: Beijing, Manila and the Scarborough Shoal

Over the last eight years I’ve commissioned, edited or led a dozen or more research studies and analytical pieces on the South China Sea disputes.   China’s assertiveness in the region, and especially the way that it has operationalized its diplomatic and strategic interests over the last two years, have lent considerable urgency to the issue. The most recent development in this story has been the changing relationship between Beijing and Manila, and its impact on regional security dynamics,  US-led “hub and spoke” arrangements in particular.

This, in the US journal The National Interest:

The past few weeks have seen a kind of whirlwind for the Rodrigo Duterte administration. “Rody,” as the Philippine president is affectionately called, made a historic trip to Beijing, where he met President Xi Jinping and returned with multiple billion dollars’ worth of Chinese investments. One of the things he promised to disaffected fishermen was to seek the restoration of their access to the Scarborough Shoal: the issue at the heart of a Chinese-Philippine conflict that has simmered for years—from April 2012, when the fishermen’s incident took place, to Manila’s filing of a legal suit against Beijing in the Permanent Court of Arbitration—characterized by recurring tensions in the waters around the disputed shoal.

Duterte returned from that trip with the official claim that he had asserted Philippine rights over the shoal, but he left it at that. “I leave it to the Chinese authorities what they will do in the next few days. We talked about it but I leave it to them,” he said. But true enough, how subsequent developments turned out seem to speak of the effectiveness of his talks with Xi. Reports started to emerge from local Philippine fishermen that they were able to fish around the shoal without harassment from the China Coast Guard (CCG) for the first time since April 2012. The loads of marine products harvested from the shoal, including more exotic species such as marlin and yellowfin tuna, arriving at Philippine piers aboard the boats, not to mention the jubilant smiles on the faces of the fishermen, are undeniable.

Adding to this euphoria have been reports of camaraderie between Philippine fishermen and CCG personnel, sharing foodstuffs and catches. Apparently, the Chinese are not such hard-headed, indifferent souls as to be oblivious to the plight of poor fishermen, merely trying to eke out a decent livelihood.

Diplomacy seems to have worked. But only partially.

Read the rest here.

Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize

No, that’s not a joke. This, from the NYT

OSLO — In a stunning surprise, the Nobel Committee announced Friday that it had awarded its annual peace prize to President Obama“for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples” less than nine months after he took office.

Urmmm…. OK, I guess.

Hunh?

[UPDATE]: I saw this a couple of days ago. Waaaaayyyy too timely to be coincidental. The word must have been floating for a while before today’s announcement. Based on the standards by which Ghandi was famously ommitted, I’m still scratching my head over this…

Omnivore 05/10/09

What I Saw At the Afghan Elections, Peter W. Galbraith, Washington Post

Evaluating Galbraith’s Dissent, John Western, Duck of Minerva

Security Advisor Calls Troop Increase McChrystal’s Opinion, Joseph Berger, New York Times

The Distance Between ‘We Must’ and ‘We Can’, James Traub, New York Times

Who Are “The Deciders”?, David Sirota, Salon

Obama Furious at McChrystal, Alex Spillius, Telegraph

Path to a Pashtun Rebellion, Seth Jones, Washington Post

Secret Agents’ Memorial Unveiled, Paul Moss, BBC News

NATO’s Second Life

Thanks to Tim for flagging this juice in his latest Infobore. I’ve been tracking NATO’s public diplomacy engagement with social media for a couple of months (here, here, here, and here), and this is an interesting tweak in the program. Tateru Nino reports via Massively that NATO “is presently seeking tenders for the construction of a proof-of-concept site in a virtual environment.” From the call:

The first scenario is to replicate a generic headquarters compound for a NATO operation. … The second scenario will involve replicating the Headquarters Supreme Allied Command Transformation in Norfolk, USA. The only acceptable worlds that may provide a solution to this statement of work are Second Life by Linden Labs[sic], OLIVE by Forterra, or NEXUS by ECS.

Nino points out a few technical problems:

Actually, this part’s a little confusing, because of the three virtual environments specified as ‘acceptable’, only one (Forterra’s OLIVE) actually meets the minimum criteria given in the solicitation. NATO SHQACT acknowledges this in a subsequent clarification document, but is still seeking Second Life submissions anyway. As it stands, it doesn’t seem like any existing Second Life developer can actually meet the stringent Defense Contract requirements in any case, and submissions close on the 8th of this month.

It’s a curious situation, overall, and leaves us scratching our heads. SHQACT insists that it wants Second Life tenders, yet Second Life does not meet the minimum technical requirements, specifically:

  • must run fully behind or through firewalls using a single open port of choice
  • should be able to run SSL encryption if desired for increased security

Still, according to article VIII of the Paris Protocol (1952), all the goods and services are tax and duty free, and that’s got to be an attractive notion. We don’t see any platform winning this one other than OLIVE though.

Joshua Fouts (not Joshua Foust, that’s this guy), writes at DIP’s Dispatches From the Information Age:

NATO has been doing a number of creative public diplomacy outreach efforts to help make its identity more accessible to a contemporary audience and redefine the narrative around NATO. We blogged in March about NATO’s poster campaign in Washington, DC. They also produced a number of highly produced videos for NATO’s 60th anniversary to demonstrate the relevance of NATO’s work today.

More recently, I’d pointed out both SACEUR and SecGen attempts at social media engagement. The SHQACT that Nino refers to is Supreme Headquarters Allied Command Transformation. NATO’s command structure is pretty convoluted. There are two strategic commands in NATO that report to NATO HQ is in Brussels, which handles the political strategic stuff.

  • One is Allied Command Operations (or ACO). It’s HQ is SHAPE (or Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe), about 55km down the road from NATO HQ. ACO does operations  – read KFOR in Kosovo, ISAF in Afghanistan, Active Endeavor in the Mediterranean, counter-piracy off the HOA, etc.
  • The other is Allied Command Transformation (or ACT), which is based in Norfolk, Virginia. I haven’t looked into whether Supreme Allied Commander – Transformation (or SACT) has a corresponding program of social media engagement, but I do know that ACT is responsible for education, training, experimentation and transformation (like it says on the box).

This sort of thing falls squarely within ACT’s remit, but insistence on Second Life despite real technical constraints smells suspiciously of three possibilities (not mutually exclusive): inept public affairs staff insufficiently cued in to the difficulties of technical development and acquisitions in NATO; NATO technocrats only too happy to oblige, regardless of whether the project has real operational merits; and Command interest in the platform. Something to watch for: NATO R&D moving to build an in-house sim platform from scratch, in order to get around the security issues. It’ll take years, cost millions, and benefit…. well, that’s the question, really. Who?

I have to wonder whether Second Life brand recognition and popularity have hooked the senior leadership. I also wonder what the troops on the ground (or the operations folks in ACO) might think about the NATOcracy fiddling around with the sort of time, effort, and funds needed to develop this kind of project, much less spending time within it. That’s not a fair or mature criticism  – the organization, as harsh as it might sound, is about more than just Afghanistan, hence the whole public diplomacy thing. But still. I can’t see ISAF troops in the wilds of Nuristan, for example, being entirely even remotely sympathetic to this.

NATO’S New Secretary General

Former Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen took over the reins as NATO Secretary General (SecGen) this past weekend. His social media campaign kicked in, too, with a new video blog, Facebook page (34,000+ fans and counting), and Twitter stream. It’s the little things that matter, really: he – or whoever – didn’t post to the blog as “Admin” or “PAO” or anyone else, but as Anders Fogh Rasmussen. That doesn’t mean he’s really doing it himself (although the video part would be hard to fake), but at least the media team running that show has set some basic web credibility markers. Should be interesting to see how SecGen’s media campaign compares to that of his military counterpart, Admiral James Stavridis, based down the road from Brussels at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe. Stay tuned.

While we’re on the subject of NATO, check out the new community site that’s been set up to field debate on the Strategic Concept. Pretty slick.