Thirty Year On, Lessons from the Falklands

Falklands War: Lessons of Liberation Ring True for U.S. Today, Heritage Foundation Issue Brief #3639, June 14, 2012. "The Falklands War illustrates the fundamental point that, in international affairs, one should always treat one’s friends better than anyone else. But it also offers a number of lessons for America as it struggles to avoid the devastating effects of defense sequestration and to maintain a military that provides for the common defense."

No Responsibility Here!

Out of Touch and Out of Favor . . . U.S. Voters Turn Their Backs on Obama’s World in Washington, Yorkshire Post, June 8, 2012. "Washington inherently likes nothing better than spending other people’s money. That’s why it’s so regularly out of touch. The President has spent four years cheerleading big government. He’s not the only one suffering from that, but whether he likes it or not, he personifies Washington. And in November, Washington’s irresponsibility could end up being a very big story indeed."

The ATT Will Be Bad for the US-Taiwan Alliance

Arms Trade Treaty Could Jeopardize U.S. Ability to Provide for Taiwan’s Defense, Heritage Foundation Issue Brief #3634, June 8, 2012. "The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) will be negotiated in July in New York. One reason to be concerned about the ATT is the risks that it poses to America’s ability to sell arms to Taiwan. The U.S. is legally—as well as strategically and morally—obliged to provide for Taiwan’s defense. It should neither sign nor ratify a treaty that would increase the difficulty of meeting that commitment."

Terrorist Legitimation, UN-Style

Arms Trade Treaty Risks Increasing the Threat of Armed Terrorism, Heritage Foundation Issue Brief #3624, June 5, 2012. "The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) will be negotiated at a conference held July 2–27, in New York. The ATT purports to seek, in part, to reduce the ability of terrorists to acquire conventional weapons. But as the U.N. has not defined terrorism, it is at best unclear how the ATT will achieve this aim. Moreover, if the U.N. negotiations follow precedent, the ATT will include a clause that legitimates the supply of arms to terrorists."

A Classic Aspirational Treaty

The Risks the Arms Trade Treaty Poses to the Sovereignty of the United States, Heritage Foundation Issue Brief #3622, June 4, 2012. "The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) will be negotiated in July in New York. One reason to be concerned about the ATT is the risks it poses to U.S. sovereignty. Some of these risks are specific to the ATT, but the fundamental problem with the ATT is that it is an aspirational treaty and, as such, will impose constraints on the U.S. that will not in practice affect the dictatorial regimes at which the treaty is nominally aimed."

The Coming Anti-American Campaign

When the UN Arms Trade Treaty Fails, What Next?, The Commentator, May 31, 2012. "So what happens when the Treaty doesn’t work? You can bet that the ATT’s proponents aren’t going to accept that they were wrong. They’ll do three things. First, they’ll blame the U.S. (and Britain, but mostly the U.S.) for the Treaty’s failure. Second, they’ll argue – no matter who is actually doing the arms supplying, and to what conflict – that the U.S. and Britain are ‘setting a bad example’ by engaging in even the well-regulated sale of arms to fellow democracies. Third, they’ll assert that the treaty needs to be tightened up, and its review conferences will be an occasion for running battles between countries that are easily swayed by left-wing NGOs and British and American diplomats who don’t want to double down on failure."

Too Much Is Never Enough, Apparently

A Bottom Up Look at the Top Down, Centre for Policy Studies, May 30, 2012. "If you believe that it is not possible to demonstrate that any particular level of taxation, welfare spending, or redistributive policies are economically counter-productive, and if you are in principle in favor of these things, then when do you say “enough,” and why do you decide to say it? A reliable way to get liberals excited is to say that they’re socialists. Fine, they’re not. But if Britain – where the government currently spends 50 percent of the nation’s GDP – is not verifiably well past the point of diminishing returns on state spending, where does that point lie? Is it 60 percent? 70 percent? 99 percent? If neither evidence nor principle tells you when to stop – and to go into reverse – then what does? At what point does the distinction between a really big government and socialism become irrelevant?

Bigger, But Not Better

From Britain, More Evidence That Smaller Government Is Better Government, Heritage Foundation Foundry, May 29, 2012. "The past week has seen the publication of two important studies on the virtues of smaller government by our friends in the United Kingdom. Neither paper is short, and both are technical in places, but they are both analytically careful and important contributions to the most important debate of our time, over when government grows so large that it becomes incompatible with the pursuit of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

The Economist's Curious Views on Unions

Britain, Europe, Scotland – and the Economist, SAIS Review, May 7, 2012. "No policy can contribute to solving every problem, as E.E.C. membership claimed to do, and policies that pretend to do so are answers in search of a question. Arguments about Britain’s European destiny are so much fluff: there is no end of history, and if there is, the EU is not it."

Obama's No Shoo-In

"Obama Must Not Celebrate Yet As US Voters Look For More Than Likeability in White House Race," Yorkshire Post, May 4, 2012. Not available online. "When I was in London last month, everyone agreed on two things: David Cameron is doing badly, and Barack Obama is doing well. So well, in fact, that Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee, has no chance at all to win in November. The only question in the British mind appears to be about Obama’s margin of victory."

Extremism: A Classic Irregular Verb

Are Republicans Crazy?, The Commentator, May 2, 2012. "My own view is that error and unreason are widely distributed across humanity, and any reasonably-sized group of people is likely to contain a similar amount of both. To an extent, that’s one reason I’m conservative: since people (including the very educated) are likely to get it wrong most of the time, I think it’s prudent to keep government as small as possible so as to limit its opportunities for inflicting damage. On the other hand, so much contemporary liberalism – dating back to the Progressives of the late-nineteenth century – is based on the idea that while the people are dopes, the elites are wise."

American Conservatives and the Constitutional Order

Limitless Liberalism, Centre for Policy Studies, May 2, 2012. "One of the subjects I found the least understanding about in Britain – though not, I hasten to add, in the Centre – is the connection that American conservatives draw between constitutional and limited government, American exceptionalism, and their discomfort with both the American Progressivism and the Obama administration. A common motif in press comment in Britain (and in the U.S.) is that Republicans or conservatives – the mash-up of the two is revealing, if incorrect – are simply unreasonable, petulant, and extreme. That charge is false, but it is a very old one, and it reveals something about the nature of the fundamental conflict in the U.S. political system."

Risks to Second Amendment from ATT

American Rights Need American Defenders, Hays Daily News, Kansas, March 30, 2012. "Is the Arms Trade Treaty about a U.N. army coming to take away our guns? That’s crazy. But this is a pro gun-control administration, negotiating at the pro gun-control U.N. with countries that have no Second Amendment. A treaty could fall far short of gun confiscation and still restrict our freedoms."

The Tappin Case, Round Two

Answers to Questions on the Tappin Extradition Case, The Commentator, March 22, 2012. "A few weeks ago, I wrote an article on extradition from the United Kingdom to the U.S., inspired by the furor over the case of Christopher Tappin. The gist of the article was that the U.K. wanted the 2003 U.S.-U.K. Extradition Treaty and the accompanying and broader Extradition Act of 2003, that the claims made about the unfairness of the Treaty are false, and that Ministers in Her Majesty’s Government should have the courage to say so. These are not popular views, in large part because they are rarely if ever expressed in Britain. So in the spirit of encouraging debate, I’ll return to the question, and present some new documents that critics of the Tappin case should read."

Establish U.S. Red Lines on ATT

U.S. Needs Red Lines for Arms Trade Treaty Negotiations, Heritage Foundation Issue Brief #3548, March 22, 2012. "The final Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) for the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) in February decided that, in preparation for the July 2–27 conference in New York that will finalize the ATT, U.N. member states should by March 31 submit short statements on the provisions that they believe should define any ATT. The U.S. should use this opportunity to establish firm red lines for the July conference and to make it clear that it will reject an unacceptable ATT that originates in either the July conference or in any other venue."

Unacceptable Ambivalance on Falklands

Obama’s Private Assurances on Falklands Not Good Enough, Contentions, March 18, 2012. "Until I hear President Obama state, on the record and publicly, that the U.S. sees no reason for negotiations over the Islands because it recognizes British sovereignty over them, I am going to take this brief, private interchange reported at second hand for what it is worth: not very much at all."

Two Lightweights Prop Each Other Up

"United By Appearance Not Substance," Yorkshire Post, March 17, 2012. Reviewing the March 2012 Obama-Cameron Summit. Not available online. "Palling around with Obama is part of that policy of appearances, of winning credibility by association. It is a strange fate for Cameron, who made waves in 2006 with his call for a Britain that was “solid but not slavish” in friendship with America. But in 2012, Britain is short on friends. The much-touted revival of Commonwealth ties has fallen flat, and the very idea of drawing closer to Europe is profoundly unpopular, not to mention economically suicidal."

Two Terrible Speeches

Why Writes This Stuff?, Contentions, March 15, 2012. "Look – writing welcoming remarks must be a tedious job, and I wouldn’t like to do it for anything. But would it be too much to ask that his speechwriters avoid obvious solecisms? If you’re going to use the tired ‘the British burned the White House’ joke, don’t follow it up, two paragraphs later, with the claim that “through the grand sweep of history, through all its twists and turns, there is one constant – the rock-solid alliance between the United States and the United Kingdom.” So, except for the whole burning thing, it’s a constant?"

What the Summit Should Have Done

At Obama-Cameron Summit, U.S. and Britain Should Take Action to Rebuild Alliance, Heritage Foundation Issue Brief #3533, March 8, 2012. "The U.S. and Britain face a number of serious issues at home and abroad. But the most important need is for the U.S. to demonstrate that Europe matters, that the institutions of the EU are no substitute for—and are in fact inferior to—the legitimacy of democratic and sovereign European nations, and that, instead of seeking to reset relations with autocracies like Russia, it will give the highest consideration to the concerns of its allies. The U.S. and Britain are close enough and important enough to each other to disagree on occasion, as they have in the past. But if Britain decides to continue the downgrading of its security role or the U.S. continues to care less about transatlantic security and political cooperation, the problem will not be an Anglo-American disagreement. It will be the slow disappearance of the Special Relationship."

Why Your Cell Phone Doesn't Work

Big Government and the Spectrum Problem, Contentions, March 8, 2012. "Larry Downes has a remarkable column on CNET news about the shortage of spectrum for use by mobile broadband. It is a catalog of government ineptitude, incompetence, regulatory capture, and short-sightedness."

The No Good, Very Bad Ike Memorial

Ordered Liberty and Controlled Chaos, Contentions, March 7, 2012. "Gehry’s philosophy of design reminds me of my encounters with deconstructionist theory in graduate school: disorienting, until you realize that the point of the enterprise is not to convey meaning but to smash it, while all the while assuming a pose of ironic, superior, unsmashed detachment in order to win immunity from criticism. Gehry’s leitmotif is that “life is chaotic, dangerous, and surprising,” democracy is either chaos or at best “controlled chaos,” and so buildings should be chaotic as well. This is the kind of thing that sounds well until you think about it for five seconds. Modern democracies are in fact the most unchaotic, predictable, secure societies in the history of the world – the only way they look chaotic is next to the Garden of Eden, or the paradise of the planner."

Here's One Thing You Missed: The Cuts Don't Exist

Britain Shows No Sign of Shaking Addiction to Debt, Taxes and Regulations, Contentions, March 7, 2012. "With British Prime Minister David Cameron’s state visit impending next week, we can expect to hear a good deal about – though see nothing very much done about – Afghanistan, the NATO Summit, Libya, and Syria, But we’re also likely to get a smattering of commentary about Britain’s parlous fiscal position. If we’re lucky, the media will talk about “Tory spending cuts.” If we’re really lucky, they’ll call them “savage.” Writ large, it’s useful to remember one thing about these spending cuts: they don’t exist."

The Tappin Extradition Case

A Few Home Truths About Extradition from the United Kingdom, The Commentator, March 2, 2012. "As Mr. Grieve has conceded in one of his more sensible reflections, the Tappin case is controversial because Mr. Tappin appears to be an eminently respectable man. Unfortunately, it is possible for a man to appear to be respectable, and even to be the President of the Kent Golf Union, and still to be creditably accused of a serious crime. If Mr. Tappin is found innocent, there will be no public outcry in the U.S. But if the U.S. trial proceeds fairly – as I believe it will – and especially if he is found guilty, I trust there will be public and government recognition in Britain that the critics were wrong, and that the extradition system – and the American system – works."

Are Ron Paul's Supporters 'Right-Wingers'?

Democrats, Republicans, and Ron Paul, Centre for Policy Studies, March 2, 2012. "What is just as interesting is that the less well-off, less-educated, the less-religious, the young, and the unmarried, most of whom normally lean Democratic, are this time out going disproportionately (though not in large numbers) for Paul. It is an open question whether that trend is best described as reshaping the Republican Party by bringing new voters in, reshaping the Democratic Party by leading traditional voters out, or as the action of voters fundamentally unaffiliated with either party – and, absent Paul, likely to back neither.

European Integration As Means, Not Ends

Five Conservative Principles That Should Guide U.S. Policy on Europe, Heritage Foundation Issue Brief #3524, March 1, 2012. "A strong transatlantic alliance should be at the heart of U.S. foreign policy. Washington should reinvigorate partnerships with America’s key friends and allies in Europe. It should adopt policies that advance national sovereignty and economic freedom across the Atlantic, rather than subvert them."