Obama says drones "legal and effective"

Nicodemus Minde

US President Barack Obama has defended the drone attacks as effective, legal and just. In a major foreign policy speech, the President said that the drone have been a major tool for the US war on terror. This speech comes after the US AG, Eric Holder admitted that the drones have in previous occasions killed American citizens. The drones have also claimed the lives of innocent children and women in Pakistan and Yemen. Although the US claim that the drones target specific individuals, there is no doubt that many other civilians fall prey into the aftermath of the attacks. 

The Legacy of Kenneth Waltz: How he changed International Relations

By BarryR. Posen via Foreign Policy Magazine

Kenneth Waltz made critical contributions to the development of international relations theory, the debate on U.S. foreign and security policy, and the training of a new generation of international relations scholars. In the course of these contributions he has also served as a model of clarity of expression and logical argument. 

Waltz's first critical contribution to international relations theory was his elucidation of the "levels of analysis" problem in Man, the State, and War. The categorization of explanatory theories into ones that respectively stress the role of human nature; state-level political, economic, and social systems; or the anarchical condition of international politics has proven a critical building block of modern international relations theory. 

Through his exploration of theories at different levels of analysis, Waltz took the first giant step of his theoretical career. Even readers who do not wish to take the same step find the path illuminating. Waltz poses two major questions: If bad humans are the cause of war, why is there so much peace? If bad states (or societies, or economies) are the cause of war, why are so many good states implicated in wars? Why does war persist despite variation in the nature of the states and societies that make up the international system? Waltz suspected that classical realism and balance of power theory would tell us something about this -- but at that point he could not quite put his finger on it. 

The device of "levels of analysis" has become a ready element of our vocabulary about international relations theories. It travels well. Even novices quickly grasp its utility, and find themselves better able to organize both their own and others' arguments after a brief introduction. More importantly, Man, the State, and War makes the case that there must be something distinctly "international" about international politics, which Waltz suspected could be traced to the absence of a sovereign. The book maps out a space that subsequent theorists, including Waltz, would then need to fill. After we read the book, we know this. Some may disagree with Waltz's subsequent arguments about the share of international politics that can be explained by "third image" -- or system-level -- theories, but none can dismiss them. 

Waltz's second contribution to international relations theory is to be found in Theory of International Politics. There, Waltz distills the product of years of thinking about the "third image." He develops the distinctive concept of "international structure" as the distinguishing feature of the international political system. Structure is the minimalist device that captures the basic causal forces and variables of the international political system. Structure is made up of an organizing principle (anarchy) and the distribution of capabilities (polarity). From that, Waltz deduces many of the characteristic patterns of behavior one should find in the relations among autonomous actors. Though Waltz overlooked certain possibilities, such as unipolarity, and left much room for argument about some of his specific deductions, one cannot come away from Theory without a keen appreciation of the constraints and incentives imposed upon states by the condition of anarchy. These lead to the competitive behaviors that are so familiar. 

Kenneth Waltz was one of the most influential international relations scholars of the last half-century. Even if he had produced no students, his books would stand as rocks in the road. Nobody trying to understand international politics can avoid them. But Kenneth Waltz did produce many students, who built on his work in their own scholarship, further refining the realist model. Even international relations theories based on other premises must engage with structural realism. Kenneth Waltz found what was international about international politics and built the foundations of the field.

Man, State and War: Thank you Kenneth Waltz, now Rest in Peace

Nicodemus Minde 

As a student of International Relations and an aspiring theorist of the discipline, the news of the passing of Kenneth Waltz is sad. This guru embodied the neo-realist theory throughout his great academic history. Ken was the author of several enduring classics of the field, including Man, the State, and War (1959), Foreign Policy and Democratic Politics (1967),  and Theory of International Politics (1979).   His 1980 Adelphi Paper on nuclear proliferation ("The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: More May Be Better"), was also a classic, albeit a controversial one. 

Kenneth Waltz

As a first year student at the university studying International Relations, Ken's works came in handy. We dissected and unpacked various theories of IR. Theorist such as Hans Morgenthau, the father of realism were introduced to us with the monumental piece of "Politics Among Nations". Others such as E.H Carr, Thucydides, Niccolo Machiavelli also epitomized the realist discourse. The epistemology and ontological points of departure came in handy when unpacking the theory debate. This being said, Kenneth Waltz remains my all time favorite theorist in International Politics. I have read his book "Man, State and War" and it together with the monumental seminal work on foreign policy of "Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis by Graham T Allison remain as my all time favorite reads in international relations. 

 

In essence, Waltz's thesis in the book "Man, State and War" is on the causes of war in a contextual framework of the man and society. Using units of analysis, Kenneth Waltz divides international relations theory into three images: that of man, state and system. He looks at the three images vis-a-vis each other and forms his theoretical premise of the causes of war. Interesting in this reading was his analysis of man within a polity or society. He asks "Can man be best understood by studying society or by studying man?" His analysis is premised on the conception that man is born good but it is society that erodes their character. 

 

Writing recently on nuclear deterrence in Iran and the politics of the bomb, Kenneth Waltz reminded us of his unique analytical skills.  In Foreign Affairs magazine, Professor Kenneth N. Waltz says it is time to back off and let Ahmadinejad develop his nuclear weapons. I wrote in this blog before on Waltz's perspective. He believed that a nuclear Iran will bring stability in the Middle East region. Just the standoff between India and Pakistan that cooled down through nuclear deterrence, Waltz believed Iran-Israel tensions could be healed this way. 

 

I eulogize Kenneth Waltz's on his excellent and critical formulation of IR theories and events. I have never met his in person but through his great works. He introduced me to the discipline that is International Relations. We debated and argued on the images as conceived by Waltz in class both at undergraduate and graduate studies. My analytical skills within the corpus of IR have largely been influenced by this great scholar. In scholarship, one is acclaimed and despised in equal measure but for me, Waltz remains one of my great mentors.   

US and Russia in Syria talks

Via Al Jazeera

The United States and Russia have agreed to push both sides in Syria to find an end to the bloodshed, offering to hold an international conference in search of peace. In talks which stretched late into the night, US Secretary of State John Kerry met first for more than two hours with President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday and then for a further three with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

"We agreed that Russia and the United States will encourage both the Syria government and opposition groups to find a political solution," Lavrov told reporters at a concluding news conference that ended after midnight. Hopefully by the end of May the two ministers working together could convene an international conference to build on the Geneva accord agreed by world powers last June for a peaceful solution in Syria, they said.

Mlipuko Kanisa la Katoliki Arusha

Poleni watu wa Kanisa Katoliki la Olasiti. Huo mlipuko ni dalili mbaya kwa nchi yetu Tanzania. Mungu aturehemu turudie amani. Habari kuhusu mkasa huu bado ni finyu.

The Tanganyika-Zanzibar Union: 49 years of a beleaguered marriage of convenience

Nicodemus Minde

The United Republic of Tanzania today celebrates 49 years of political union between Tanzania mainland and Tanzania Zanzibar. I am explicit in naming Zanzibar as Tanzania Zanzibar and the mainland as Tanzania mainland and not Tanganyika. The nomenclature of the the constituent entities of the union, though not said explicitly, has also led to the antagonism between the two. This is a story for another day. Analysts and political pundits have debated for many years on the constitutionality of the union, the status of the union, and the prospects for the union. 

For more than forty years Tanzania has remained the only Union of independent states in Africa. There has always been much debate on this Union both before the Union took place as well as after its happening. Prof. Issa Shivji describes the union as a pragmatic one born out of caution and not necessity. As he aptly puts it, "The Union between Tanganyika and Zanzibar was determined by two governments for the interests of Africa and African Unity. There was no other reason. Further to this, Nyerere has been quoted saying “...No, I’m not joking … I fear Zanzibar will be a big headache for us." This was before the then Tanganyika gained independence. The union was hurried. The ratification of the articles of the union was hurried and a CIA Intelligence Memo assessing the Union four years after its conception asserted that the union was never popular in Zanzibar and that "it was only Tanganyika's steam-roller tactics that forced the issue." There is no evident to date of a consultation process in the isles and to some degree in the mainland. The negotiations of the union were largely 'informal' and the only 'legal instruments' were the articles of the union which were haphazard and lacked the concrete legal foundations. The so-called Union of Zanzibar and Tanganyika Law, 1964 published in the Government Gazette of the United Republic was also wanting with regard to procedure, legality and constitutionalism. Laying strong legal and constitutional foundations is important for state survival and unity. The union has withstood the tests of fissure and collapse only through Nyerere's leadership and CCM manipulation of election results (after Tanzania became a multiparty state).

The ghosts of shaky foundations of the union need to be exorcised. The marriage between the two was out of convenience. The marriage bore resentment from the people of Zanzibar. The children of the union are disenfranchised. The leaders across the divide politic. Either side of the union has its wishes. There are Tanzanian Zanzibaris who want secession, there are those who want more autonomy, there are those that want unity. The Tanzanians from the mainland also want the status union to be addressed. With the drafting of the new constitution ongoing, there is need for a comprehensive discussion on this matter. The Constitutional Review Committee gave a time frame for people, political parties and other interest groups to give their opinions on matters they would love to be addressed in the new law. There has been a surreal mentality from most Tanzanians that come the next elections, the country shall have a new constitution. Constitutions are not built in five years. They are built on a long time reflection and contemplation of a nation's needs and aspirations. Having been born on shaky foundations, Tanzania has the greatest opportunity to rethink the union. The union started on rather shaky legal and legal foundations. A critical renegotiation of the union ought to be a key priority of the Constitutional Review Committee.

The communication angle during Cabinet Unveiling: Why UhuruRuto were in matching outfits and more!

Nicodemus Minde, Nairobi

Tuesday 23, April, 2013. Late Tuesday, Kenya's President Uhuru Kenyatta named four out of the 18 members of his Cabinet. Flanked by his Deputy, William Ruto, the President read out the profiles of the four nominees to his cabinet. Going against primordial tendencies which characterized former administrations, President Kenyatta in a calculative manner set out the unveiling of the cabinet at the entrance of State House, a more media friendly area. The occasion and setting was reminiscent of that of White House in United States. Further, the President read out the list of the nominees with their profiles coming at the interlude of each proposed name. This is indeed a modern culture which, pursuant to their election manifesto,echoes the spirit of a digital revolution in Kenya. With State House Kenya having its on twitter handle (@StateHouseKenya) and Facebook link which keeps the people abreast with matters of the State, the Curriculum Vitae of the nominees were also quickly uploaded in the document sharing website Scribd. This is indeed a digital revolution on the part of the Jubilee team. 

Picture courtesy of Daily Nation

The President and his Deputy were also in matching white shirts and red ties. By them wearing shirts without the coats/jackets, it signifies their readiness and commitment to the arduous work ahead. Similar to President Obama's roll-up of his shirt's sleeves, the two decided to abandon their coats and show they are prepared for the task at hand. It is also noteworthy that the two matching in their dressing. This again shows their commitment to working together despite the incessant giggles and parleys of them not agreeing on the cabinet list. 

The President also took questions from the media, a practice not so common with previous administrations. To show unity again, Uhuru Kenyatta asked his Deputy William Ruto to take the other questions and clarify on a number of issues. That is called working in tandem and the relationship is becoming telepathic. William Ruto backed his boss when responding to the questions and further clarified on the East African Community docket. In another symbolic act, the President invited the journalists for a cup of tea inside State House. Though the welcome gesture was just out of courteousness, it shows the friendly side of the two. People will say the two are in the honeymoon phase of their leadership, but as the Swahili saying goes, "siku njema huonekana asubuhi."