WASHINGTON, Jan. 23 (UPI) -- The UPI Think Tank Wrap-Up is a daily digest covering brief opinion pieces, reactions to recent news events, and position statements released by various think tanks.
Cato Institute
WASHINGTON -- Trade, Not Aid, Is The Key To Afghanistan's Future, Says Cato Analyst
By the Cato Institute
A two-day conference on rebuilding Afghanistan has yielded $4.5 billion in international aid pledges for interim Afghan leader Hamid Karzai. In Tokyo, the United States pledged $296 million for this year, while the European Union, the largest donor, offered $500 million. Cato Institute foreign policy analyst Gary Dempsey had the following comments:
"The reconstruction aid package adopted in Tokyo won't achieve the self-sustaining progress the international community hopes for. The real long-term answer to Afghanistan's development lies with free trade and the internal pro-market reforms that trade fosters. The Bush administration should therefore shift the world's focus away from aid to trade, and pledge to negotiate a sweeping free-trade agreement with Afghanistan's newly formed government once the Senate passes trade promotion authority. That would be a forceful sign that the United States is serious about helping Afghanistan, and not turning it into a perpetual aid recipient.
"Right now the United States imposes its highest trade barriers on exports that are most important to poor countries, such as clothing, footwear and textiles. Studies show that developing countries would capture around 75 percent of the expected economic benefits from liberalizing trade in the light-manufacturing sector.
"In other words, Washington could deliver far more important and long-lasting aid to poor countries like Afghanistan by allowing them to sell their products duty-free in the U.S. market."
WASHINGTON -- Netscape Lawsuit, Not Microsoft, Is Anticompetitive
By the Cato Institute
Netscape Communications on Tuesday filed suit against Microsoft Corp. for antitrust violations, arguing that the decline of Netscape, now an AOL Time Warner subsidiary, was a direct result of Microsoft's illegal bundling of its Internet Explorer browser with the popular Windows operating system. Robert A. Levy, senior fellow in constitutional studies at the Cato Institute, had the following comments on the issue:
"In the old, dog-eat-dog days, corporations battled for market share by introducing new goods and services, advertising, lowering prices, improving quality, adding features, and offering superior service. Today's corporate giants, like Netscape -- an Internet start-up supposedly mangled by Microsoft, then acquired by AOL for a mere $10 billion -- can avoid the nitty-gritty of competition by sucking up to politicians and, if that doesn't work, filing an antitrust suit to punish any rival with the temerity to develop a better product.
"That is exactly what's unfolding in federal court as AOL Time Warner seeks treble damages for its Netscape subsidiary, which lost the browser wars to Microsoft. As usual, consumers will ultimately pay the freight. They want an integrated operating system. It provides more bang for the buck; it's easier to operate, document and debug; it's less expensive to market and distribute; and it provides a uniform standard for software developers.
"When Netscape had a virtual monopoly in the browser market, Microsoft countered with a three-part strategy. It expanded research and development, priced its browser at zero, and bundled the browser with Windows. What Microsoft didn't do was exclude Netscape, which still controlled 90 percent of the market long after Microsoft began selling its operating system and browser as a package.
"The end result: consumers benefited from zero price, competition thrived, and Netscape worked fine with Windows. Not until trade magazines, then consumers, discovered that newer versions of Microsoft's browser were superior to Netscape's did Microsoft's market share explode. A better product, not tying arrangements, won the battle for consumer acceptance.
"Microsoft's product design decisions, like Netscape's, are better left to software executives than to bureaucrats and judges. Especially in the aftermath of Sept. 11, it's time for the nation's top high-tech companies to get back to the marketplace and out of the courtroom."
WASHINGTON -- Government Spending Upsurge Started Before 9/11, New CBO Numbers Show: Projected Federal Spending Will Rise 31 Percent by FY 2004
By the Cato Institute
New budget projections released Tuesday by the Congressional Budget Office show that the discretionary spending baseline has taken another large upward jump. Discretionary spending includes defense and non-defense spending that is annually appropriated.
Examining CBO's past projections for discretionary spending for fiscal years 2003 to 2007, Cato's director of fiscal policy, Chris Edwards, found an alarming trend of upward revisions.
"In January 1999, CBO projected that if spending rose each year by the inflation rate, then FY 2003 outlays would be $583 billion. The CBO now says FY 2003 spending will be $764 billion, a 31 percent upward revision in just 3 years. Since CBO's baseline already factors in inflation, these increases reflect a large expansion of real resources poured into federal spending.
"The cumulative effect of the rising baseline has been huge.If Congress had been able to restrain FY 2003-2007 spending to levels projected in 1999, it would now have $950 billion more available to cut taxes during the next 5 years. That would be more than enough to accelerate to 2002 all future phased-in tax cuts under the Bush tax plan and pay down large amounts of federal debt.
"While Congress did show some spending restraint in the mid-1990s, the new baseline numbers show that discretionary spending growth will average at least 6.6 percent annually between FY 1998 and 2003. With spending in entitlement programs, including Social Security and Medicare, expected to explode in future years, taxpayers simply cannot afford such profligacy in discretionary spending."
Institute for Policy Studies
(IPS is the only multi-issue progressive think tank in Washington, D.C. IPS offers resources for progressive social change locally, nationally, and globally. In contrast to other think tanks that work to advance unlimited wealth and unregulated markets, IPS strives to create a more responsible society.)
WASHINGTON -- Military Leaders, Diplomats, Academics Urge President Bush Not To Extend Military Action To Iraq
By the Institute for Policy Studies
On Tuesday, a coalition of 18 high-ranking former military leaders, intelligence analysts and diplomats, academics, heads of think tanks, and former U.N. weapons and food inspectors urged President Bush to resist military action against Iraq and instead focus on capturing the terrorists responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks.
In a letter sent to President Bush on Tuesday, the signers stressed that military intervention against Iraq would hinder efforts to reduce terrorism by "splintering the global coalition so vital to identifying and bringing to justice terrorists around the world, including those remaining of the al Qaida network." This letter represents a nonpartisan effort to counter the growing lobby both inside and outside the government for extending the war on terrorism to Iraq.
"The U.S. has assembled an international coalition that supports U.S. military action designed to bring to justice those who perpetrated the attacks of Sept. 11. Any effort by the U.S. to include Iraq as a target without evidence directly linking Iraq to the terrorist attacks would be counterproductive, and will likely cause the coalition to fracture," said former U.N. Iraq weapons inspector Scott Ritter, one of the letter's signers.
Signatories includes retired military officials Navy Adm. Eugene Carroll and Air Force Maj. Gen. Jack Kidd; William Christison, former National Intelligence Officer of the Central Intelligence Agency; former Chief of Mission to Iraq Ed Peck; former Ambassador to Saudi Arabia James Akins; former Senator George McGovern; Michael Klare, Professor at Hampshire College and Director of the Five College Program in Peace & World Security; and John Cavanagh, Director of the Institute for Policy Studies, among others.
The signers also warned President Bush that "a new war would increase instability inside Iraq," further harm Iraqi civilians, and cause an "increase in anti-American sentiments in the Middle East and in Muslim countries that may fuel the appeal of terrorist organizations."
According to Ambassador Edward Peck, "If we are truly interested in and concerned over the vital issues of peace and stability in the Middle East, attacking Iraq is precisely what we should not do." Peck is also former White House Deputy Director of the Cabinet Task Force on Terrorism.
The Institute for Policy Studies coordinated the assembly of the letter, and released it to the White House.
The text of the letter follows:
The Honorable George W. Bush
President of the United States
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
We write you today as Americans holding a wide range of political views, but who are united on one simple message: We urge you not to extend U.S. military action to Iraq. We urge you to focus instead on capturing the terrorists responsible for the terrible events of September 11, bringing them to justice, unraveling their cells, and helping to change the conditions that breed terror.
We acknowledge the criminal, despicable actions of Saddam Hussein in his country. Nevertheless, there is no conclusive evidence linking Iraq to the events of September 11th or to al-Qaeda, and we believe that military action against Iraq is likely to hurt our shared objective of reducing terrorism. In such an action the U.S. would stand virtually alone, splintering the global coalition so vital to identifying and bringing to justice terrorists around the world, including those remaining of the al-Qaeda network. Our friends and allies across Europe, Russia and the Arab world continue to implore us not to extend the war to Iraq.
A new military campaign, however careful, would inevitably cause suffering among Iraqi civilians. One result would be an increase in anti-American sentiments in the Middle East and in Muslim countries that may fuel the appeal of terrorist organizations. Further, we are concerned that a new war would increase instability inside Iraq, without leading to a more democratic outcome. Unlike the situation in Afghanistan, as you are aware from the testimony of former CentCom Commander General Anthony Zinni, there is no viable resistance movement in Iraq.
We also acknowledge that weapons of mass destruction are a critical long-run issue in Iraq and in the region, and we will need the help of Western Europe, Russia, and China in containing them. Here again, a rush to war would be a disaster.
And finally, Mr. President, we are concerned that any new military strikes would further erode any possibility of access for the vitally needed UN arms inspectors in Iraq.
We believe that former South African President and Nobel laureate Nelson Mandela was right when he said that a new military campaign against Iraq would be "a disaster." We urgently hope you will act to prevent just such an outcome.
Thank you.
Ambassador James Akins, former Ambassador to Saudi Arabia; Admiral Eugene Carroll, U.S. Navy (ret.); John Cavanagh, Director, Institute for Policy Studies; Kathleen Christison, former Political Analyst on the Middle East, Central Intelligence Agency;
William Christison, former National Intelligence Officer and principle advisor to the Director on specialized areas, Central Intelligence Agency; Ben Cohen, Ben and Jerry's Homemade, Ltd.; Melvin Goodman, former Division Chief, Soviet/Third World Division, Central Intelligence Agency and currently Professor of International Security, National War College; Major General Jack Kidd, U.S. Air Force (ret.); Dr. Michael Klare, Professor, Hampshire College, and Director of the Five College Program in Peace and World Security; Charles William Maynes, President, Eurasia Foundation
George McGovern, former U.S. Senator; Ambassador Richard Parker, former Ambassador to Algeria, Lebanon, Morocco and Mexico; Ambassador Edward Peck, former Chief of Mission to Iraq and former White House Deputy Director of the Cabinet Task Force on Terrorism; Peter Pellet, former team leader of four U.N. Food and Nutrition Missions to Iraq; Scott Ritter, former Chief, Concealment Investigations Unit, U.N. Special Commission on Iraq; Admiral Jack Shanahan, U.S. Navy (ret.); Cora Weiss, President, Hague Appeal for Peace;Vice Admiral Ralph Weymouth, U.S. Navy (ret.)
Institute for Public Accuracy
( The IPA is a nationwide consortium of policy researchers that seeks to broaden public discourse by gaining media access for experts whose perspectives are often overshadowed by major think tanks and other influential institutions.)
WASHINGTON -- From Manhattan to Brazil: Major Economic Summits
By the Institute for Public Accuracy
On Jan. 31, the annual World Economic Forum -- a gathering of the "1,000 most powerful corporations in the world" which has been held in Davos, Switzerland, for three decades -- will get underway in New York City. Meanwhile, the World Social Forum, bringing together tens of thousands of activists from human rights, environmental, labor and other organizations, will convene in Porto Alegre, Brazil.
IPA analysts commented on both summits.
* Emily Labarbara-Twarog, organizer with Chicago Jobs with Justice.
"Trends in world economic policies have an impact not just in the global South, but the driving down of labor standards there is also driving down labor standards in the United States. We work not just to maintain labor standards in the U.S., but also to bring up standards globally. In Porto Alegre, we want to build sustainable, solid relationships with labor rights groups around the world."
* Martin Khor, director of the Third World Network, a group of non-governmental organizations that deal with economic and environmental issues.
"The global financial system is in crisis --Argentina is the latest sign of this. Poor people are the main victims. The world trading system is very unequal and, despite the image of a good outcome at the Doha conference of the World Trade Organization, it is a disastrous situation for poor countries. This means we are in for a lot of trouble as Third World societies disintegrate under the weight of these (trade and financial) systems."
* Erpan Faryadi, director of the Consortium for Agrarian Reform.
"Indonesia is still an agrarian country, so land reform is the best tool to solve the social conflicts in Indonesia."
* Alejandro Bendana, director of the Center for International Studies based in Managua, Nicaragua and a member of the international coordinating committee of Jubilee South.
"The critical issue now is Argentina. A global movement is beginning to take place as that country is being pressured by the U.S. and the International Monetary Fund. Argentina and certainly its people should not be made to pay its enormous foreign debt.... You could have not only people, but also governments, contesting a global system that concentrates extreme wealth and power on one hand and mass misery and massive subjugation on the other. The World Social Forum is a quest not only for protest, but to bring forward proposals; for example, an international tribunal on illegitimate debt will be held.
East-West Center
(The East-West Center is an education and research organization established to strengthen understanding and relations between the United States and the countries of the Asia Pacific region. The center carries out its mission through programs of cooperative study, training and research. The center is supported by the U.S. government and the governments of nine Asia Pacific nations.)
HONOLULU -- Pacific Islands: Potential 'Back Door' For Terrorists
By the East-West Center
Ease in obtaining passports, plus loosely regulated offshore banking and poorly patrolled shorelines, make remote Pacific island nations a potential "back door" from which future terrorist attacks could be organized or launched, said an East-West Center researcher.
As the United States looks at countries beyond Afghanistan where al Qaida could operate, it should not overlook the 14 island nations that span nearly a third of the globe, said Gerard Finin, a Pacific islands specialist.
The recent Israeli commando seizure of a gunrunning ship sailing under the Kingdom of Tonga's flag, and allegedly taking arms to Palestinian militants, "exemplifies how Pacific island nations are today very much linked to transnational flows and contemporary global events," Finin said.
He noted the decline in U.S. development assistance, diplomacy and people-to-people programs in the region since the Cold War ended, lessening U.S. engagement in the islands. Terrorists could potentially seize upon the area because of this lack of American attention to what some in Washington have over the past decade seen as a region lacking strategic significance.
With shrinking economic aid, one way several Pacific island nations have attempted to raise revenues is by selling passports on demand, Finin said. Moreover, citizens from nations without U.S. consulates might obtain visas without personal interviews with American officials, relying only on passports for documentation.
Offshore banking has also become lucrative in parts of the region. Reports suggest Nauru has some 450 shell banking companies, of which one-third are believed to be of Middle East origin. An estimated $400 million has passed through these accounts annually.
Pacific island governments have indicated they are more than willing to join the fight against terrorism. Finin said this is an opportune time to strengthen U.S. ties to the region.
