Kerry Comments

CNN reports:

Earlier Monday, Kerry said that al-Assad "could turn over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week."

But speaking at a news conference with British Foreign Secretary William Hague, Kerry described that as an impossible scenario.

"He isn't about to do it and it can't be done obviously," Kerry said.

The State Department later sought to clarify Kerry's comment as a "rhetorical argument," and a U.S. official called the secretary of state's remarks a "major goof."

"His point was that this brutal dictator with a history of playing fast and loose with the facts cannot be trusted to turn over chemical weapons, otherwise he would have done so long ago," State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said. "That's why the world faces this moment."

At The Atlantic, James Fallows writes that another Kerry goof crystallizes some larger impression:

That is of course the significance of today's unfortunate stumble by Secretary of State John Kerry, who said in London that any strike in Syria would be "unbelievably small."

We will be able to hold Bashar al-Assad accountable without engaging in troops on the ground or any other prolonged kind of effort in a very limited, very targeted, short-term effort that degrades his capacity to deliver chemical weapons without assuming responsibility for Syria's civil war. That is exactly what we are talking about doing -- unbelievably small, limited kind of effort.

You know what he meant. He was advancing the argument for a contained, "surgical," pinpoint, etc., effort that would be big enough to let Assad and future dictators know the cost of using chemical weapons, yet not so broad as to entrap the United States in the ongoing (horrific) civil war. If the two words that had come to his mind in real time had been "unbelievably precise" rather than "unbelievably small," no one would have blinked.

But this is the undertaking that the same Secretary Kerry just finished telling us was our moment's moral crossroads, our Munich. And we will rise to that challenge with a response that is "unbelievably small."

Pictures and Crises

CBS reports that Secretary of State John Kerry -- contrary to earlier denials -- has been boating during the  Egypt crisis:

 

On Twitter, the president seemed to be making fun of the controversy with a 2010 photo of himself:

The president and Kerry are both making serious PR mistakes.  If the Egypt crisis turns into civil war -- and particularly if Americans come into harm's way -- these images will make them look foolish and detached, much  this photo did to President Bush during  Hurricane Katrina:

International Views of US Leadership

In our chapter on national security and foreign policy, we examine international views of the United States.  Gallup reports some new data:

The image of U.S. leadership worldwide was weaker during President Barack Obama's fourth year in office than at any point during his first administration. Median approval of U.S. leadership across 130 countries stood at 41% in 2012, down measurably from 49% approval in Obama's first year. Despite these poorer scores, approval ratings for the most part remain stronger than they were at the end of the last Bush administration.

This shift suggests that the president and the new secretary of state may not find global audiences as receptive to the U.S. agenda as they have in the past. In fact, they may even find even once-warm audiences increasingly critical. The image of U.S. leadership continued to be the strongest worldwide in Africa in 2012, bolstered by strong majority approval in sub-Saharan Africa. However, this strong support in the subcontinent, which first showed signs of weakening in 2011, waned more in 2012.

U.S. leadership remains far less popular in North Africa, except in Libya, where U.S. support for the revolution may have generated an almost unprecedented level of goodwill toward America. A majority of Libyans (54%) surveyed before the attack in Benghazi approved of U.S. leadership in 2012. In Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Egypt, no more than one-third approved and ratings remained mostly flat. Algerian approval of U.S. leadership is down slightly since 2011, dropping from 37% to 30%.

Majority, Minority, Markey

Representative Edward Markey (D-MA) won his first House election in 1976. Of returning members of his party, only John Dingell (MI), John Conyers (MI), Charles Rangel (NY), George Miller (CA) and Henry Waxman (CA) have served longer.  But now that President Obama has nominated Senator John Kerry (D-MA) to be secretary of state, Markey will run in a special election to succeed him.  In other words, he wants to give up being the sixth most senior House Democrat in order to become the least-senior Senate Democrat.

There are two reasons why this decision makes sense.

First is the prestige difference between the two chambers.  House members often run for the Senate, but contemporary senators never voluntarily give up their seats to run for the House.

Second is the difference between majority and minority status.  As a member of the minority party in the majoritarian House, Markey faces daily frustration.  One may gather that he does not expect his party to regain the majority anytime soon.  In the Senate, his party is in the majority.  If it can avoid serious losses in the 2014 midterm, it will probably retain the majority for quite a while.

Reaction Shots

Eight years ago, the Democratic National Committee made an ad featuring reaction shots of President George H.W. Bush in his first debate with John Kerry:



The Republican National Committee has now returned the favor:

f

Disability Treaty

Our chapter on national security and foreign policy discusses the making of treaties. The Hill reports:

Sens. Dick Lugar (R-Ind.), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) joined the 10 Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to pass the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which has the support of advocacy groups across the country. Proponents say it would merely require the rest of the world to catch up to the United States' high standards created by the Americans With Disabilities Act while protecting Americans with disabilities abroad, but opponents — including a number of home-schooling groups — have raised concerns about international standards being imposed on America.

The treaty, said panel Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.), “raises the standard to our level without requiring us to go further.”

Abortion was the only issue to divide lawmakers along partisan lines.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) proposed language saying the treaty “does not create any abortion rights.” All nine Republicans on the panel voted for it.

But Democrats said that would have allowed treaty signers to discriminate against people with disabilities — refusing to provide the full range of family planning services under domestic law — in violation of the spirit of the treaty. Instead, Kerry offered an amendment saying the treaty does not address “the provision of any particular health program or procedure,” meaning the treaty doesn't create any new abortion rights beyond the duty not to discriminate against people with disabilities.

The anti-abortion rights Susan B. Anthony List however said abortion itself is often a form of discrimination against people with disabilities.

"Ironically, when special needs children are identified in the womb, they often become a prime target for abortion," SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement. "Over 90% of children diagnosed with Down syndrome in utero have their lives abruptly ended. Abortion in no way promotes the rights and dignity of people with disabilities."

Politics and Shark Week

Just about everything has a connection to politics -- even Shark Week. At the end of 2010, Congress passed H.R. 81, the International Fisheries Agreement Clarification Act. Title I of the bill was The Shark Conservation Act of 2010:

Title I - Shark Conservation Act of 2010

Shark Conservation Act of 2010 -

Section 102 -

Amends the High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium Protection Act to direct the Secretary of Commerce to urge international fishery management organizations to which the United States is a member to adopt shark conservation measures, including measures to prohibit removal any of the fins of a shark (including the tail) and discarding the shark carcass at sea. Requires the Secretary to seek to enter into international shark conservation agreements, including measures prohibiting fin removal and carcass disposal, that are comparable to those of the United States, taking into account different conditions. Directs the Secretary to include shark conservation measures when defining fishing activities that violate international fishery conservation and management agreements. Requires the Secretary to list a nation in the biennial report on international compliance if the nation's fishing vessels are or have been engaged in fishing activities that target or incidentally catch sharks in waters beyond their jurisdiction, and such nation has not adopted a regulatory program providing for shark conservation, including the fin removal and carcass disposal prohibitions. Requires such listing within one year after the enactment of this Act.

Section 103 -

Amends the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to revise provisions prohibiting the removal of shark fins to make it a prohibited act to: (1) remove any shark fin (including the tail) at sea; (2) have a fin aboard a fishing vessel unless the fin is naturally attached to the carcass; (3) transfer a fin from one vessel to another or receive a fin unless it is naturally attached; or (4) land a fin that is not naturally attached to a carcass or land a carcass without fins naturally attached. Revises the current rebuttable presumption provision concerning shark fins on fishing vessels to create a rebuttable presumption that, if any shark fin (including the tail) is aboard a non-fishing vessel without being naturally attached, the fin was transferred from a fishing vessel in violation.

The Shark Conservation Act was a project of Senator John Kerry, who teamed with the Discovery Channel to drum up support.

Kerry's 2004 rival for the presidency, George W. Bush, also got into the shark conservation business. At The New York Times, Andrew C. Revkin interviews Juliet Eilperin, author of Demon Fish.

Q. I was fascinated at first, but then not surprised, to read the details of how President George W. Bush, thanks to Jean-Michel Cousteau, produced what might be one of the biggest victories for sharks ever. How would you cast the importance of his decision on the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands National Monument?

A. I think that decision was pivotal, in terms of setting a precedent that countries need to protect the ecologically rich, vast swaths of the sea from exploitation. Bush not only followed this up by creating large marine reserves in the Marianas Trench and the Line Islands, but other world leaders have followed suit in Britain’s Chagos Islands and Chile’s Sala y Gomez preserve. So his move has reverberated across the globe.