Does Taiwan Rhyme with Ukraine?

Review by Bill Doughty––

In “War and Peace in the Taiwan Strait” (Columbia University Press, 2022), Scott L. Kastner examines the likelihood of conflict in Asia. However, readers may find themselves thinking about the actual war in Europe. More about that in a moment…

Kastner’s well-researched book considers the possibility that the People’s Republic of China will take military action –– in the form of a military blockade or outright invasion –– against the democratic citizens of Taiwan (a country which has has been, in reality, an independent nation since 1949).

Kastner presents a brief history of the formation of Republic of China after the civil war of 1949, including Taiwan's flirtation with autocracy and martial law and eventual full embrace of democracy. Then he gets to the heart of his thesis: that there is a balance between sovereignty and reunification, with “status quo” as the fulcrum keeping peace, and with ambiguous options clouding an uncertain future.

The power balance in the region, he notes, has changed in recent years as China’s economy and military have grown –– along with nationalism. “Although the balance of power has clearly shifted in Beijing’s favor, attempting to seize and occupy Taiwan would still represent a highly risky and costly undertaking that might fail spectacularly.”

A key to preventing war, many analysts believe, is deterrence, predicated on the strength of the economy and military of the United States, which is committed to maintaining peace and cooperation on the global commons.

U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley said recently, “As long as we remain number one, then we will deter the war that people worry about, a great power war between China and the United States.”

Kastner writes:

“The U.S. Navy has announced numerous transits through the Taiwan Strait over the past few years, including several by guided missile destroyers; these high-profile transits could also indicate some strengthening of U.S.-Taiwan security ties. The frequency of transits has varied considerably over time, however, and long-term trends (at least over the past decade and a half) are ambiguous. Transits occurred on average 5.5. times per year from 2007 to 2010, increased to nearly 10 per year from 2011 to 2016 on average, and dropped to 4 per year from 2017 to 2018, before increasing sharply in 2019 and 2020. On the other hand, the recent uptick in transits is notable, and it is worth highlighting as well that U.S. officials have begun to announce these transits on a regular basis –– whereas in the past they typically went unannounced.”

Kastner also examines the commitment by the U.S. Congress and American presidents to supporting Taiwan's security. (This book was apparently published just before former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s notable visit to Taipei last year.)

Kastner notes, “U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken warned in April 2021 that it would be ‘a serious mistake for anyone to try to change the existing status quo by force.’”

Still, XI and Communist China threatens invasion by force if the One-China policy is not realized. While Kastner contends “war is not inevitable,” he has an ominous observation:

“Were armed conflict to occur in the Taiwan Strait, at its root would be an intractable sovereignty dispute that has persisted since the end of the Chinese Civil War. In its current manifestation, the dispute centers on Taiwan’s status: whether Taiwan should be considered part of China now, and whether it should be formally unified with mainland China in the future. The PRC views itself as the sole legal government of China, Taiwan as part of China in principle, and formal unification as an important national goal. While Beijing has embraced a policy of ‘peaceful unification,’ it has refused to renounce the use of force and has explicitly threatened to go to war if Taiwan were to formally declare its independence from China, be occupied by foreign forces, or delay –– indefinitely –– negotiations over formal unification. In Taiwan, even though individuals have widely divergent views on cross-Strait policy, and even though the two major parties differ considerably in their approach to China, there nevertheless exists wide agreement that Taiwan (or the ROC) is a sovereign state, and there is very little support for near-term unification with the PRC.”

Kastner concludes ominously, “Absent a dramatic change in circumstances, then, there is little prospect for the two sides peacefully resolving the underlying dispute.”

Does Taiwan rhyme with Hong Kong?

The citizens of Taiwan see what is unfolding in Hong Kong –– as China cracks down on democracy and independence there. They want no part of the loss of freedom they see there and in Tibet, another formerly autonomous region, as a result of China's political system, management, and control.

In Hong Kong, new PRC laws allow interference in the judicial system and schools. Independent newspapers and voices are shut down. Security officers patrol the streets. "The undercutting of autonomy in Hong Kong sends an especially troubling signal to Taiwan given that Beijing also calls its proposed formula for Taiwan "one China, two systems."

Does Taiwan rhyme with Korea?

In North Korea, “Supreme Leader” Kim Jong-un threatens ethnically identical South Koreans. Kastner compares the U.S. promise to support Taiwan with the “iron-clad” commitment to defend the Republic of Korea if attacked by autocratic Communist North Korea, as happened in 1950.

[Recently, the world learned that North Korea, which is still supported by China, is providing weapons to Russia’s Wagner Group in support of Putin’s war of terrorism in Ukraine.]

Does Taiwan rhyme with Ukraine?

In Europe, Putin kills and terrorizes the people of Ukraine despite their same ethnicity.

Just as the PRC sees Taiwan as critical to its expansion throughout Asia, Putin sees Ukraine as a strategic bulwark against the West and his revanchist goals in Eastern Europe.

Meanwhile, the Communist Party observes Ukraine and sees how Putin’s war continues to backfire: instead of an easy takeover, he has lost tens of thousands of soldiers; instead of weakening NATO and the West, he has strengthened the free world’s resolve; and instead of reunification, he is causing deep rifts within his own country.

One year ago, the world was still hopeful that Putin’s threats, maneuvers, and calls for “unification” would not lead to war despite his previous invasions of Georgia and Crimea. Today, we see Russia’s campaign of terrorism and violence continue as the war nears its one year anniversary.

China must be as surprised as Putin in seeing Ukraine's resolve and the free world’s coalition led by President Biden with the support of the U.S. Congress. So far.

Just this week, the Biden administration authorized sending 30 Abrams tanks to Ukraine; Germany announced it is sending dozens of Leopard 2 tanks.

Does Taiwan rhyme with Finland?

Seeing the parallels between Taiwan and Ukraine becomes clearer through the lens of the history of the Soviet Union, including what happened in the Winter War between the USSR and Finland in 1939 (ten years before Chinese nationalists fled to Taiwan). The Soviets invaded ethnically similar Finland, at the same time that Germany did the same to its neighbors in Central Europe.

Citing the conclusions of Stanford’s James D. Fearon, Kastner writes about the dangers of accommodation and appeasement and why a country may choose to “roll the dice” and accept war over loss of territory or independence.

“Fearon suggests the Winter War between the Soviet Union and Finland can be explained in part by this dynamic, where Finland preferred to fight rather than yield to Soviet demands to cede some small islands in the Gulf of Finland that Moscow viewed as strategically important: here, Helsinki feared that ceding the islands would give the USSR more leverage to demand further concessions in the future, and Stalin presumably couldn’t be trusted to honor a promise not to do so. Leaders in Taiwan will likewise be reluctant to accommodate the PRC by yielding ground on the island’s sovereign status, unless they can be confident that Beijing could be trusted to honor commitments not to take advantage of the increased bargaining power such accommodation would provide. Unfortunately, there are a number of reasons to doubt the credibility of PRC promises in this regard…”

As for the possibility of actual war between China and Taiwan, Kastner admits pessimism but says conflict is not inevitable. He notes the precariousness of Taiwan’s position: unable to declare total independence as a sovereign nation but also unable to appease China, which would risk losing freedom and democracy for its people.

USS Antietam (CG-54) and USS Chancellorsville (CG-62) transit the Taiwan Strait in August 2022. (MC2 Justin Stack)

Prevention of conflict, Kastner says, depends on good communication and information, as well as continued credible commitment to deterrence in the name of peace [to echo Gen. Milley].

“If the United States were to abandon Taiwan,” Kastner writes, “the risk of cross-strait war would likely increase.” There may be no evidence that Mark Twain ever said, “History never repeats itself, but it does often rhyme.” But in an unpublished manuscript, “Mark Twain in Eruption,” he did write that “It is not worthwhile to try to keep history from repeating itself, for man’s character will always make the preventing of the repetitions impossible.”

In “War and Peace in the Taiwan Strait” Kastner includes a huge section of historical and analytical notes and another lengthy set of references, including Shelley Rigger, Michael Beckley, Jessica Chen Weiss, Qiang Xin, Robert Sutter, Alan Romberg, Russell Hsiao, Richard C. Bush, Thomas J. Christensen, T. Y. Wang, and James D. Fearon, among dozens of other experts.

Unfortunately, there is a dearth of analysis in this book of the role and importance of Japan, not to mention other nations such as the Australia, New Zealand, and the Republic of the Philippines and as part of the strategic balance in the region. Kastner admits early in his introduction that his work is an overall analysis, not an evaluation of military strategy, weapons systems, or potential PRC planning. Still, for Navy readers this book presents a worthwhile examination of ambiguity and precariousness in the Taiwan Strait.

Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley speak at the eighth Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting at Ramstein Air Base, Germany, Jan. 20, 2023. The meeting brought together representatives from more than 50 nations and organizations to determine the best way to get the military capabilities that Ukraine needs to repel Russian forces from their sovereign territory. (DoD photo by U.S. Air Force Tech. Sgt. Jack Sanders)

Stavridis on Crucial Crucible of Decision

Review by Bill Doughty––

Admiral James Stavridis (USN, Ret.) offers key lessons for Sailors and Marines in “To Risk It All: Nine Conflicts and the Crucible of Decision” (Penguin Press, 2022). Most of the stories will be familiar to readers of Stavridis or his recommended reading list, but one story –– recent and still painful –– is presented with a personal and unique perspective only Stavridis could achieve.

“The Red Flare” describes the crucible faced by Navy Capt. Brett Crozier, former CO of USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN 71). Crozier was fired for the way he responded to an outbreak of COVID-19 aboard TR in the early months of the pandemic. At that time there were more questions than answers, and self-serving politics delayed a proper national response. (We cover Crozier’s challenge and legacy in several previous Navy Reads posts.)

Stavridis begins The Red Flare by recounting his relationship with Crozier in the final days of Libyan intervention during Operation Odyssey Dawn in 2011 and subsequently as part of the NATO joint task force for Operation Unified Protector when Stavridis became Supreme Allied Commander. Crozier was considered “a talented and quite extraordinary officer.”

Crozier’s job was target selector or “targeteer,” responsible for carefully deciding how to maximize effectiveness while minimizing collateral damage and death to local citizens when planning precision-guided-air-to-ground strikes. Crozier’s decision-making during the Libya conflict was done in a pressure-cooker cauldron of international media and chain-of-command scrutiny, according to Stavridis:

“In the end, Crozier and his team planned and executed 218 air taking orders (ATOs), mammoth action orders that plan out the complex movements of aircraft in combat zones. NATO aircraft flew over 26,500 flights, including 9,700 that attacked ground targets and destroyed over 5,900 military assets, all while deconflicting operations with over 6,700 humanitarian aid flights and ground movements. And they did all this with the lowest level of collateral damage in the history of air operations. It was a stunningly successful military campaign, and Crozier’s part in it was rewarded with two significant medals: one from NATO and one from the United States. I thought then that he’d surely go on to an admiral’s stars, and over the next several years I watched his steady progress toward that goal…”

Then-Adm. James Stavridis tours NHHC, Dec. 7, 2012. (MC2 G. Morrisette)

After commanding the U.S. Seventh Fleet’s flagship, USS Blue Ridge (LCC-19), Crozier took the helm of the mighty TR.* During a WestPac cruise, which included a visit to Vietnam, a few members of the crew contracted COVID, and as can be expected on any ship, it spread fast. Crozier tried to get authorization to offload sick and infected Sailors while maintaining enough crew to remain combat-ready.

Frustrated by a lack of action and assistance from higher-ups, he sent a “red flare” message for help. The trouble was, in error, he sent the message as an unclassified email, and he did not include a key leader in his chain of command.

Crozier wrote, “We are not at war. Sailors do not need to die. If we do not act now, we are failing to properly take care of our most trusted asset –– our Sailors!”

The email found its way to the media, and the crisis aboard TR became a national news story and an embarrassment to an administration that failed to take the pandemic seriously at the time.

Stavridis evaluates Crozier’s decision-making and takes the readers to the moment that the Skipper held his finger over the “send” button before he launched the thoroughly reasoned and carefully worded email that would end his career and lead to a dissing from President Trump, who called him “Hemingway.”

Stavridis looks at the context of the events, considers the stellar record of Crozier, and makes a case for understanding the “important point” that communication is key –– and never more complicated than in the internet era.

“It is also important to remember that so often the hard choice you make is something you have to live with from that moment forward. Had Crozier been so focused on his Navy career instead of the health of his crew, he likely would have continued to go along with the shifting guidance without raising any additional complications or hesitations. Had he done that, I suspect he would have never been fired by the acting secretary of the Navy, never been investigated for the events that led up tot he outbreak, and likely would have continued with his Navy career and pinned on admiral’s stars as I’d envisioned back in 2011.”

Today, we can see clear examples of others who focus first on perpetuating their positions of power. They put their own interests ahead of country, Constitution, or the people they represent.

The sad fact is that Crozier was removed from command and, despite efforts by some senior naval officers to reinstate him in command, he was ultimately relieved for cause.

“In my view, the Navy had it right by recommending his reinstatement, and I believe some level of political pressure was exerted from the White House,” Stavridis observes.

Then-Capt. Brett E. Crozier, then-commanding officer of the U.S. 7th Fleet flagship USS Blue Ridge (LCC 19), welcomes members of the Japan Self-Defense Force Joint Staff College for a tour aboard the ship, Sept. 18, 2018. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Adam K. Thomas/Released)

“I believe this case study will be examined by generations of naval officers going forward, and with good reason. It perfectly outlines for the Navy the principles of caring for the crew and the difficulty of balancing with getting the mission done.”

“People versus mission is an age-old dilemma for sea captains,” Stavridis writes.

His book explores weighty decisions made by Capt. John Paul Jones, Lt. Stephen Decatur, Rear Adm. David Farragut, Commodore George Dewey, Cook Third Class Doris “Dorie” Miller, Adm. William “Bull” Halsey, Lt. Cdr. Lloyd M. Bucher, Rear Adm. Michelle Howard, and Capt. Crozier. There’s a bonus story right at the outset, too; Stavridis’s introduction leads with the story of Cdr. Ernest Evans, CO of the USS Johnston (DD-557), and his heroism in the Battle off Samar, 78 years ago on October 25, 1944.

Each story methodically evaluates the circumstances, personnel, and ramifications of decisions made in moments of often extreme stress, with lives on the line, and when there appears to be no perfect response.

Stavridis writes with his usual panache and passion. His book is accessible to any deckplate Sailor or rifleman Marine, who will be inspired by the courage and grit of Dorie Miller at Pearl Harbor. This book is also written for leaders of leaders –– military or civilian –– who want to understand the decision-making process, even when there is “no way out,” as was the case with Lloyd M. Bucher, skipper of USS Pueblo (AGER-2) after his ship was seized by North Korea on January 23, 1968 at the height of the Vietnam War.

The final chapter “To Risk It All” deploys practical advice for leaders who face hard decisions in their life’s voyage. Personally, I love Stavridis’s mention of a personal favorite book I read in high school, Mario Puzo’s “The Godfather,” which Stavridis calls “one of the greatest books ever written about leadership and decision-making…”

Thank you, Admiral, for another great collection of terrific stories, unexpected book suggestions, and indispensable insights, especially your take on a hero for Sailors, whose sacrifice will be even more understood and appreciated in years to come –– Capt. Brett Crozier.

*Top photo: Capt. Brett Crozier, commanding officer of the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN 71), and Capt. Carlos Sardiello cut a cake in the ship’s hangar bay during a change of command ceremony reception. Crozier relieved Sardiello to become the 16th commanding officer of TR. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Olympia O. McCoy)

Russia Scars ‘The Border’

Review by Bill Doughty––

The sunflower is the national flower of Ukraine. It has become a symbol of resistance after a Ukrainian woman confronted a Russian soldier and offered him seeds. She told him to put the seeds in his pocket so sunflowers would grow when he died on Ukraine’s soil. She shouted at him, “You’re occupants, you’re fascists. Take these seeds and put them in your pockets so at least sunflowers will grow when you all lie down here … You are occupiers. You are enemies.”

The sunflower seeds incident is just one of the stories of heroic resistance and resilience in Ukraine inspiring the world for the past two weeks since Putin’s unprovoked invasion.

Erika Fatland

I was interested in learning more about the people and history of Ukraine and was rewarded with a great book by historian and travel writer Erika Fatland, author of “The Border” (translated from the Norwegian by Kari Dickson; Pegasus Books Ltd., 2017).

In Ukraine, Fatland visits Odessa, Gammalsvenskby, Crimea, Mariupol, Kramatorsk, Donetsk, Poltava, Kiev, Lviv, and other areas in her two-year exploration around Russia’s border. After completing her journey –– more than five years ago –– Fatland had a chilling premonition about Putin’s aggression:

“The borders have changed and multiplied time and again over the centuries, most recently in 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea. Borders are not set in stone; the new fibreglass boundary markers are easy to move. The world’s biggest country is low on self-esteem; the economy is failing and the population shrinking. Thus the need to assert itself is even greater.”

“Putin, a former K.G.B. officer, stops at nothing to gain power and influence,” she observes. “Rules are only followed if they are in Russia’s favor.”

Putin justifies his invasion of the sovereign democratic nation of Ukraine because it once was part of Russia. But that view is myopic, at best, considering the long sweep of history. Fatland presents history lessons throughout her narrative, and she provides a helpful annex at the end of her book listing key events in Russian History from 862 to 2015.

With regard to Ukraine, she explains the strong ties with Sweden, the role of religion in the region, and the roles of Rural the Run, Vladimir 1, Grand Prince of Kiev; Genghis Khan and the Mongols; Ivan the Terrible; Napoleon; and various Alexanders, Nicholases, and Vladimirs/Volodymirs. Readers learn about the role of the Tartars, the Turks, the Crimean War, Stalin’s war of famine, and the Putin’s aggression in recent years in Chechnya, Georgia, and Crimea.

Monument to Peter the Great, St. Petersburg, Russia

Two Russian leaders leap out of history for Navy readers: Peter the Great and Catherine the Great, each with maritime interest in Ukraine.

“In 1682, Peter I, better known as Peter the Great, was crowned tsar at the tender age of ten. He was no more than a child and liked to spend his time building and sailing boats. As he grew up, his ambitions also grew, without his losing interest in boats and sailing: Peter the Great’s dream was to make Russia a maritime superpower. He first attempted to conquer the port areas on the Black Sea, but was unsuccessful, so he turned his sights west instead. In 1700, his troops besieged the Swedish-controlled town of Narva, on the current Estonian-Russian border. The clearly inferior Swedish army, led by the then eighteen-year-old Charles XII, were blessed by a snowstorm that blew up behind them and blinded the Russians, who panicked and fled, suffering great losses.”

Catherine II, known as Catherine the Great, continued Peter’s revanchist ambitions:

In 1689, when Peter the Great came to the throne, Russia, despite its size still had only one port, in Archangel. This was frozen over for the greater part of the year and was in the far north. Peter the Great managed to secure Russia’s access to the Baltic Sea and built a new capital, St Petersburg, there. But all attempts to conquer the Black Sea coast failed. It was only at the end of the eighteenth century, under Catherine the Great, that ships flying the Russian flag finally sailed on the Black Sea. Like her predecessor, Catherine the Great was ambitious. Her big dream was to conquer Istanbul, cradle of orthodox Christianity. She was not successful in that, but in the course of two long wars with the Ottoman Empire, she did manage to acquire large parts of what is now South Ukraine, from Odessa in the south to Dnepropetrovsk (now known as Dnipro) in the north, including Crimea.

“After the war with the Turks, which ended in 1774, Crimea was given the status of independent khanate. The freedom was, however, short-lived. In 1783, Catherine the Great announced that the khan in Crimea and his people would henceforth be considered subjects of the Russian tsar.” 

Portrait of Catherine the Great by Alexey Antropov

[By the way, later in his life, with few career options after his military service, American naval hero John Paul Jones entered into the service of Catherine the Great on April 23, 1787.]

Fatland’s book and journey begins in, of all places, North Korea, which shares a tiny border but huge history with Russia. Fatland takes us on a fascinating propaganda tour filled with giant statues of the Kims, choreographed mass dances, school visits, and photo-deleting tour guides. Along the way, she contextualizes places and culture with history.

Navy readers will enjoy her brief discussion of the Russo-Japan War, where Tsar Nicholas II’s Russian fleet was destroyed by the Japanese fleet in the Tsushima Straits, May 27, 1905. President Theodore Roosevelt received the Nobel Peace Prize for helping negotiate peace.

Today, in response to Russia’s atrocities in Ukraine, the free world is imposing  more sanctions against Russia. We can imagine what the future could portend for Putin, as a result of those sanctions, when we consider the effects of Russia’s war on its home front –– in 1905:

“In addition to the many thousands of soldiers who had been killed far away in a war that very few understood, it had also resulted in food shortages in the major ciities. On January 22, several hundred peaceful demonstrators marched on the Winter Palace, demanding reform, better working conditions, and an end to the war with Japan. [Russian police were ordered to open fire on citizens]… More than 130 people were killed in what has gone down in history as ‘Bloody Sunday.’ This, in turn, led to strikes, protests, and revolt throughout the empire. In the autumn, following Russia’s humiliating defeat by the Japanese, all the major cities were brought to a standstill by a general strike … Nicholas II’s inability to accept the fact that times were changing, and that the days of the autocrat were numbered, would cost him dear.”

After Putin the autocrat aggressively annexed the Crimean Peninsula 2014 and fomented unrest in eastern Ukraine, he showed interest in fortifying his relationship with China and North Korea. Just a few months after taking over Crimea, Putin wiped out ninety percent of North Korea’s debt with Russia, according to Fatland. Russia has unrestricted access to North Korea’s mineral resources. In addition to other quid pro quo infrastructure initiatives, Putin arranged for a fifty year lease for the use of Rason, a port in the Sea of Japan.

“The Russian authorities plan to transport goods by rail from Vladivostok, which will then be transferred to ships in Rason, which, unlike Vladivostok, is ice-free all year round. Even though more than two thirds of Russia’s border is maritime, the country has very few deepwater ports. This desire for warm-water ports has been the cause of several wars in Russian history: Peter the Great, Catherine the Great, Nicholas I and Nicholas II all stopped at nothing in their attempts to make the enormous empire a maritime superpower. A leasing agreement with the world’s worst dictator is one of the less dramatic steps Russian leaders have taken to guarantee the country an ice-free port.”

The problem for the Russians in using the port, however lies in the sanctions imposed by the United States, European Union, and many other nations.

Today, President Joe Biden announced the United States was sanctioning oil and natural gas exports from Russia. The U.S. continues to send billions in military aid to Ukraine, and is fortifying NATO allies.

Pallets of ammunition, weapons and other equipment bound for Ukraine wait to be loaded during a foreign military sales mission at Dover Air Force Base, Delaware, Feb. 28, 2022. Since 2014, the United States has committed more than $5.4 billion in total assistance to Ukraine, and reaffirms its steadfast commitment to a secure and prosperous Ukraine and to its sovereignty and territorial integrity. (Tech. Sgt. J.D. Strong II)

There is so much more to discover in this book: meeting the Uyghurs in Xinjiang; taking a group tour to Chernobyl; discovering the connection between explorers Vitus Bering and Captain James Cook and the Arctic; contemplating borders as both real and abstract; and learning more about Putin’s forays into Chechnya, Syria, and Georgia.

The full name of her book is “The Border: A Journey Around Russia Through North Korea, China, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Finland, Norway, and the Northeast Passage.”

Fatland is also author of “Sovietistan,” that, according to Kirkus Review is “A lively, if rarely cheerful, travelogue that fills a yawning knowledge gap for readers concerned with international affairs,” which aptly describes “Border” too. In "The Border," she introduces us to colorful characters, fraught or funny situations, and fascinating landscapes.

Fatland writes with precision and compassion. In Georgia’s Caucasus mountains she visited the Gergeti Monastery, pictured above. She has a poet’s soul, especially when she writes about Georgia:

“Georgia is one of my favorite countries. It is a country that has absolutely everything: some of the highest mountains in Europe in the north, you can swim in the Black Sea in the west and in the east you will find world-class vineyards. Add old, almost untouched architecture (everything from medieval villages where stone towers stand side by side, to some of the oldest churches in the world), a cuisine that can compete with Italian, and people who not only are open and hospitable, but always ready to party and have another drink, and you have Georgia. Were it not for their neighbours, the Georgians would probably be the world’s happiest people”

With her perspective as a citizen of Norway, Fatland has an objective eye, yet she sees the danger of Russian aggression throughout her journeys both on land and through time. “Being Russia’s neighbour has never been easy,” she writes. “Norway is the only one of its fourteen neighbours that has not been invaded or at war with Russia in the past five hundred years.”

“I had travelled through fourteen countries and three breakaway republics,” Fatland writes:

“And none of the countries I had travelled through were without wounds or scars left by their neighbor, Russia. For centuries, the smaller countries and peoples, in particular, had been ground between the millstones of power, torn by wars between the major players, and pulled here and there.

“Nations have not collective memory; nations have no healed wounds. It is the individuals, millions of then, who carry the scars.”

Scars –– deep scars –– are being created right now in Ukraine, where Putin’s Russia is attacking not only military targets, but also schools, hospitals, residential neighborhoods, evacuation centers, and even nuclear power plants, committing war crimes as he spreads disinformation to his own nation.

Analysts say Putin won’t stop in Ukraine unless he is stopped; some say we may already be in World War III –– or WWZ, considering the Russians use of the letter Z as a crooked half-swastika symbol. “The Border” gives us an appreciation of liberty and freedom in the face of authoritarian autocratic governments, and it helps us understand the people impacted by Russian aggression and find the right questions for what's ahead.

“After two years of traveling along Russia’s border –– in real terms, along dusty country roads and across the sea, and in figurative terms, charting its long and complex history –– I now have more questions than answers. Which is not unexpected. My main impression is of a lack of direction and opportunism. The Russian Empire grew to the size it did because tsar after tsar seized any opportunity to expand the empire’s borders, using violence, trickery and war if necessary. And one group of people after another, from the nomadic tribes of Siberia to the Muslim Khanates of Central Asia and Russia’s Slav neighbors, was encompassed by the great empire, willingly and unwillingly. In the borderlands and on the periphery, freedom came and went. History teaches us that those who were once part of the Russian empire are most at risk of falling under its yoke in the future.”

“The Border” is an amazing achievement. Fatland manages to plant dry seeds of history in a compelling, often poetic, travel adventure. At nearly 600 pages, her book is both informative and fun but also melancholy considering the humanitarian catastrophe occurring now in some of the same places she visited –– places where perhaps sunflowers will grow in the future.

With Respect to the Truth ...

Review by Bill Doughty

Here's a mind-expanding book that offers cosmic advice for the future – and the advice is most welcome today. 

Can we distinguish between facts and beliefs? Do we understand why some people reject science and secular values of truth, compassion, equality, freedom, courage and responsibility? Are we ready for a world in which humans could be irrelevant but under the control of more authoritarian leaders? Oh, and by the way, "what is the meaning of life" (and why is that the wrong question)?

According to philosopher-scholar Yuval Noah Harari in "21 Lessons for the 21st Century" (Spiegel & Grau, Penguin Random House, 2018), twin revolutions of infotech and biotech are bringing about big data algorithms and bioengineering as the world races to embrace artificial intelligence.

"What we are facing is not the replacement of millions of human workers by millions of individual robots and computers; rather, individual humans are likely to be replaced by integrated networks," Harari writes.

USAF maintainers prepare an MQ-9 Reaper drone at Ali Al Salem Air Base, Kuwait, July 23, 2019. (SSgt. Mozer O. Da Cunha)

This is a challenge already for the U.S. Air Force as it accelerates artificial intelligence technology:

"AI might help create new human jobs in another way. Instead of humans competing with AI, they could focus on servicing and leveraging AI. For example, the replacement of human pilots by drones has eliminated some jobs but created many new opportunities in maintenance, remote control, data analysis, and cybersecurity. The U.S. armed forces need thirty people to operate every unmanned Predator or Reaper drone flying over Syria, while analyzing the resulting harvest of information occupies at least eighty people more. In 2015 the U.S. Air Force lacked sufficient trained humans to fill all these positions, and therefore faced an ironic crisis in manning its unmanned aircraft."

Harari said the future may see "the rise of a new useless class" as we experience higher unemployment and a shortage of skilled workers. "Today, despite the shortage of drone operators and data analysts, the U.S. Air Force is unwilling to fill the gaps with Walmart dropouts."

In a rapid explanation of human history – from the African savannah through the Crusades and effects of the Industrial Revolution to today's Nuclear Age and into tomorrow – Harari provides an ominous warning:

"The challenge posed to humankind in the twenty-first century by infotech and biotech is arguably much bigger than the challenge posed in the previous era by steam engines, railroads, and electricity. And given the immense destructive power of our civilization, we just cannot afford more failed models, world wars, and bloody revolutions. This time around, the failed models might result in nuclear wars, genetically engineered monstrosities, and a complete breakdown of the biosphere. We have to do better than we did in confronting the Industrial Revolution."

Why worry about the growing influence of algorithms? Harari says the shift in authority from human control to networks of algorithms "might open the way to the rise of digital dictatorships."

One important question for our time, he says, is "who owns the data?"

Harari reminds us how George Orwell in "1984" warned of televisions watching us and controlling free will and freedom of choice. Biotechnology, memory storage capability and data assimilation are advancing exponentially and can be controlled centrally. Imagine the new technologies in the hands of authoritarian leaders.

"In fact, we might end up with something that even Orwell could barely imagine: a total surveillance regime that follows not just all our external activities and utterances but can even go under our skin to observe our inner experiences. Consider, for example, what the Kim regime in North Korea might do with the new technology. In the future, each North Korean citizen might be required to wear a biometric bracelet that monitors everything that person does and says, as well as their blood pressure and brain activity. By using our growing understanding of the human brain and drawing on the immense powers of machine learning, the North Korean regime might be able for the first time in history to gauge what each and every citizen is thinking at each and every moment. If a North Korean looks at a picture of Kim Jong-un and the biometric sensors pick up the telltale signs of anger (high blood pressure, increased activity in the amygdala), that person will be in the gulag tomorrow morning."

Harari warns, "Democracy in its present form cannot survive the merger of biotech and infotech," where authoritarian governments could control citizens "even more than in Nazi Germany."

In "Mein Kampf," Hitler wrote about the importance of constant repetition; his propagandist Joseph Goebbels said, "A lie told once remains a lie, but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth."

Using lies and intimidation, dictators like Hitler and Joseph Stalin in the previous century controlled people's minds through a cult of personality, belief and anger. "The dictator might not be able to provide citizens with healthcare or equality, but he could make them love him and hate his opponents," writes Harari.

Stalin shamelessly embraced false stories and propaganda as he controlled minds, persecuted dissenters and killed millions of people, including in Ukraine, where his imposed famine became a weapon.

More recently, after Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine and occupied Crimea in 2014 he lied about Russian troops being involved. Later, he and Russian nationalists claimed Ukraine is not a sovereign nation and should be part of Mother Russia.

"Ukrainian citizens, outside observers, and professional historians may well be outraged by this explanation and regard it as a kind of 'atom bomb lie' in the Russian arsenal of deception. To claim that Ukraine does not exist as a nation and as an independent country disregards a long list of historical facts – for example, that during the thousand years of supposed Russian unity, Kiev and Moscow were part of the same country for only about three hundred years. It also violates numerous international laws and treaties that Russia has accepted and that guarantee the sovereignty and borders of independent Ukraine. Most important, it ignores what millions of Ukrainians think about themselves. Don't they have a say about who they are?"

Fortunately, the U.S. Navy stands with its friend, the democratic nation of Ukraine.

Cmdr. Tyson Young, right, CO of USS Carney (DDG 64), meets with a Ukrainian Navy music conductor after a Ukrainian Navy performance during exercise Sea Breeze 2019 in Odesa, Ukraine, July 4, 2019. Sea Breeze is a U.S. and Ukraine co-hosted multinational maritime exercise held in the Black Sea and is designed to enhance interoperability of participating nations and strengthen maritime security and peace within the region. (MC1 Kyle Steckler)

Unfortunately, people throughout the world are unaware of verifiable facts. We are ill-equipped to deal with future "deep fake" attacks, attempts to interfere with free elections, and mind control by digital dictators.

Harari shows that human nature makes us susceptible to false information, and the so-called post-truth era may have started millennia ago with belief systems that reject science and objective reality. Fiction, for many people, is more palpable and believable than fact.

What to do? Harari says we should meditate in order to achieve greater consciousness, which he calls the greatest mystery in the universe. He says, "The big question facing humans isn't 'what is the meaning of life?' but rather 'how do we stop suffering."

This book is a good companion to Harari's other works, "Sapiens" and "Homo Deus." As with his previous works, "21 Questions" goes beyond nations, ethnicities, religions and human consciousness to present a cosmic perspective in examining big questions in search for ultimate truth and wisdom.

Navy Day & Peacetime Strategies

by Bill Doughty

Fleet Adm. William D. Leahy

In "The Second Most Powerful Man in the World: The Life of Admiral William D. Leahy, Roosevelt's Chief of Staff" (Dutton, Penguin House, 2019) author Phillips Payson O'Brien shows how Leahy helped shape strategies to win World War II and the Cold War.

That may sound like a bold statement, yet unimpeachable evidence rests in the text, notes and appendices of O'Brien's excellent biography of an under-recognized American hero of the last century.

In the early days and months of his presidency, Truman wisely trusted and listened to Leahy, who had been FDR's right hand throughout the Second World War. Leahy's old friend William Bullitt, a former ambassador to France, like Leahy, suggested Truman give a postwar speech similar to Woodrow Wilson's post-WWI Fourteen Points speech.

Leahy was inspired to present foreign policy and wrote "the most important speech that Harry Truman would give in the first two years of his presidency."

O'Brien provides Leahy's personal copy of the fundamental points underlying U.S. foreign policy as Appendix B. These points were announced by President Truman in his Navy Day speech, October 1945, and they ring loudly today in territorial issues related to Palestine/Israel, Hong Kong/China, South and North Korea, Kurdistan/Turkey/Syria, and Ukraine/Russia.

Point number 4 seems to speak to what happened in the Russian attack on the 2016 U.S. election and what is happening currently in the constitutional crisis unfolding in the United States. Point number 7 shows the ongoing commitment to protecting freedom of the seas as part of a global commons.

"1.  No territorial expansion or selfish advantage. No plans for aggression against any other state, large or small. No objective which need clash with the peaceful aims of any other nation.

2.  The eventual return of sovereign rights and self-government to all peoples who have been deprived of them by force.

3.  No territorial changes in any friendly part of the world unless they accord with the freely expressed wishes of the people concerned.

4.  All peoples who are prepared for self-government should be permitted to choose their own form of government by their freely expressed choice, without interference from any foreign source.

5.  By the combined and cooperative action of our war allies, help the defeated enemy states establish peaceful democratic governments of their own free choice. And try to attain a world in which nazism, fascism, and military aggression cannot exist.

6.  Refuse to recognize any government imposed upon any nation by the force of any foreign power.

7.  All nations should have the freedom of the seas and equal rights to the navigation of boundary rivers and waterways and of rivers and waterways which pass through more than one country.

8.  All states which are accepted in the society of nations should have access on equal terms to the trade and the raw materials of the world.

9.  The sovereign states of the Western Hemisphere, without interference from outside the Western Hemisphere, must work together as good neighbors in the solution of their common problems.

10. Full economic collaboration between all nations, great and small, is essential to the improvement of living conditions all over the world, and to the establishment of freedom from fear and freedom from want.

11. Continue to strive to promote freedom of expression and freedom of religion throughout the peace-loving areas of the world.

12. The preservation of peace between nations requires a United Nations Organization composed of all the peace-loving nations of the world who are willing to jointly use force, if necessary, to insure peace."

Navy ships, planes & lighter-than-air vessels, Hudson River, Navy Day 1945.

According to O'Brien, "The final text of the speech is the best summary of Leahy's outlook as it had evolved to that time and was both a statement about the coming Cold War and an attempt to keep alive the legacy of Franklin Roosevelt."

Here's an excerpt from Truman's actual Navy Day Speech focusing on a commitment to global cooperation, outlawing of nuclear weapons and a peaceful future for the world's citizens. As Truman delivered the speech, Leahy sat by his side.

   "The world cannot afford any letdown in the united determination of the allies in this war to accomplish a lasting peace. The world cannot afford to let the cooperative spirit of the allies in this war disintegrate. The world simply cannot allow this to happen. The people in the United States, in Russia, and Britain, in France and China, in collaboration with all the other peace-loving people, must take the course of current history into their own hands and mold it in a new direction – the direction of continued cooperation. It was a common danger which united us before victory. Let it be a common hope which continues to draw us together in the years to come.   The atomic bombs which fell on Hiroshima and Nagasaki must be made a signal, not for the old process of falling apart but for a new era—an era of ever-closer unity and ever-closer friendship among peaceful nations.   Building a peace requires as much moral stamina as waging a war. Perhaps it requires even more, because it is so laborious and painstaking and undramatic. It requires undying patience and continuous application. But it can give us, if we stay with it, the greatest reward that there is in the whole field of human effort ...   The immediate, the greatest threat to us is the threat of disillusionment, the danger of insidious skepticism—a loss of faith in the effectiveness of international cooperation. Such a loss of faith would be dangerous at any time. In an atomic age it would be nothing short of disastrous ...   What the distant future of the atomic research will bring to the fleet which we honor today, no one can foretell. But the fundamental mission of the Navy has not changed. Control of our sea approaches and of the skies above them is still the key to our freedom and to our ability to help enforce the peace of the world.   No enemy will ever strike us directly except across the sea. We cannot reach out to help stop and defeat an aggressor without crossing the sea. Therefore, the Navy, armed with whatever weapons science brings forth, is still dedicated to its historic task: control of the ocean approaches to our country and of the skies above them.   The atomic bomb does not alter the basic foreign policy of the United States. It makes the development and application of our policy more urgent than we could have dreamed six months ago. It means that we must be prepared to approach international problems with greater speed, with greater determination, with greater ingenuity, in order to meet a situation for which there is no precedent.   We must find the answer to the problems created by the release of atomic energy—we must find the answers to the many other problems of peace—in partnership with all the peoples of the United Nations ...   In our possession of this weapon, as in our possession of other new weapons, there is no threat to any nation. The world, which has seen the United States in two great recent wars, knows that full well. The possession in our hands of this new power of destruction we regard as a sacred trust. Because of our love of peace, the thoughtful people of the world know that that trust will not be violated, that it will be faithfully executed.   Indeed, the highest hope of the American people is that world cooperation for peace will soon reach such a state of perfection that atomic methods of destruction can be definitely and effectively outlawed forever."

The speech was delivered at a Navy Day celebration in New York City October 27, 1945.

President Harry S. Truman is piped aboard USS Missouri (BB-63), during the Navy Day fleet review in the Hudson River, New York City, 27 October 1945. Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy is just behind the President. (National Archives and Naval History and Heritage Command)

(A clip from the Navy Day 1945 speech.)