Category Archives: Progress

Middle East and North Africa

Steven A. Cook, Eni Enrico Mattei senior fellow for Middle East and Africa studies and director of the International Affairs Fellowship for Tenured International Relations Scholars at CFR, leads a conversation on geopolitics in the Middle East.FASKIANOS: Welcome to todays session of the CFR Fall 2021 Academic Webinar Series. Im Irina Faskianos, vice president of the National Program and Outreach at CFR. Todays discussion is on the record and the video and transcript will be available on our website, CFR.org/Academic, if you want to share it with your colleagues or classmates. As always, CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy.Todays topic is geopolitics in the Middle East. Our speaker was supposed to be Sanam Vakil, but she had a family emergency. So were delighted to have our very own Steven Cook here to discuss this important topic. Dr. Cook is the Eni Enrico Mattei senior fellow for Middle East and Africa studies, and director of the International Affairs Fellowship for Tenured International Relations Scholars at the Council on Foreign Relations. He is the author of several books, including False Dawn; The Struggle for Egypt, which won the 2012 Gold Medal from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy; and Ruling But Not Governing. And hes working on yet another book entitled The End of Ambition: Americas Past, Present, and Future in the Middle East. So keep an eye out for that in the next year or so. Hes a columnist at Foreign Policy magazine and contributor and commentator on a bunch of other outlets. Prior to coming to CFR, Dr. Cook was a research fellow at the Brookings Institution and a Soref research fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. So, Dr. Cook, thank you for being with us. I thought you could justIm going to give you a soft question here, to talk about the geopolitical relations among state and nonstate actors in the Middle East. And you can take that in whatever direction you would like.COOK: Well, thanks so much, Irina. Its a great pleasure to be with you. Good afternoon to everybody whos out there whos on an afternoon time zone, good morning to those who may still be in the evening, and good evening to those who may be somewhere where its the evening. Its very nice to be with you. As Irina mentioned, and as Im sure its plenty evident, I am not Sanam Vakil, but Im happy to step in for her and offer my thoughts on the geopolitics of the Middle East.Its a small topic. That question that Irina asked was something that I certainly could handle effectively in fifteen to twenty minutes. But before I get into the details of whats going on in the region, I thought I would offer some just general comments about the United States in the Middle East. Because, as it turns out, I had the opportunity last night to join a very small group of analysts with a very senior U.S. government official to talk precisely about the United States in the Middle East. And it was a very, very interesting conversation, because despite the fact that there has been numerous news reporting and analytic pieces about how the United States is deemphasizing the Middle East, this official made it very, very clear that that was practically impossible at this time. And this was, I think, a reasonable position to take. There has been a lot recently, in the last recent years, about withdrawing from the region, from retrenchment from the region, reducing from the region, realignment from the region. All those things actually mean different things. But analysts have essentially used them to mean that the United States should deprioritize the Middle East.And it seems to me that the problem in the Middle East has not necessarily been the fact that we are there and that we have goals there. Its that the goals in the region and the resources Washington uses to achieve those goals need to be realigned to address things that are actually important to the United States. In one sense that sound eminently reasonable. We have goals, we have resources to meet those goals, and we should devote them toand if we cant, we should reassess what our goals are or go out and find new resources. That sounds eminently reasonable.But thats not the way Washington has worked over the course of the last few decades when it comes to the Middle East. In many ways, the United States has been overly ambitious. And it has led to a number of significant failures in the region. In an era when everything and anything is a vital interest, then nothing really is. And this seems to be the source of our trouble. For example, when we get into trying to fix the politics of other countries, were headed down the wrong road. And I dont think that theres been enough real debate in Washington or, quite frankly, in the country about whats important in the Middle East, and why were there, and what were trying to achieve in the Middle East.In part, this new book that Im writing called the End of Ambition, which, as Irina pointed out, will be out hopefully in either late 2022 or early 2023, tries to answer some of these questions. There is a way for the United States to be constructive in the Middle East, but what weve done over the course of the last twenty years has made that task much, much harder. And it leads us, in part, to this kind of geostrategic picture or puzzle that Im about to lay out for you.So let me get into some of the details. And Im obviously not going to take you from Morocco all the way to Iran, although I could if I had much, much more time because theres a lot going on in a lot of places. But not all of those places are of critical importance to the United States. So Ill start and Ill pick and choose from that very, very large piece of geography.First point: There have been some efforts to deescalate in a region that was in the middle of or on the verge of multiple conflicts. There has been a dialogue between the Saudis and the Iranians, under the auspices of the Iraqis, of all people. According to the Saudis this hasnt yielded very much, but they are continuing the conversation. One of the ways to assess the success or failure of a meeting is the fact that theres going to be another meeting. And there are going to be other meetings between senior Iranian and Saudi officials. I think that thats good.Egyptians and Turks are talking. Some of you who dont follow these issues as closely may not remember that Turkey and Egypt came close to trading blows over Libya last summer. And they pulled back as a result of concerted diplomacy on the part of the European Union, as well as the Egyptian ability to actually surge a lot of force to its western border. Those two countries are also talking, in part under the auspices of the Iraqis. Emiratis and Iranians are talking. That channel opened up in 2019 after the Iranians attacked a very significanttwo very significant oil processing facilities in Saudi Arabia, sort of scaring the Emiratis, especially since the Trump administration did not respond in ways that the Emiratis or the Saudis had been expecting.The Qataris and the Egyptians have repaired their relations. The Arab world, for better or for worse, is moving to reintegrate Syria into is ranks. Not long after King Abdullah of Jordan was in the United States, he and Bashar al-Assad shared a phone call to talk about the opening of the border between Jordan and Syria and to talk about, among other things, tourism to the two countries. The hope is that this de-escalation, or hope for de-escalation coming from this dialogue, will have a salutary effect on conflicts in Yemen, in Syria, in Libya, and Iraq. Thus far, it hasnt in Yemen, in particular. It hasnt in Syria. But in Libya and Iraq, there have been some improvements to the situation. All of this remains quite fragile. These talks can becan break off at any time under any circumstances. Broader-scale violence can return to Libya at any time. And the Iraqi government still doesnt control its own territory. Its sovereignty is compromised, not just by Iran but also by Turkey. But the fact that a region that was wound so tight and that seemed poised to even deepen existing conflicts and new ones to break out, for all of these different parties to be talkingsome at the behest of the United States, some entirely of their own volitionis, I think, a relatively positive sign. You cant find anyone whos morelets put it this way, whos darker about developments in the Middle East than me. And I see some positive signs coming from this dialogue.Iran, the second big issue on the agenda. Just a few hours ago, the Iranians indicated that theyre ready to return to the negotiating table in Vienna. This is sort of a typical Iranian negotiating tactic, to push issues to the brink and then to pull back and demonstrate some pragmatism so that people will thank for them for their pragmatism. This agreement to go back to the negotiating table keeps them on decent terms with the Europeans. It builds on goodwill that they have developed as a result of their talks with Saudi Arabia. And it puts Israel somewhat on the defensive, or at least in an awkward position with the Biden administration, which has very much wanted to return to the negotiating table in Vienna.What comes out of these negotiations is extremely hard to predict. This is a new government in Iran. It is certainly a harder line than its predecessor. Some analysts believe that precisely because it is a hardline government it can do the negotiation. But well just have to see. All the while this has been going on, the Iranians have been proceeding with their nuclear development, and Israel is continuing its shadow campaign against the Iranians in Syria, sometimes in Iraq, in Iran itself. Although, theres no definitive proof, yesterday Iranian gas stations, of all things, were taken offline. Theres some suspicion that this was the Israelis showing the Iranians just how far and deep they are into Iranian computer systems.It remains unclear how the Iranians will retaliate. Previously they have directed their efforts to Israeli-linked shipping in and around the Gulf of Oman. Its conventional responses up until this point have been largely ineffective. The Israelis have been carrying on a fairly sophisticated air campaign against the Iranians in Syria, and the Iranians have not been able to mount any kind of effective response. Of course, this is all against the backdrop of the fact that the Iranians do have the ability to hold much of the Israeli population hostage via Hezbollah and its thousands of rockets and missiles. So you can see how this is quite worrying, and an ongoing concern for everybody in the region, as the Israelis and Iranians take part in this confrontation.Let me just continue along the line of the Israelis for a moment and talk about the Arab-Israeli conflict, something that has not been high on the agenda of the Biden administration, it hasnt been high on the agenda of many countries in the region. But since the signing of the Abraham Accords in September 2020, there have been some significant developments. The normalization as a result of the Abraham Accords continues apace. Recently in the Emirates there was a meeting of ministers from Israel, the UAE, Morocco, Bahrain, and Sudan. This is the first kind of face-to-face meeting of government officials from all of these countries.Now, certainly the Israelis and the Emiratis have been meeting quite regularly, and the Israelis and the Bahrainis have been meeting quite regularly. But these were broader meetings of Cabinet officials from all of the Abraham Accords countries coming together in the United Arab Emirates for talks. Rather extraordinary. Something that thirteen monthsin August 2020 was unimaginable, and today is something that doesnt really makeit doesnt really make the headlines. The Saudis are actually supportive of the normalization process, but theyre not yet willing to take that step. And theyre not willing to take that step because of the Palestinian issue. And it remains a sticking point.On that issue, there was a lot of discussion after the formation of a new Israeli government last June under the leadership, first, of Naftali Bennett, who will then hand the prime ministership over to his partner, Yair Lapid, who are from different parties. That this was an Israeli government that could do some good when it comes to the Palestinian arena, that it was pragmatic, that it would do things that would improve the lives of Palestinians, whether in Gaza or the West Bank, and seek greater cooperation with both the United States and the Palestinian authority toward that end.And that may in fact turn out to be the case. This government has taken a number of steps in that direction, including family reunification, so that if a Palestinian on the West Bank who is married to a Palestinian citizen of Israel, the Palestinian in the West Bank can live with the family in Israel. And a number of other things. But it should also be clear to everybody that despite a kind of change in tone from the Israeli prime ministry, theres not that much of a change in terms of policy. In fact, in many ways Prime Minister Bennett is to the right of his predecessor, Benjamin Netanyahu. And Yair Lapid, who comes from a centrist party, is really only centrist in terms of Israeli politics. He isin any other circumstances would be a kind of right of center politician. And Ill just point out that in recent days the Israeli government has declared six Palestinian NGOslong-time NGOsterrorist organizations, approved three thousand new housing units in the West Bank, and worked very, very hard to prevent the United States from opening a consulate in East Jerusalem to serve the Palestinians. That consulate had been there for many, many, many years. And it was closed under the Trump administration when the U.S. Embassy was moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The Biden administration would like to reopen that consulate. And the Israeli government is adamantly opposed. In the end, undoubtably Arab governments are coming to terms with Israel, even beyond the Abraham Accords countries. Egypts flag carrier, Egyptair, announced flights to Tel Aviv. This is the first time since 1979. You couldyou could fly between Cairo and Tel Aviv, something that Ive done many, many times. If you were in Egypt, youd have to go and find an office that would sell you a ticket to something called Air Sinai, that did not have regular flights. Only had flights vaguely whenever, sometimes. It was an Egyptair plane, stripped of its livery, staffed by Egyptair pilots and staff, stripped of anything that said Egyptair. Now, suddenly Egyptair is flying direct flights to Tel Aviv. And El-Al, Israels national airline, and possibly one other, will be flying directly to Cairo. And there isand that there is talk of economic cooperation. Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett met with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi in Sharm al-Sheikh not long ago. That was the first meeting of Israeli leadersfirst public meeting of Israeli leaders and Egyptian leaders in ten years. So there does seem to be an openness on the part of Arab governments to Israel.As far as populations in these countries, they dont yet seem to be ready for normalization, although there has been some traffic between Israel and the UAE, with Emiratis coming to see Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, and so on and so forth. But there are very, very few Emiratis. And there are a lot of Egyptians. So as positive as that all is, this isthis has not been a kind of broad acceptance among the population in the Arab world for Israels legitimate existence.And the kind of issue du jour, great-power competition. This is on everybodys lips in Washington, D.C.great-power competition, great-power competition. And certainly, the Middle East is likely to be an arena of great-power competition. It has always been an arena of great-power competition. For the first time in more than two decades, the United States has competitors in the region. And let me start with Russia, because theres been so much discussion of China, but Russia is the one that has been actively engaged militarily in the region in a number of places.Vladimir Putin has parlayed his rescue of Hafez al-Assad into influence in the region, in an arc that stretches from NATO ally Turkey, all the way down through the Levant and through Damascus, then even stretching to Jerusalem where Israeli governments and the Russian government have cooperated and coordinated in Syria, into Cairo, and then into at least the eastern portion of Libya, where the Russians have supported a Qaddafist general named Khalifa Haftar, who used to be an employee of the CIA, in his bid for power in Libya. And he has done so by providing weaponry to Haftar, as well as mercenaries to fight and support him. That episode may very well be over, although theres every reason to believe that Haftar is trying to rearm himself and carry on the conflict should the processshould the political process in Libya break down. Russia has sold more weapons to Egypt in the last few years than at any other time since the early 1970s. They have a defense agreement with Saudi Arabia. Its not clear what that actually means, but that defense agreement was signed not that long after the United States rather chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan, which clearly unnerved governments in the Middle East. So Russia is active, its influential, its militarily engaged, and it is seeking to advance its interests throughout the region.Ill point out that its presence in North Africa is not necessarily so much about North Africa, but its also about Europe. Its bid in Libya is important because its ally controls the eastern portion of Libya, where most of Libyas light, sweet crude oil is located. And that is the largestthe most significant reserves of oil in all of Africa. So its important as an energy play for the Russians to control parts of North Africa, and right on Russiasright on Europes front doorstep.China. Chinas the largest investor and single largest trading partner with most of the region. And its not just energy related. We know how dependent China is on oil from the Gulf, but its made big investments in Algeria, in Egypt, the UAE, and in Iran. The agreement with Iran, a twenty-five-year agreement, coming at a time when the Iranians were under significant pressure from the United States, was regarded by many in Washington as an effort on the part of the Chinese to undercut the United States, and undercut U.S. policy in the region. I think it was, in part, that. I think it was also in part the fact that China is dependent in part on Iranian oil and did not want the regime there to collapse, posing a potential energy crisis for China and the rest of the world. It seems clear to me, at least, that the Chinese do not want to supplant the United States in the region. I dont think they look at the region in that way. And if they did, they probably learned the lesson of the United States of the last twenty-five years, which has gotten itself wrapped around the axle on a variety of issues that were unnecessary and sapped the power of the United States. So they dont want to get more deeply involved in the region. They dont want to take sides in conflicts. They dont want to take sides in the Arab-Israeli conflict. They dont take sides in the conflict between the United States and Iran, or the competition between Saudi Arabia and Iran. They want to benefit from the region, whether through investment or through extraction, and the security umbrella that the United States provides in the region. Im not necessarily so sure that that security umbrella needs to be so expensive and so extensive for the United States to achieve its goals. But nevertheless, and for the time being at least, we will be providing that security umbrella in the region, from which the Chinese will benefit.I think, just to close on this issue of great-power competition. And because of time, Im leaving out another big player, or emerging player in the region, which is India. Im happy to talk about that in Q&A. But my last point is that, going back to the United States, countries in the region and leaders in the region are predisposed towards the United States. The problem is, is that they are very well-aware of the political polarization in this country. Theyre very well-aware of the political dysfunction in this country. Theyre very well-aware of the incompetence that came with the invasion of Iraq, the withdrawal from Afghanistan, or any number of disasters that have unfolded here in the United States.And it doesnt look, from where they sit in Abu Dhabi, in Cairo, in Riyadh, and in other places, that the United States has staying power, the will to lead, and the interest in remaining in the Middle East. And thus, they have turned to alternatives. Those alternatives are not the same as the United States, but they do provide something. I mean, particularly when it comes to the Chinese it is investment, its economic advantages, without the kind of trouble that comes with the United States. Trouble from the perspective of leaders, so that they dont have to worry about human rights when they deal with the Chinese, because the Chinese arent interested in human rights. But nevertheless, they remain disclosed toward the United States and want to work with the United States. They just dont know whether were going to be there over the long term, given what is going on in the United States. Ill stop there. And I look forward to your questions and comments. Thank you.FASKIANOS: Steven, that was fantastic. Thank you very much.Were going to now to all of you for your questions. So the first raised hand comes from Jonas Truneh. And I dont think I pronounced that correctly, so you can correct me.Q: Yeah, no, thats right. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Dr. Cook, for your talk. Im from UCL, University College London, in London.COOK: So it is(off mic).Q: Indeed, it is. Yeah. Thats right.COOK: Great.Q: So you touched on it there somewhat particularly with great-power competition, but so my question is related to the current energy logic in the Middle East. The Obama administration perhaps thought that the shale revolution allowed a de-prioritization, if Im allowed to use that word, of the Middle East. And that was partly related to the pivot to Asia. So essentially does the U.S. still regard itself as the primary guarantor of energy security in the Persian Gulf? And if so, would the greatest beneficiary, as I think you indicated, would that not be China? And is that a case of perverse incentives? Is there much the U.S. can do about it?COOK: Well, it depends on who you ask, right? And its a great question. I think that theone of the things thatone of the ways in which the Obama administration sought to deprioritize and leave the region was through the shale revolution. I mean, the one piece of advice that he did take from one of his opponents in 20022008, which was to drill, baby, drill. And the United States did. I would not say that this is something that is specific to the Obama administration. If you go back to speeches of presidents way backbut I wont even go that far back. Ill go to George W. Bush in 2005 State of the Union addressed, talked all about energy independence from the Middle East.This may not actually be in much less the foreseeable future, but in reallyin a longer-term perspective, it may be harder to do. But it is politically appealing. The reason why I say it depends on who you ask, I think that there are officials in the United States who say: Nothing has changed. Nothing has changed. But when the Iranians attacked those two oil processing facilities in Saudi Arabia, that temporarily took off 50 percent of supply off the marketsgood thing the Saudis have a lot stored awaythe United States didnt really respond. The president of the United States said: Im waiting for a call from Riyadh. That forty years of stated American policy was, like, it did not exist. The Carter doctrine and the Reagan corollary to the Carter doctrine suddenly didnt exist. And the entirety of the American foreign policy community shrugged their shoulders and said: Were not going to war on behalf of MBS. I dont think we would have been going to war on behalf of MBS. We would have been ensuring the free flow of energy supplies out of the region, which is something that we have been committed to doing since President Carter articulated the Carter doctrine, and then President Reagan added his corollary to it. I think that there are a number of quite perverse incentives associated with this. And I think that youre right. The question is whether the competition from China outweighs ourIm talking about ourthe United States compelling interest in a healthy global economy. And to the extent that our partners in Asia, whether its India, South Korea, Japan, and our important trading partner in China, are dependent upon energy resources from the Gulf, and we dont trust anybody to ensure the free flow of energy resources from the Gulf, its going to be on us to do it. So we are kind of hammered between that desire to have a healthy global economy as beingand being very wary of the Chinese. And the Chinese, I think, are abundantly aware of it, and have sought to take advantage of it.FASKIANOS: Thank you. Im going to take the next question, which got an up-vote, from Charles Ammon, who is at Pennsylvania State University. And I think this goes to what you were building on with the great-power competition: What interests does India have in the Middle East? And how is it increasing its involvement in the region?COOK: So India isimports 60 percent of its oil from the region. Fully 20 percent of it from Saudi Arabia, another 20 percent of it from Iran, and then the other 20 percent from other sources. So thats one thing. Thats one reason why India is interested in the Middle East. Second, there are millions and millions of Indians who work in the Middle East. The Gulf region is a region that basically could not run without South Asian expatriate labor, most of which comes from Indiaon everything. Third, India has made considerable headway with countries like the United Arab Emirates, as well as Saudi Arabia, in counterextremism cooperation. This has come at the expense of Pakistan, but as relations between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia and relations between Pakistan and the UAE soured in recent years, the Indians have been able to take advantage of that. And Indian leaders have hammered away at the common interest that India and leaders in the region have in terms of countering violent extremism.And then finally, India and Israel have quite an extraordinary relationship, both in the tech field as well as in the defense area. Israel is a supplier to India. And the two of them are part of a kind of global network of high-tech powerhouse that have either, you know, a wealth of startups or very significant investment from the major tech players in the world. IsraelMicrosoft just announced a huge expansion in Israel. And Israeli engineers and Indian engineers collaborate on a variety of projects for these big tech companies.So theres a kind of multifaceted Indian interest in the region, and the regions interest in India. What India lacks that the Chinese have is a lot more capacity. They dont have the kind of wherewithal to bring investment and trade in the region in the other direction. But nevertheless, its a much more important player than it was in the past.FASKIANOS: Thank you. Im going to take the next question from Curran Flynn, who has a raised hand.Q: How do you envision the future of Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia politics for the next thirty years? Ethiopia controls the Nile dam projects. And could this dispute lead to a war? And what is the progress with the U.S. in mediating the talks between the three countries?COOK: Thank you.FASKIANOS: And that is coming from the King Fahd University in Saudi Arabia.COOK: Fabulous. So thats more than the evening. Its actually nighttime there. I think that the question of the great Ethiopian Renaissance Dam is really an important one, and its something that has not gotten as much attention as it should. And for those of you who are not familiar, in short the Ethiopians have been building a massive dam on the Blue Nile, which is a tributary to the Nile. And that ifwhen competed, threatens the water supply to Egypt, a country of 110 million people that doesnt get a lot of rainfall. Ethiopia, of course, wants to dam the Nile in order to produce hydroelectric power for its own development, something that Egypt did when it dammed the Nile River to build the Aswan High Dam, and crated Lake Nasser behind it.The Egyptians are very, very concerned. This is an existential issue for them. And there have been on and off negotiations, but the negotiations arent really about the issues. Theyre talks about talks about talks. And they havent gottenthey havent gotten very far. Now, the Egyptians have been supported by the Sudanese government, after the Sudanese government had been somewhat aligned with the Ethiopian government. The Trump administration put itself squarely behind the Egyptian government, but Ethiopias also an important partner of the United States in the Horn of Africa. The Egyptians have gone about signing defense cooperation agreements with a variety of countries around Ethiopias borders. And of course, Ethiopia is engaged in essentially whats a civil war. This is a very, very difficult and complicated situation. Thus far, there doesnt seem to be an easy solution the problem. Now, heres the rub, if you talk to engineers, if you talk to people who study water, if you talk to people who know about dams and the flow of water, the resolution to the problem is actually not that hard to get to. The problem is that the politics and nationalism have been engaged on both sides of the issue, making it much, much more difficult to negotiate an equitable solution to the problem. The Egyptians have said in the past that they dont really have an intention of using force, despite the fact of this being an existential issue. But theres been somewhat of a shift in their language on the issue.Which recently theyve said if red lines were crossed, they may be forced to intervene. Intervene how? What are those red lines? They havent been willing to define them, which should make everybody nervous. The good news is that Biden administration has appointed an envoy to deal with issues in the Horn of Africa, who has been working very hard to try to resolve the conflict. I think the problem here however is that Ethiopia, now distracted by a conflict in the Tigray region, nationalism is running high there, has beenI dont want to use the word imperviousbut not as interested in finding a negotiated solution to the problem than it might have otherwise been in the past.FASKIANOS: Thank you. Im going to take the next question from Bob Pauly, whos a professor of international development at the University of Southern Mississippi. It got three up-votes.What would you identify as the most significant likely short and longer-term effects of Turkeys present domestic economic and political challenges on President Erdogans strategy and policy approaches to the Middle East, and why?COOK: Oh, well, that is a very, very long answer to a very, very interesting question. Lets see what happens in 2023. President Erdogan is facing reelection. His goal all along has been to reelected on the one hundredth anniversary of the republic, and to demonstrate how much he has transformed Turkey in the image of the Justice and Development Party, and moved it away from the institutions of the republic. Erdogan may not make it to 2023. I dont want to pedal in conspiracy theories or anything like that, but he doesnt look well. There are large numbers of videos that have surfaced of him having difficulties, including one famous one from this past summer when he was offering a Ramadan greeting on Turkish television to supporters of the Justice and Development Party, and he seemed to fade out and slur his words. This is coupled with reports trickling out of Ankara about the lengths to which the inner circle has gone to shield real health concerns about Erdogan from the public. Its hard to really diagnose someone from more than six thousand miles away, but I think its a scenario that policymakers in Washington need to think seriously about. What happens if Erdogan is incapacitated or dies before 2023? Thats one piece.The second piece is, well, what if he makes it and hes reelected? And I think in any reasonable observer sitting around at the end of 2021 looking forward to 2023 would say two things: One, you really cant predict Turkish politics this far out, but if Turkish elections were held today and they were free and fair, the Justice and Development Party would get below 30 percent. Still more than everybody else. And Erdogan would have a real fight on his hands to get reelected, which he probably would be.His approaches to his domestic challenges and his approaches to the region are really based on what his current political calculations are at any given moment. So his needlessly aggressive posture in the Eastern Mediterranean was a function of the fact that he needed to shore up his nationalist base. Now that he finds himself quite isolated in the world, the Turks have made overtures to Israel, to the UAE, to Saudi Arabia. Theyre virtually chasing the Egyptians around the Eastern Mediterranean to repair their relationship. Because without repairing these relationships the kind of investment that is necessary to try to help revive the Turkish economywhich has been on the skids for a number of yearsis going to beis going to be more difficult.Theres also another piece of this, which is the Middle East is a rather lucrative arms market. And during the AKP era, the Turks have had a significant amount of success further developing their defense industrial base, to the point that now their drones are coveted. Now one of the reasons for a Saudi-Turkish rapprochement is that the United States will not sell Saudi Arabia the drones it wants, for fear that they will use them in Yemen. And the Saudis are looking for drones elsewhere. Thats either China or Turkey. And Turkeys seem to work really, really well, based on experience in Syria, Libya, and Nagorno-Karabakh. So whatTurkish foreign policy towards the region has become really dependent upon what Erdogans particularly political needs are. Theres no strategic approach to the region. There is a vision of Turkey as a leader of the region, of a great power in its own right, as a leader of the Muslim world, as a Mediterranean power as well. But thats nothing new. Turkish Islamists have been talking about these things for quite some time. I think its important that theres been some de-escalation. I dont think that all of these countries now love each other, but they see the wisdom of pulling back frompulling back from the brink. I dont see Turkeys position changing dramatically in terms of its kind of reintegration into the broader region before 2023, at the least.FASKIANOS: Great. Lets go next to, raised hand, to Caleb Sanner. And you need to unmute yourself.Q: Hello, my name is Caleb. Im from the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater.So, Dr. Cook, you had mentioned in passing how China has been involved economically in North Africa. And my question would be, how is the U.S. taking that? And what are we doing, in a sense, to kind of counter that? I know its not a military advancement in terms of that, but Ive seen what it has been doing to their economiesNorth Africas economies. And, yeah, whats the U.S. stance on that?COOK: Well, I think the United States is somewhat detached from this question of North Africa. North Africas long been awith the exception of Egypt, of course. And Egypt, you know, is not really North Africa. Egypt is something in and of itself. That China is investing heavily in Egypt. And the Egyptian position is: Please dont ask us to choose between you and the Chinese, because were not going to make that choice. We think investment from all of these places is good foris good for Egypt. And the other places where China is investing, and thats mostly in Algeria, the United States really doesnt have close ties to Algeria. There was a tightening of the relationship after the attacks on New York and Washington in 2001, recognizing that the Algeriansextremist groups in Algerian that had been waging war against the state there over the course of the 1990s were part and parcel of this new phenomenon of global jihad. And so there has been a security relationship there. There has been some kind of big infrastructure kind of investment in that country, with big companies that build big things, like GE and others, involved in Algeria. But the United States isnt helping to develop ports or industrial parks or critical infrastructure like bridges and airports in the same way that the Chinese have been doing throughout the region.And in Algeria, as well as in Egypt, the Chinese are building a fairly significant industrial center in the Suez Canal zone, of all places. And the United States simply doesnt have an answer to it, other than to tell our traditional partners in the region, dont do it. But unless we show up with something to offer them, Im afraid that Chinese investment is going to be too attractive for countries that are in need of this kind of investment.FASKIANOS: Thank you. Im going to go next to a written question from Kenneth Mayers, who is at St. Francis College in Brooklyn. In your opinion, what would a strategic vision based on a far-sighted understanding of both resources and U.S. goalswith regard to peace and security, prosperity and development, and institutions and norms and values such as human rightslook like in the Middle East and North Africa?COOK: Well, its a great question. And Im tempted to say youre going to have to read the last third of my new book in order to get thein order to get the answer. I think but let me start with something mentioned about norms and values. I think that one of the things that has plagued American foreign policy over the course of not just the last twenty years, but in the post-World War II era all the way up through the present day, you see it very, very clearly with President Biden, is that trying to incorporate American values and norms into our approach to the region has been extraordinarily difficult. And what we have a history of doing is the thing that is strategically tenable, but morally suspect.So what I would say is, I mean, just look at whats happened recently. The president of the United States studiously avoided placing a telephone call to the Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi. The Egyptians, as many know, have a terrible record on human rights, particularly since President Sisi came to power. Arrests of tens of thousands of people in the country, the torture of many, many people, the killings of people. And the president during his campaign said that he was going to give no blank checks to dictators, including to Abdel Fattah al-Sisi. And then what happened in May? What happened in May was that fighting broke out between Israel and Hamas and others in the Gaza Strip, a brutal eleven-day conflict. And Egypt stepped up and provided a way out of the conflict through its good offices. And that prompted the United States tothe president of the United Statesto have two phone calls in those eleven days with the Egyptian leader. And now the United States is talking about Egypt as a constructive partner thats helping to stabilize the region. Sure, the administration suspended $130 million of Egypts annual$130 million Egypts annual allotment of $1.3 billion. But that is not a lot. Egypt got most ofmost of its military aid. As I said, strategically tenable, morally suspect. Im not quite sure how we get out of that.But what I do know, and Ill give you a little bit of a preview of the last third of the bookbut I really do want you to buy it when its doneis that the traditional interests of the United States in the Middle East are changing. And I go through a kind of quasi, long, somewhat torturedbut very, very interestingdiscussion of the origins of our interests, and how they are changing, and how we can tell they are changing. And that is to say that the free flow of energy resources may not be as important to the United States in the next twenty-five years as it was over the course of the previous fifty or sixty years. That helping to ensure Israeli security, which has been axiomatic for the United States, eh, Id say since the 1960s, really, may not be as important as Israel develops its diplomatic relations with its neighbors, that has a GDP per capita thats on par with the U.K., and France, and other partners in Europe, a country that clearly can take care of itself, that is a driver of technology and innovation around the globe. And that may no longer require Americas military dominance in the region.So what is that we want to be doing? How can we be constructive? And I think the answers are in things that we hadnt really thought of too systematically in the past. What are the things that were willing to invest in an defend going forward? Things like climate change, things like migration, things like pandemic disease. These are things that weve talked about, but that weve never been willing to invest in the kind of the resources. Now there are parts of the Middle East that during the summer months are in-habitable. Thats going to produce waves of people looking for places to live that are inhabitable. What do we do about that? Does that destabilize the Indian subcontinent? Does it destabilize Europe? Does it destabilize North Africa? These are all questions that we havent yet answered.But to the extent that we want to invest in, defend and sacrifice for things like climate, and we want to address the issuerelated issue of migration, and we want to deal with the issue of disease and other of these kind of functional global issues in the Middle East is better not just for us and Middle Easterners, but also in terms of our strategicour great-power competition in the region. These are not things that the Chinese and the Russians are terribly interested in, despite the fact that the Chinese may tell you they are. FASKIANOS: Thank you. Im going to go next to Ahmuan Williams, with a raised hand, at the University of Oklahoma.COOK: Oklahoma.Q: Hi. And thank you for being here.You kind of talked about the stabilization of northern Africa and the Middle East. And just a few days ago the Sudanese governmentand they still havent helped capture the parliamentarian therehave recycled back into a militarysomewhat of military rule. And its been since 2005 since the end of their last civil war, which claimed millions of innocent civilians through starvation and strife and, you know, the lack of being able to get humanitarian aid. There was also a huge refugee crisis there, a lot of people who evacuated Sudan. Hows that going to impact the Middle East and the American take to Middle East and northern Africa policy, especially now that the Security Council is now considering this and is trying to determine what we should do?COOK: Its a great question. And I think that, first, lets be clear. There was a coup dtat in Sudan. The military overthrew a transitional government on the eve of having to hand over the government to civilians. And they didnt like it. Theres been tension thats been brewing in Sudan for some time. Actually, an American envoy, our envoy to East Africa and Africa more generally, a guy named Jeff Feltman, was in Khartoum, trying to kind of calm the tension, to get the two sides together, and working to avert a coup. And the day after he left, the military moved. Thats notthat doesnt reflect the fact that the United States gave a blessing for the military to overthrow this government. I think what it does, though, and its something that I think we all need to keep in mind, it demonstrates the limits of American power in a variety of places around the world. That we dont have all the power in the world to prevent things from happening when people, like the leaders of the Sudanese military, believe that they have existential issues that are at stake. Now, whats worry about destabilization in Sudan is, as you point out, there was a civil war there, there was the creation of a new country there, potential forif things got really out of handrefugee flows into Egypt, from Egypt across the Sanai Peninsula into Israel. One of the things people are unaware of is the large number of Sudanese or Eritreans and other Africans who have sought refuge in Israel, which has created significant economic and social strains in that country.So its a big deal. Thus far, it seems we dontthat the U.S. government doesnt know exactly whats happening there. There are protesters in the streets demanding democracy. Its very unclear what the military is going to do. And its very unclear what our regional allies and how they view whats happening. What Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, what Saudi Arabia, what Israelwhich Sudan is an Abraham Accords country nowwhat they are doing. How they view the coup as positive or negative will likely impact how effective the United States can be in trying to manage this situation. But I suspect that were just going to have to accommodate ourselves to whatever outcome the Sudanese people and the Sudanese military come to, because I dont think we have a lot ofwe dont have a lot of tools there to make everybody behave.FASKIANOS: OK. So Im going to take the next question from Elena Murphy, who is a junior at Syracuse Universitys Maxwell School. And shes a diplomatic intern at the Kurdistan Regional Governments Representation in the United States.COOK: Thats cool.FASKIANOS: Thats very cool. So as a follow up, how much do you believe neo-Ottomanism and attempting regional hegemony has affected Erdogans domestic and foreign policy, especially in consideration of Turkeys shift towards the MENA in their foreign policy, after a period of withdrawals and no problems with neighbors policy?COOK: Great. Can I see that? Because thats a long question.FASKIANOS: Yeah, its a long question. Its got an up-vote. Third one down.COOK: Third one down. Elena, as a follow up, how much do you believe neo-OttomanismIm sorry, Im going to have to read it again. How much do you believe neo-Ottomanism and attempting regional has affected Erdogans both domestic and foreign policy, especially in consideration of Turkeys shift towards the MENA in their foreign policy, after a period of withdrawals and no problems with neighbors? OK. Great.So let us set aside the term neo-Ottomanism for now. Because neo-Ottomanism actuallyit does mean something, but people have often used the term neo-Ottomanism to describe policies of the Turkish government under President Erdogan that they dont like. And so lets just talk about the way in which the Turkish government under President Erdogan views the region and views what Turkeys rightful place should be. And I think the Ottomanism piece is important, because the kind of intellectual framework which the Justice and Development Party, which is Erdogans party, views the world, sees Turkey asfirst of all, it sees the Turkish Republic as a not-so-legitimate heir to the Ottoman Empire. That from their perspective, the natural order of things would have been the continuation of the empire in some form or another.And as a result, they believe that Turkeys natural place is a place of leadership in the region for a long time. Even before the Justice and Development Party was founded in 2001, Turkeys earlier generation of Islamists used to savage the Turkish leadership for its desire to be part of the West, by saying that this was kind of unnatural, that they were just merely aping the West, and the West was never actually going to accept Turkey. Which is probably true. But I think that the Justice and Development Party, after a period of wanting to become closer to the West, has turned its attention towards the Middle East, North Africa, and the Muslim world more generally.And in that, it sees itself, the Turks see themselves as the natural leaders in the region. They believe they have a cultural affinity to the region as a result of the legacies of the Ottoman Empire, and they very much can play this role of leader. They see themselves as one of the kind of few real countries in the region, along with Egypt and Iran and Saudi Arabia. And the rest are sort of ephemeral. Needless to say, big countries in the Arab worldlike Egypt, like Saudi Arabiadont welcome the idea of Turkey as a leader of the region. They recognize Turkey as a very big and important country, but not a leader of the region. And this is part of that friction that Turkey has experienced with its neighbors, after an earlier iteration of Turkish foreign policy, in whichone of the earliest iterations of Turkish foreign policy under the Justice and Development Party which was called no problems with neighbors. In which Turkey, regardless of the character of the regimes, wanted to have good relations with its neighbors. It could trade with those neighbors. And make everybodyin the process, Turkey could be a driver of economic development in the region, and everybody can be basically wealthy and happy. And it didnt really work out that way, for a variety of reasons that we dont have enough time for. Lets leave it at the fact that Turkey under Erdoganand a view that is shared by manythat Turkey should be a leader of the region. And I suspect that if Erdogan were to die, if he were unable to stand for election, if the opposition were to win, that there would still be elements of this desire to be a regional leader in a new Turkish foreign policy.FASKIANOS: Steven, thank you very much. This was really terrific. We appreciate your stepping in at the eleventh hour, taking time away from your book. For all of youCOOK: Im still not Sanam. FASKIANOS: (Laughs.) I know, but you were an awesome replacement. So you can follow Steven Cook on Twitter at @stevenacook. As I said at the beginning too, he is a columnist for Foreign Policy magazine. So you can read his work there, as well as, of course, on CFR.org, all of the commentary, analysis, op-eds, congressional testimony are there for free. So I hope you will follow him and look after his next book.Our next Academic Webinar will be on Wednesday November 3, at 1:00 p.m. Eastern time on the future of U.S.-Mexico relations. In the meantime, I encourage you to follow us, @CFR_Academic, visit CFR.org, ForeignAffairs.com, and ThinkGlobalHealth.org for new research and analysis on global issues. And stay well, stay safe, and thank you, again. COOK: Bye, everyone.FASKIANOS: Bye.(END)

Webinar with Steven A. Cook October 27, 2021 Academic and Higher Education Webinars

Read the original:

COVID-19 Vaccinations: Visualizing a Year of Global Progress and Inequity - Council on Foreign Relations

Updated Nov. 4, 2021, at 10:32 a.m. ET with additional information on Chinas nuclear capabilities.

MELBOURNE, Australia, and WASHINGTON China is expanding its nuclear force much faster than U.S. officials predicted a year ago, highlighting a broad and accelerating buildup of military muscle designed to enable Beijing to match or surpass U.S. global power by midcentury, according to a Pentagon report released Wednesday.

The Defense Departments 2021 report, commonly referred to as the China Military Power Report, said that the accelerating pace of Chinas nuclear expansion may enable it to have up to 700 deliverable nuclear warheads by 2027, and that China likely intends to have at least 1,000 warheads by 2030.

The United States, by comparison, has 3,750 nuclear weapons and has no plans to increase that number. As recently as 2003, the U.S. total was about 10,000. The Biden administration is undertaking a comprehensive review of its nuclear policy and has not said how that might be influenced by its China concerns.

The report does not suggest open conflict with China but it fits an emerging U.S. narrative of a Peoples Liberation Army intent on challenging the United States in all domains of warfare air, land, sea, space and cyberspace. Against that backdrop, U.S. defense officials have said they are increasingly wary of Chinas intentions with regard to the status of Taiwan.

The PLAs evolving capabilities and concepts continue to strengthen [Chinas] ability to fight and win wars against a strong enemy a likely euphemism for the United States, the report said, adding that it makes China more capable of coercing Taiwan, the self-ruled island that China claims as its territory.

Wednesdays report is the latest reminder to Congress, already leery of Beijings military ambitions, that the Pentagons frequent promises to focus more intently on countering China have moved only incrementally beyond the talking stage. The Biden administration is expected to take a new step by following through on its announcement in September of plans to increase the U.S. military presence in Australia, in addition to a controversial decision to help Australia acquire nuclear-powered submarines.

The report also flagged the possibility of China having already established a nascent nuclear triad with the development of a nuclear capable air-launched ballistic missile and improvements to its land- and sea-based nuclear capabilities.

The Pentagon report was based on information collected through December 2020 and so does not reflect or mention Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milleys expression of concern last month about Chinese hypersonic weapon tests over the summer that he said came as a troublesome surprise. Wednesdays report only referred to the widely known fact that China had fielded the DF-17 medium-range ballistic missile, equipped with a hypersonic glide vehicle designed to evade American missile defenses.

In remarks shortly before the reports release Wednesday, Milley told the Aspen Security Forum that the hypersonic missile test and other Chinese advances are evidence of what is at stake for the world. We are witnessing one of the largest shifts in global and geostrategic power that the world has witnessed, he said.

The airborne launch platform of this Chinese triad is the Xian H-6N bomber, a derivative of the H-6K that is optimized for long-range strikes and features a modified fuselage that allows it to externally carry an air-launched ballistic missile that maybe nuclear-capable.

The H-6N also possesses air-to-air refueling capability, the first variant of the type able to do so and thereby providing it greater range compared to other Chinese bombers. The report assesses that the Peoples Liberation Army Air Force has operationally fielded the H-6N bomber as of 2020 and is very likely to be developing tactics and procedures to conduct the PLAAF nuclear mission.

Chinas main nuclear delivery system is still the growing force of ballistic missiles in its arsenal that are capable of carrying nuclear or conventional warheads. The Pentagon report said China has commenced building at least three solid-fueled [intercontinental ballistic missiles] silo fields, which will cumulatively contain hundreds of new ICBM silos echoing earlier news reports based on open-source satellite imagery

The Pentagon report also said sources indicate a new long-range DF-27 ballistic missile with an officially stated range of 5,000-8,000 kilometers (3,100-5,000 miles) is under development. However, it is unclear if this is referring to the Chinese intercontinental glider system that was previously reported.

The naval leg of Chinas triad is also advancing, with the report noting that development of the Type 096-class ballistic missile submarine is continuing, and that when it is commissioned, the class is expected to serve alongside six older Type 094s.

The ballistic missile submarine fleet is expected to reach eight boats by 2030 with the Type 096 in service. The submarine will be equipped with JL-3 submarine-launched ballistic missiles, which would enable China to target the U.S. mainland with nuclear strikes from within Chinas littoral waters.

These ballistic missiles will receive up-to-date targeting information from Chinas growing fleet of reconnaissance and remote sensing satellites, that is estimated to number around 200, up from more than 80 in last years report.

However, anti-submarine warfare in open waters remains an Achilles heel for the Chinese military. The report acknowledged that China is aware of this shortfall and is improving its anti-sub warfare capabilities and training to better protect its aircraft carriers and ballistic missile submarines even as its naval force is projected to reach 460 ships by 2030.

The basis of the Pentagons prediction that China will vastly increase its nuclear arsenal is not spelled out in Wednesdays report. A senior defense official who briefed reporters in advance of the reports public release, and thus spoke on condition of anonymity, said the forecast reflects several known developments, such as Chinas addition of a nuclear bomber capability, as well as public statements in Chinese official media that have made reference to China needing 1,000 nuclear weapons.

Continue reading here:

Pentagon warns of China's progress toward nuclear triad - Military Times

A long-running decline in COVID-19 cases nationally masks some trouble spots emerging in the upper half of the United States. The disease is hitting states in the Mountain West such as Colorado, Utah and Wyoming especially hard, but even parts of the Northeast have dealt with a worrying surge in cases and hospitalizations. Helen H. Richardson/MediaNews Group/Denver Post via Getty Images hide caption

A long-running decline in COVID-19 cases nationally masks some trouble spots emerging in the upper half of the United States. The disease is hitting states in the Mountain West such as Colorado, Utah and Wyoming especially hard, but even parts of the Northeast have dealt with a worrying surge in cases and hospitalizations.

The U.S. has settled into an uneasy, drawn-out exit from the delta surge that took hold over the summer.

For many weeks, declining cases and hospitalizations have offered hope ahead of the holiday season, when Americans travel and spend more time indoors, but progress has stalled recently, with cases rising or plateauing in more than 20 states.

In fact, the country's daily average of cases has hovered around 72,000 infections for the past two weeks as outbreaks smolder, particularly in the northern half of the country. About 40,000 people are in the hospital with COVID-19, under half of the peak in early September.

The Mountain West where vaccination coverage tends to be lower is the worst off, especially Colorado, Wyoming and Montana. Parts of the Southwest and Midwest are also trying to control an uptick. Even some of the heavily vaccinated Northeast has been dealing with increases during the fall.

Modeling suggests that cases will likely stay high through the holiday season but will not accelerate into a new nationwide surge as occurred last year, says Dr. David Rubin, who leads the COVID-19 modeling group at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.

"The next few weeks are really going to tell us about the holiday season," he says. "I've got cautious optimism, particularly in highly vaccinated areas right now."

Now that younger kids can start to get vaccinated, that could make a substantial difference in controlling cases as families gather together. That gives Rubin "the greatest hope that our worst days are behind us."

Some experts are less sanguine about what direction the pandemic is heading, though.

"There is more than enough human wood for this coronavirus forest fire to burn," says Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. Researchers there estimate that about 70 million Americans remain vulnerable to the virus due to a combination of waning immunity and lack of vaccination.

"It's not going to look like it was in January because we have a lot of immunity," says Dr. Julie Parsonnet, a professor of epidemiology and population health at Stanford University. "But we're going to see waves the peak of the waves is going to get lower and lower, but we're still going to see them as the population gets more and more immune."

As cases have plummeted in the South, many parts of the West have contended with their worst surges to date.

"In the 12 years I've been with the hospital, it's hands down the busiest, including compared to last fall," says Dr. Andy Dunn, head of primary care at Wyoming Medical Center, the state's largest hospital. "We're seeing more COVID patients, and we're seeing sicker COVID patients."

With only about 44% of its population fully vaccinated, Wyoming ranks below almost every other state. This reality, coupled with the arrival of the delta variant of the coronavirus, had Dunn's hospital prepping months ago: "We knew it was going to hit, so it's been very stressful."

In Utah, health officials were on the brink of activating statewide plans to ration care last fall, and now the situation looks nearly as bad, says Dr. Angela Dunn, executive director at the Salt Lake County Health Department.

"We are definitely in a crisis in terms of people getting the care they need," she says. "When a patient needs an ICU bed, it takes us two to three hours because they're all full. Usually it takes 10 minutes."

To her dismay, many members of the public seem unaware of the distress in their local hospitals. And Dunn's hope that this would propel more people to get vaccinated Utah's vaccination rate is about 53% have not materialized. "We're just seeing a really low, slow uptake," she says.

Meanwhile, Colorado's governor, Jared Polis, has issued orders that allow hospitals to turn away some patients if necessary and that clarify when hospitals can activate the state's crisis standards of care plan, due to the crush of patients filling up intensive care units.

"We have all these COVID-positive patients, but we also have a lot of other patients that during our last major surge we weren't seeing," says Dr. Michelle Barron, medical director of infection control and prevention at UCHealth, Colorado's largest health system.

The backlog of other patients, often people who delayed care, and the staffing shortages have put its hospitals in a precarious position. Colorado has vaccinated more than 60% of its population against COVID-19, putting it ahead of many other neighboring states. But Barron says that this still leaves plenty of people who are potentially susceptible to infection or who can have complications because their immune system is compromised.

"The vast majority of the patients that we're seeing really are those that are still unvaccinated," she says.

Even some states that had set the standard for successful vaccination campaigns have weathered a big wave of infections this fall.

Vermont is one sobering example.

The state has vaccinated more than 70% of its population against COVID-19, including the vast majority of its older adults. Still, it hit new records in daily coronavirus cases last month, although the per capita rate was not as high as in many states at the peak of their surges.

"We had as many or more patients at this point than we've ever had over the course of the last two years," says Dr. Rick Hildebrant, chief of hospital medicine at Rutland Regional Medical Center in Rutland, Vermont. "But we have never seen the type of scenarios in other parts of the country, where the hospital systems have just been overwhelmed by COVID."

In fact, COVID-19 accounts for a small portion of the overall patient volume in Vermont's hospitals, which are also struggling with very busy emergency rooms and the consequences of deferred care. However, the added stress of a coronavirus surge has pushed the hospitals to "operate beyond capacity for weeks," says Tim Lahey, an infectious disease physician at UVM Medical Center.

"It's a clarion call to other states that are catching up to Vermont: Just because you have high adult vaccination percentages doesn't mean that the game is over," he says.

While cases are now trending down in the state, Lahey says the surge there has also revealed that a "vaccine only" strategy one that dispenses with interventions like masks can be risky when a relatively small portion of the population remains unvaccinated.

But Vermont's experience does underscore that well-vaccinated states can stave off the kind of disaster seen in other states such as Idaho and Wyoming, where half, if not more, of the population remains unvaccinated, hospitals were overwhelmed and death rates were much higher.

"The data is unassailable at this point in terms of the protection of broad community vaccination against severe disease," says Rubin, of Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.

Some major cities in the Northeast have also seen increased transmission this fall, he says, but "they're still holding up pretty well," and that could mean they "prove somewhat resilient through the holiday season."

The rest is here:

The COVID surge was on the decline. Now progress has stalled out : Shots - Health News - NPR

The figure of the modeling agent must be up there with the personal injury lawyer and the tobacco lobbyist as far as stock villain professions go. Has an honorable and kindly modeling agent ever been committed to print, film, television or stage? Are those very words doomed to suggest a leering cartoon rubbing his hands together and making ah-ooga noises as an underpaid model toils to funnel money into his cartoon bank account?

Emily Ratajkowskis book of essays will not alter the record. It features multiple modeling agents, none of them savory. One arranges for Ratajkowski to attend the Super Bowl with a random financier for $25,000. (Its left to his client to infer that the words go to contain certain expectations.) Another pauses on a photo of Ratajkowski as a teenager and says, Now this is the look. This is how we know this girl gets [expletive]. A third agent sends Ratajkowski, at 20 years old, to a job in the Catskills without mentioning that its a lingerie shoot, or that the photographer will show Ratajkowski nude photos of another woman, or that he will request that she, too, remove her clothes.

The Catskills voyage turns into a horror story. After being sexually assaulted by the photographer, Ratajkowski, having nowhere else to go, sleeps at his house, only to wake and find him posting a photo of her on Instagram. Adding injury to injury, the photographer later publishes a book of the photos taken the evening of the assault, leaving Ratajkowski livid and frantic as the book sells out, goes through reprints and sells out again.

That essay, called Buying Myself Back, is the strongest of the 11 collected here, which are serious, personal, repetitive and myopic. This is a book about capitalism, Ratajkowski told The New York Times in an interview. Arguably, the sleazy photographer could say the same about his book of ill-gotten pictures. But while he merely demonstrates the unremarkable fact that men daily exploit womens bodies for money (and pleasure, and fame, and Oscars), what Ratajkowski describes in the essay which was received with both applause and backlash is the ambiguity of exploiting her own body.

That ambiguity is present in these essays, often frustratingly so. Part of the problem is that Ratajkowskis conception of herself is at odds with the reality she describes, which is a sincere but exasperating kind of celebrity dysmorphia. Evaluating her career, she concludes: My position brought me in close proximity to wealth and power and brought me some autonomy, but it hasnt resulted in true empowerment. Only Ratajkowski can determine her sense of autonomy. But wealth and power are more easily quantified, and it seems fair to insist that Ratajkowski with a booming womens wear line, 28 million Instagram followers, a partnership with LOreal and a Super Bowl ad under her belt is not merely in close proximity to either.

In an essay titled Bc Hello Halle Berry, Ratajkowski gets paid to go on vacation in the Maldives and grows annoyed when her husband calls her a capitalist. That comment comes when the two of them are lounging on beach chairs, doing a bit of people-watching. I pointed out that we werent like the other guests at this resort, Ratajkowski writes. The other guests, she tells her husband, are real rich people.

Cmon, baby, her husband says. Youre a capitalist, too, admit it.

Im trying to succeed in a capitalist system, Ratajkowski responds. But that doesnt mean I like the game. This is broadly relatable; Im pretty sure most people who arent Jeff Bezos feel displeased by their standing in the American economy of 2021. But merely being aware that you are doing something you consider morally shaky does not constitute resistance or absolution. In this case, the morally shaky part centers on Ratajkowskis instinct that women are harmed by the abyss between themselves and the filtered, Facetuned, genetically or Photoshopically gifted individuals shown to them in ads implying that only X product can help narrow that abyss. Shortly before the beach conversation, Ratajkowski posts a photo of herself on Instagram to promote a bikini from her company. At breakfast she tallies up the likes for her husband: Five hundred thousand in an hour. Not bad. The title of the essay stems from a quote attributed to Halle Berry: My looks havent spared me one hardship. I bet that millions of unattractive people would disagree.

There are moments of courageous self-disclosure in My Body, and passages that made me laugh, like her description of a giant photo of Victorias Secret models arching their backs and holding index fingers up to their mouths as if flirtatiously telling me to shush. (You know the pose.) She performs a public service by excerpting the treatment for Robin Thickes Blurred Lines video, which might be the most embarrassing PDF in the history of entertainment. (A treatment is a pitch outlining the projected tone and content of the finished video.) Scrolling through it, Ratajkowski sees phrases like TRUE PIMP SWAG and NAKED GIRLS XXX and THIS IS FAR FROM MASOGYNIST. [sic] She declines the job, but reconsiders after meeting with the director a woman, to Ratajkowskis surprise and negotiating the rate up.

That video is what launched Ratajkowski to fame in 2013. With its onscreen hashtags and images of Thicke murmuring I know you want it in a models ear, the video now looks so dated it might as well be a Civil War daguerreotype. Ratajkowski is funny and charming, dancing goofily and rolling her eyes at the idiocy unfolding around her. But it is still a video that features three semi-naked females (the models) cavorting among three clothed men (the artists), demonstrating a vision the directors vision? Robin Thickes vision? Both, maybe? that nudity is precisely the skill these women bring to the table.

The essay about Blurred Lines is the one that most clearly captures the perplexing nature of Ratajkowskis position. Shes thoughtful and skeptical, and has been treated wretchedly over the course of her career; she grapples intently with her sense of victimization at the hands of those who would use her body to sell their products. It seems strange, then, that her empowerment should arrive in the form of doing exactly that, albeit on her own terms and with her own products. It is inarguably better that Ratajkowski, rather than some horny bozo, receive the profits from her image but does a more equitable distribution of cash really make a difference to the young women who scroll through Instagram, rapidly absorbing new reasons to despise themselves? That, it seems to me, is the unsolvable moral question at the heart of this book.

In a later essay, Transactions, Ratajkowski reprises the metaphor from the Maldives. Contemplating other models and actresses she has known, Ratajkowski writes: There was no way to avoid the game completely: We all had to make money one way or another. And yet there is no binary that consists of, on one side, Make money in a specific way and feel conflicted about it, and, on the other side, Dont make any money at all and feel virtuous. To frame it in those terms creates the false impression that there is, in the end, no choice an act of self-exoneration and, more to the point, disempowerment.

More:

In a World That Exploits Women, Emily Ratajkowski Exploits Herself. Is That Progress? - The New York Times

For most of the first half, Matanzasplayed toe to toe with one of the best football teams in Northeast Florida.

The Pirates scored on theirfirst two possessions and ledSt. Augustine 14-7 before the Yellow Jackets closed outthe second quarter with 17 straight points on the way to a 37-21 victory Friday, Oct. 22, at St. Augustine.

"We couldn't have scripted a better opening start," Matanzas coach Matt Forrest said. "There are no moral victories, but I thought we played our best game of the season against the toughest team on our schedule to date."

"We couldn't have scripted a better opening start. There are no moral victories, but I thought we played our best game of the season against the toughest team on our schedule to date."

MATT FORREST, Matanzas football coach

Noah Cundiff ended an eight-play, game-opening drive with a 17-yard touchdown catch from sophomore quarterback Dakwon Evans. After the Yellow Jackets tied it up at 7-7, Matanzas moved methodically downfield againwith Evans closing out an 11-play drive with a 10-yard touchdownrun.

"The first half we gave it everything we could," Forrest said. "We played well offensively, but we made mistakes on defense and special teams, and when you play a good team like that, you can't give them anything.

"St. Augustine has a longstanding tradition," Forrest added. "And the thing about them is they don't get rattled. In the third quarter when they went up by 17we went into a lull."

The Pirates would not score again until Tate Winecoff punched it in with a 2-yard run late in the fourth quarter.

"Our offensive line played a great game," Forrest said. "(Defensive back/receiver) Jordan Mills played well on both sides of the ball. Dakwon Evans played his best game of the season, and Noah, besides his touchdown catch, caught a lot of balls underneath."

St. Augustine improved to 5-2 overall, 3-2 in District 4-6A. Matanzas, which saw its two-game winstreak snapped, fell to 3-6 and 1-3.

After 10 straight weeks of football,including the kickoff classic, the Pirates will finally have a bye week before hosting cross-town rival Flagler Palm Coast on Nov. 5 in the season-ending Potato Bowl.

"We're going to rest and recover," Forrest said. "A lot of guys are banged up. It's been a long season. We're going to focus on ourselves, trying to getbetter, and we'll worry about Week 11 when it comes."

View original post here:

Plucky Pirates pleased with progress heading into Potato Bowl showdown - Palm Coast Observer

Wall Street likes what its hearing from Washington lately.

The S&P 500 inched to a new high on Thursday, continuing a rally aided by signs of progress in spending talks that could pave the way for an injection of some $3 trillion into the U.S. economy.

The index rose 0.3 percent to 4,549.78, its seventh straight day of gains and a fresh peak after more than a month of volatile trading driven by nervousness over the still-wobbly economic recovery and policy fights in Washington.

But even baby steps by lawmakers have helped end a market swoon that began in September.

Share prices began to rise this month when congressional leaders struck a deal to allow the government to avoid breaching the debt ceiling, ending a standoff that threatened to make it impossible for the country to pay its bills. The rally has gained momentum as investors and analysts grow increasingly confident about a government spending package using a recipe Wall Street can live with: big enough to bolster economic growth, but with smaller corporate tax increases than President Bidens original $3.5 trillion spending blueprint.

It seems like were kind of reaching a middle ground, said Paul Zemsky, chief investment officer, multi-asset strategies at Voya Investment Management. The president himself has acknowledged its not going to be $3.5 trillion, its going to be something less. The tax hikes are not going to be as much as the left really wanted.

Share prices had marched steadily higher for much of the summer, hitting a series of highs and cresting on Sept. 2. But a number of anxieties sapped their momentum as the certainty that markets crave began to evaporate. Gridlock over government spending, continuing supply chain snarls, higher prices for businesses and consumers and the Federal Reserves signals that it would begin dialing back its stimulus efforts all helped sour investor confidence. The S&P 500s 4.8 percent drop in September was its worst month since the start of the pandemic.

It has made up for it in October, rising 5.6 percent this month. But its not just updates out of Washington that have renewed investors optimism.

The country has seen a sharp drop in coronavirus infections in recent weeks, raising, once again, the prospect that economic activity can begin to normalize. And the recent round of corporate earnings results that began in earnest this month has started better than many analysts expected. Large Wall Street banks, in particular, reported blockbuster results fueled by juicy fees paid to the banks deal makers, thanks to a surge of merger activity.

Elsewhere, shares of energy giants have also buoyed the broad stock market. The price of crude oil recently climbed back above $80 a barrel for the first time in roughly seven years, translating into an instant boost to revenues for energy companies.

But the recent rally seemed find its footing two weeks ago. On Oct. 6, word broke that Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, was willing to offer a temporary reprieve allowing Congress to raise the debt ceiling. The market turned on a dime from its morning slump, finishing the day in positive territory. That week turned out to be the markets best since August.

Once done as a matter of course in Washington, raising the debt ceiling has been an increasingly contentious issue in recent years with sometimes serious implications for the market. In August 2011, a rancorous battle over the debt ceiling sent share prices tumbling sharply as investors began to consider the prospect that the United States could actually default on its debts.

But the recent deal on the ceiling even though it only pushed a reckoning into December suggested to investors that theres little appetite in Washington for a replay of a decade ago.

I think that let some pressure out of the system, said Alan McKnight, chief investment officer of Regions Asset Management. What it signaled to the markets was that you can find some area of agreement. It may not be very large. But at least they can come together.

With the impasse broken, the rally gained strength. Last Thursday, the S&P 500 jumped 1.7 percent its best day in roughly seven months as financial giants like Morgan Stanley and Bank of America reported stellar results.

Potential progress on a deal in Washington has only brightened investors outlook.

Democrats are now moving in the same direction, and hard decisions are being made, wrote Dan Clifton, an analyst with Strategas Research, who monitors the impact of policy on financial markets, in a note to clients on Wednesday.

What is the debt ceiling? The debt ceiling, also called the debt limit,is a cap on the total amount of money that the federal government is authorized to borrow via U.S.Treasury bills and savings bonds to fulfill its financial obligations. Because the U.S. runs budget deficits, it must borrow huge sums of money to pay its bills.

When will the debt limit be breached? After Senate leaders agreed to a short-term dealto raise the debt ceiling on Oct. 7, the Treasury estimated that the government can continue borrowing through Dec. 3. The deal sets up yet another consequential deadlinefor the first Friday in December.

Why does the U.S. limit its borrowing? According to the Constitution, Congress must authorize borrowing. The debt limit was instituted in the early 20th century so the Treasury did not need to ask for permission each time it needed to issue bonds to pay bills.

What would happen if the debt limit was hit? Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen told Congressthat inaction on raising the debt limit could lead to a self-inflicted economic recession and a financial crisis. She also said that failing to raise the debt ceiling could affect programs that help millions of Americans, including delays to Social Security payments.

Do other countries do it this way? Denmark also has a debt limit, but it is set so high that raising it is generally not an issue. Most other countries do not. In Poland, public debt cannot exceed 60 percent of gross domestic product.

What are the alternatives to the debt ceiling? The lack of a replacement is one of the main reasons the debt ceiling has persisted. Ms. Yellen said that she would support legislation to abolish the debt limit, which she described as destructive. It would take an act of Congress to do away with the debt limit.

On Thursday, analysts spotlighted the news that the White House and congressional Democrats were moving toward dropping corporate tax increases they had wanted to include in the bill, as they hoped to forge a deal that could clear the Senate. A spending deal without corporate tax increases would be a potential boon to profits and share prices.

A stay of execution on higher corporate tax rates would seem a potentially noteworthy development, Daragh Maher, a currency analyst with HSBC Securities, wrote in a note to clients on Thursday.

An agreement among Democrats on whats expected to be a roughly $2 trillion spending plan would also open the door to a separate $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure plan moving through Congress. Progressives in the House are blocking the infrastructure bill until agreement is reached on the larger bill.

But the prospects for an agreement have helped to lift shares of major engineering and construction materials companies. Terex, which makes equipment used for handling construction materials like stone and asphalt, has jumped more than 5 percent this week. The asphalt maker Vulcan Materials has risen more than 4 percent. Dycom, which specializes in construction and engineering of telecommunication networking systems, was up more than 9 percent.

The renewed confidence remains fragile, with good reason. The coronavirus continues to affect business operations around the world, and the Delta variant demonstrated just how disruptive a new iteration of the virus can be.

Another lingering concern involves the higher costs companies face for everything from raw materials to shipping to labor. If they are unable to pass those higher costs on to consumers, it will cut into their profits.

That would be big, Mr. McKnight said. That would be a material impact to the markets.

But going into the final months of the year traditionally a good time for stocks the market also has plenty of reasons to push higher.

The recent weeks of bumpy trading may have chased shareholders with low confidence sometimes known as weak hands on Wall Street out of the market, offering potential bargains to long-term buyers.

Interest rates are relatively stable. Earnings are booming. Covid cases, thankfully, are dropping precipitously in the U.S., Mr. Zemsky said. The weak hands have left the markets and theres plenty of jobs. So why shouldnt we have new highs?

Go here to see the original:

Stocks Hit a Record as Investors See Progress Toward a Spending Deal - The New York Times

The Progress MS-17 spacecraft approaches the International space Station for docking Friday. Credit: Roscosmos

A Russian Progress supply ship docked with the new Nauka lab module at the International Space Station Friday, completing a 29-hour free flight after detaching from a different port at the complex.

The relocation positions the Progress spacecraft to assist with leak checks of the Nauka modules propulsion system, which will be used to help control the space stations attitude, or orientation, as it loops around Earth in orbit every hour-and-a-half.

The unpiloted Progress MS-17 supply ship undocked from the space stations Poisk module at 7:42 p.m. EDT (2342 GMT) Wednesday and backed away to a distance of 115 miles (185 kilometers) from the orbital outpost.

Once the spacecraft was the proper distance from the station, the Progress initiated a new approach to the complex using space-based navigation and a Kurs rendezvous radar system. The automated approach culminated in a docking with the Nauka module at 12:21 a.m. EDT (0421 GMT) Friday.

The docking was the first link-up of a Progress cargo freighter with the Nauka module, which arrived at the space station July 29, becoming the largest addition to the research complex in more than a decade. A Soyuz crew ship relocated to the Nauka module last month before departing Oct. 16 to head for landing, freeing up the modules docking port for the Progress MS-17 supply ship.

Nauka, which means science, had a troubled flight to the space station after launch from the Baikonur Cosmodrome on July 21. After encountering propulsion problems during the flight to the station, the Nauka module successfully docked with the Zvezda service module to wrap up the eight-day trip.

But hours after docking, thrusters on Nauka inadvertently started firing due to a software glitch. The thrusters forced the space station off its proper attitude and into a slow tumble. The station made one-and-a-half rotations before its other thrusters regained pointing control.

The Progress MS-17 spacecraft now docked to Nauka will perform leak checks of the modules propellant lines over the next few weeks.

Russias new Prichal node module will take the place of the Progress MS-17 spacecraft at the Nauka docking port next month.

The Prichal module is scheduled for launch Nov. 24 from the Baikonur Cosmodrome on a Soyuz rocket, followed by docking to the Nauka module Nov. 26.

Once the Prichal module is in orbit on the way to the space station, the Progress MS-17 spacecraft will depart Nauka on Nov. 25, taking with it a docking adapter that launched with Nauka to temporarily accommodate Soyuz and Progress vehicles.

The Prichal module will become a standard docking location for visiting Soyuz crew ferry ships.

Email the author.

Follow Stephen Clark on Twitter: @StephenClark1.

Read more:

Progress cargo ship relocated to new module at International Space Station Spaceflight Now - Spaceflight Now

WASHINGTON, Oct 21 (Reuters) - Brawling factions of the Democratic Party on Thursday worked feverishly toward agreement on a huge U.S. social spending bill, even as Senator Joe Manchin said there would not be a deal "anytime soon" on broad outlines of legislation that is a pillar of President Joe Biden's agenda.

The warning from the key centrist lawmaker indicated that Democrats were still not close to agreeing on the size and contents of Biden's spending package.

"This is not going to happen anytime soon," Manchin told reporters.

With closed-door talks being held throughout the day, there were conflicting assessments of how rapidly disagreements could be resolved.

Democrats have spent months arguing about the size and scope of what Biden initially proposed as a $3.5 trillion plan to expand the social safety net and fight climate change.

Negotiators might cut it down to about $2 trillion or less. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal told reporters his goal was $2 trillion.

Manchin - who along with fellow moderate Senator Kyrsten Sinema has been pushing for a smaller package - had said earlier he believed Democratic negotiators could settle on a final figure by Friday. That would resolve a key sticking point, although progressives and moderates would still have to sort out the substance of the bill, including what programs to keep, what to cut, and how long to fund them.

Neal said he had talks with Sinema and that the two lawmakers were in "full agreement" on major initiatives, such as extending an expanded child tax credit and family and medical leave.

"I still think there's a long ways to go but the conversation was really good," Neal said.

Raising tax rates for corporations and wealthy individuals has been a hot-button issue for months in negotiations, spurring ideas for other ways to raise revenues.

"Senator Sinema has agreed to provisions in each of President Biden's four proposed revenue categories - international, domestic corporate, high net-worth individuals, and tax enforcement - providing sufficient revenue to fully pay for a budget reconciliation package in the range currently being discussed," a source familiar with the negotiations said.

The source did not provide details.

Sinema has told the White House she will not support Biden's proposed rate increases for corporations and wealthy individuals. The White House told some Democrats this week that the corporate tax hikes may be dead.

Representative Pramila Jayapal, who heads the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said the tax provisions were vital to the success of the legislation.

"I think it says terrible things about us as Democrats if we can't get those in here because of one senator," Jayapal told reporters.

FRAMEWORK DEAL SOON?

Democratic Senator Ben Cardin said he expected Democrats would agree on a total price tag within days, leaving lawmakers to fill in the details.

"I think they've got to stay in over the weekend to try to get this resolved," he said.

Biden told lawmakers on Tuesday he thought he could get Manchin and Sinema to agree to a figure in the range of $1.75 trillion to $1.9 trillion, according to a source familiar with the talks, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Getting to that number could mean giving up or delaying priorities, including a plan to offer all Americans the opportunity to attend two years of free community college, and scaling back others such as a child tax credit and funds for affordable housing.

Disagreements over the scale of the bill have held up Biden's domestic agenda, with progressives in the House of Representatives refusing to vote for a $1 trillion infrastructure bill already passed by the Senate until a deal is reached on social programs and climate change.

If a deal is promptly reached on the outlines of the big social spending bill, it could clear the way for House passage of the infrastructure bill as soon as next week.

Another stumbling block involves how to lower pharmaceutical prices.

A Sinema aide rejected media reports she does not want to give the government authority to negotiate lower drug prices for the Medicare healthcare program for seniors. The issue as been a Democratic priority for decades.

"As part of her direct negotiations over the reconciliation package, she is carefully reviewing various proposals around this issue," said the aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the final package could contain no tax rate increases at all.

During a visit to his native Scranton, Pennsylvania, on Wednesday, Biden said the social spending legislation, plus the infrastructure bill, would create 2 million jobs a year for 20 years and not raise the deficit.

Reporting by David Morgan and Richard Cowan; Additional reporting by Doina Chiacu and Timothy Gardner; Writing by Andy Sullivan; Editing by Scott Malone, Jonathan Oatis and Peter Cooney

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read more:

Divided Democrats see slow progress on Biden's social spending bill - Reuters

Country

United States of AmericaUS Virgin IslandsUnited States Minor Outlying IslandsCanadaMexico, United Mexican StatesBahamas, Commonwealth of theCuba, Republic ofDominican RepublicHaiti, Republic ofJamaicaAfghanistanAlbania, People's Socialist Republic ofAlgeria, People's Democratic Republic ofAmerican SamoaAndorra, Principality ofAngola, Republic ofAnguillaAntarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S)Antigua and BarbudaArgentina, Argentine RepublicArmeniaArubaAustralia, Commonwealth ofAustria, Republic ofAzerbaijan, Republic ofBahrain, Kingdom ofBangladesh, People's Republic ofBarbadosBelarusBelgium, Kingdom ofBelizeBenin, People's Republic ofBermudaBhutan, Kingdom ofBolivia, Republic ofBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswana, Republic ofBouvet Island (Bouvetoya)Brazil, Federative Republic ofBritish Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago)British Virgin IslandsBrunei DarussalamBulgaria, People's Republic ofBurkina FasoBurundi, Republic ofCambodia, Kingdom ofCameroon, United Republic ofCape Verde, Republic ofCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChad, Republic ofChile, Republic ofChina, People's Republic ofChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombia, Republic ofComoros, Union of theCongo, Democratic Republic ofCongo, People's Republic ofCook IslandsCosta Rica, Republic ofCote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of theCyprus, Republic ofCzech RepublicDenmark, Kingdom ofDjibouti, Republic ofDominica, Commonwealth ofEcuador, Republic ofEgypt, Arab Republic ofEl Salvador, Republic ofEquatorial Guinea, Republic ofEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFaeroe IslandsFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Fiji, Republic of the Fiji IslandsFinland, Republic ofFrance, French RepublicFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabon, Gabonese RepublicGambia, Republic of theGeorgiaGermanyGhana, Republic ofGibraltarGreece, Hellenic RepublicGreenlandGrenadaGuadaloupeGuamGuatemala, Republic ofGuinea, RevolutionaryPeople's Rep'c ofGuinea-Bissau, Republic ofGuyana, Republic ofHeard and McDonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)Honduras, Republic ofHong Kong, Special Administrative Region of ChinaHrvatska (Croatia)Hungary, Hungarian People's RepublicIceland, Republic ofIndia, Republic ofIndonesia, Republic ofIran, Islamic Republic ofIraq, Republic ofIrelandIsrael, State ofItaly, Italian RepublicJapanJordan, Hashemite Kingdom ofKazakhstan, Republic ofKenya, Republic ofKiribati, Republic ofKorea, Democratic People's Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwait, State ofKyrgyz RepublicLao People's Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanon, Lebanese RepublicLesotho, Kingdom ofLiberia, Republic ofLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtenstein, Principality ofLithuaniaLuxembourg, Grand Duchy ofMacao, Special Administrative Region of ChinaMacedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascar, Republic ofMalawi, Republic ofMalaysiaMaldives, Republic ofMali, Republic ofMalta, Republic ofMarshall IslandsMartiniqueMauritania, Islamic Republic ofMauritiusMayotteMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldova, Republic ofMonaco, Principality ofMongolia, Mongolian People's RepublicMontserratMorocco, Kingdom ofMozambique, People's Republic ofMyanmarNamibiaNauru, Republic ofNepal, Kingdom ofNetherlands AntillesNetherlands, Kingdom of theNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaragua, Republic ofNiger, Republic of theNigeria, Federal Republic ofNiue, Republic ofNorfolk IslandNorthern Mariana IslandsNorway, Kingdom ofOman, Sultanate ofPakistan, Islamic Republic ofPalauPalestinian Territory, OccupiedPanama, Republic ofPapua New GuineaParaguay, Republic ofPeru, Republic ofPhilippines, Republic of thePitcairn IslandPoland, Polish People's RepublicPortugal, Portuguese RepublicPuerto RicoQatar, State ofReunionRomania, Socialist Republic ofRussian FederationRwanda, Rwandese RepublicSamoa, Independent State ofSan Marino, Republic ofSao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic ofSaudi Arabia, Kingdom ofSenegal, Republic ofSerbia and MontenegroSeychelles, Republic ofSierra Leone, Republic ofSingapore, Republic ofSlovakia (Slovak Republic)SloveniaSolomon IslandsSomalia, Somali RepublicSouth Africa, Republic ofSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSpain, Spanish StateSri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic ofSt. HelenaSt. Kitts and NevisSt. LuciaSt. Pierre and MiquelonSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudan, Democratic Republic of theSuriname, Republic ofSvalbard & Jan Mayen IslandsSwaziland, Kingdom ofSweden, Kingdom ofSwitzerland, Swiss ConfederationSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwan, Province of ChinaTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailand, Kingdom ofTimor-Leste, Democratic Republic ofTogo, Togolese RepublicTokelau (Tokelau Islands)Tonga, Kingdom ofTrinidad and Tobago, Republic ofTunisia, Republic ofTurkey, Republic ofTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUganda, Republic ofUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom of Great Britain & N. IrelandUruguay, Eastern Republic ofUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofViet Nam, Socialist Republic ofWallis and Futuna IslandsWestern SaharaYemenZambia, Republic ofZimbabwe

Go here to read the rest:

Bring on the infrastructure progress | Opinion | swoknews.com - The Lawton Constitution

As Golden State ran its offensive system deeper into the shot clock, the Lakers helplessly chased Stephen Curry and Jordan Poole, running after the Warriors backcourt like a child chasing a puppy always too many steps behind to stop them.

The hope is that months from now the Lakers will be so connected and in tune with their defensive philosophies that theyll make up for not always being quicker by being smarter and more disciplined.

Obviously, we want to contain the ball one-on-one, win our one-on-one matchups. But if a guy gets beat and guys are gonna get beat off the dribble or off a closeout then our team defense has to be there, Anthony Davis said after Lakers practice Thursday. And its not just guarding the first action. If they drive, kick it, swing, pick and roll, swing, drive its multiple actions. And thats where weve got to get better, just playing through the whole 24.

Theyre not their yet. Minus the kind of elite on-ball defense that former Lakers like Alex Caruso and Kentavious Caldwell-Pope provided, the Lakers are going to need to be better as a group. That takes time and patience.

Obviously, thats a concern of mine, coach Frank Vogel said of the Lakers lacking a wing stopper. But we have to get the job done regardless of that. What I like is that we have two-way players. Everybody on our roster is good on both sides. Theres just not this specialist that we had guys that are elite on that side of the ball.

But theres other benefits to the other side, too, you know what I mean? And our thing is we just have to get our guys really executing our scheme at a high level. If they execute our scheme and chase their perimeter guys into our bigs the right way, and then pass them off the way we want to within our scheme, were confident that we should have an elite defense again.

The Lakers have had two top defenses in the top three during Vogels tenure, and hes regarded as one of the NBAs best tacticians in that regard. But the team doesnt have the same pieces, particularly on the perimeter.

With news that backup guard Kendrick Nunn, considered by some scouts to be one of the Lakers best perimeter defenders, will miss the next few weeks because of a bone bruise, the options on the outside are even thinner.

He joins guard Talen Horton-Tucker (thumb), forward Trevor Ariza (ankle) and guard Wayne Ellington (hamstring) as players unavailable for the Lakers game against Phoenix on Friday at Staples Center.

The great thing is we have depth, Vogel said. If everybody is healthy, were gonna have to make some difficult decisions as to which guys to go to, its just brought clarity to those decisions. Its not a situation where we dont believe in the guys that we have. We have the right depth to still get the job done. We dont feel like thats going to limit us.

The Lakers might end up turning more to veteran guard Avery Bradley, who the team claimed off of waivers after Bradley lost a bid for a spot with the Warriors.

Davis said Lakers general manager Rob Pelinka checked with him and LeBron James this summer once the Houston Rockets turned down Bradleys team option, wanting to make sure there were no bad feelings about Bradley opting out of the NBA bubble. He cited concerns for the health of his young son, who struggled to recover from respiratory illnesses, as to why he stayed behind.

It got brought up to us and Rob asked us, obviously, because of the whole bubble situation and all that to make sure we were all good. And we were all good, Davis said. And then this summer, we knew we had an opportunity from the buyout. We talked to him for a little bit. It didnt work out. And then we had another opportunity and we were able to get him the third time around. We definitely wanted him here. What he can bring to us defensively and offensively is something that we need.

After badly struggling in his first game with the Lakers, guard Russell Westbrook impressed his teammates with his attitude and production during Thursdays work.

He was himself. As a person and on the floor, Davis said. He got to some of his moves, the post-ups, where he scores. Dribble back downs where he scores and dribble pull-ups off the glass his go-to when he scores. Talking [expletive] to everybody and all that.

He was his normal self and its good to see that. He had a day off to reflect, get over it, flush it. And then come back to practice and get back to being himself. And hopefully it carries over to tomorrow where he can be Russell Westbrook.

Carmelo Anthony said while he doesnt know what Westbrook is dealing with specifically as he integrates to a new team, hes walked in those shoes before strangely enough when he joined Oklahoma City to play with Westbrook and Paul George.

Newsletter

All things Lakers, all the time.

Get all the Lakers news you need in Dan Woike's weekly newsletter.

Enter email address

Sign Me Up

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.

Were here to keep him positive, keep him motivated, keep him understanding that theres only one game. Hell figure it out. Youll figure it out. Well help you figure it out, Anthony said. But yeah, I know what its like, I know what its like being from here and wearing the white hat on the team to being one of the guys whos wearing the white hat on the team. So its a different feeling, a different emotion, a different mindset that you have to have.

UP NEXT

VS. PHOENIX

When: 7:30 p.m., Friday

On the air: TV: ESPN, Spectrum SportsNet; Radio: 710, 1330

Update: The Lakers season debut of their overhauled roster ended with a thud Tuesday against the Golden State Warriors, and things should only be tougher Friday when the Phoenix Suns come to Staples Center. The Suns are coming off a trip to the NBA Finals and have retained all their key players while the Lakers are still figuring each other out. Considering Phoenix lost its home opener, youd expect Chris Paul, Devin Booker and the Suns to be extra sharp on Friday.

Read more from the original source:

Lakers' defense is a work in progress that will take time - Los Angeles Times