Call for Papers: D&S Vol. 8, Iss. 2

We are seeking well-written, interesting submissions of 1500-2000 words on the themes below, including summaries and/or excerpts of recently completed research, new publications, and works in progress. Submissions for the issue are due Friday, March 4, 2011. Continue reading »

2010 in Review

Once again, we’ve spent the year expanding D&S.   We have new contributors, including David, Elizabeth and Imara, D&S is now on Facebook, we published the Spring 2010 issue, with the Fall issue on the way, the complete archives are now available, we added a page of special reports from the CDACS and DG staff and students and we continued to provide quality snark and commentary on foreign affairs and international development.

Here’s a brief review to ring out the old year.

Top Posts

On Facebook

• Federalism and Democracy Development
• I Can’t Believe these People Govern Us
• Human Rights, Media Manipulation and Technological Attacks
• Diplomacy and Development: Best Friends for Life
• Busted

On the Blog

Returning from last year, Why Do People Protest still lands in the Top 5 posts on the blog.  The other Top 5 posts are:

• The Simpsons Turn 20
• Here’s a Dumb Idea
• The ‘Africa Porn’ Problem
• Event: Emerging Leaders for Democracy

Most Commented

Another of last year’s posts (Obama Needs a Vision Check) continues to be one of the most commented posts.  The others include:

• Freedom of Religion and US Foreign Policy
• I Stand by My Post
• Our Long National Nightmare Is Over
• Economic Success & Regime Change

Thank You

We’d like to say thank you to all of our Fans, Friends and followers, and in particular, to the following for ReTweeting, linking, and generally loving our stuff!

• Gregg Wilhauck at the CIPE Development Blog
• John Brown’s Public Diplomacy Press and Blog Review
• Everyone over at The Democratic Piece
• @SMSLegal @pcdnetwork @mmckone @NDItech @penelopeinparis @auerswald @viewfromthecave @USIP @elizabethcutler @demdigest @vargheseanand @amellionaire @Adamdougl @odonnellm @DavidJandura @SwahiliStreet @xrauscher_ @intljurist @Tobias_B @gerardtmccarthy @CIPEGlobal @iapss @msfsinfo @Grieboski @LisaofArabia @Snov @GUInstituteLSGS @electionguide @woodenbeirut @arenda @Tosk59 @GUConflictRes

Happy New Year from all of us at D&S and Georgetown CDACS!

Human Rights, Media Manipulation & Technological Attacks

Image courtesy of worsttech.com

So, in the wake of the most recent WikiLeaks scandal, the diplomatic cabletastrophy, the MasterCard “cyber attacks” and the attack on the Iranian nuclear program lots of new language has been added to the media vocabulary.  Until just a few weeks ago the vast majority of Americans had no clue what a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack, nor certainly viewed internet crime as any sort of national security issue.  Now it seems politically motivated cyber attacks are all the rage, and though these are the newest forms of political attacks popularized in news media, they’ve been a popular  weapons against human rights organizations for ages.

Yet, not surprisingly, one rarely if ever hears about cyber attacks on human rights organizations and sources of independent media.  Perhaps at least in part because excluding major efforts of governments and the like, they tend not to actually be that big of a deal.  Contrary to the sea of tweets and TV news stories, cyber attacks, while certainly pretty fierce and frightening displays of political beliefs, tend not to cause earth shattering meltdowns.  As with more traditional political attacks, these recent attacks have had an impressive impact in bringing public attention to a host of differing political ideologies.

If not for sharp manipulation of mainstream media sources, WikiLeaks probably never would’ve stood out among the sea of nerdy political sites.  Whatever the WikiLeaks scandals amount to in history, the organization certainly will have had a profound impact on the US populace and international community in bringing the influence of technology into the public eye.

China’s Internet Woes & the Cabletastrophy

Image courtesy of J.Anderson & The Tech Herald

James Glanz & John Markoff’s recent New York Times article on China’s discomfort with the internet is another in the recent string of articles discussing the WikiLeaks scandal and foreign policy.  I have to admit, on reading their article I found myself more than a little tickled at some of the issues brought up.  In light of the scandals, one could certainly argue that the government of China has been rather reasonable in fearing the dangers presented by the internet.  Given my appreciation of democracy as the preferred method of governance, of course I think China would be well served to loosen up, but in my own country the government’s reaction to the diplomatic cabletastrophy has been anything but forgiving.

I’m sure that there will be lots of news in the next few days regarding the accusation of Chinese “cyber attacks” on Google, but the issue I find interesting is one that seemed largely a side note.  On reading the article I was struck by the continued “misunderstanding” regarding China’s interpretation of the relationship between private organizations and the governments they exist in.  Earlier this year drama arose between the governments of China and Norway, over the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to jailed Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo.  Along similar lines, in the recent diplomatic cable leak there are claims that Chinese officials put pressure on the United States government to censor Google Earth.

Warnings that the US would be responsible if terrorists used the information presented through Google to attack China, strike me as similar to the issues between China and Norway.  These incidents speak to a strange broader problem in China’s government either honestly or rhetorically failing to understand the separation between government and private institutions. In some ways I suspect WikiLeaks has a great deal more to fear from antagonizing the government of China, even collaterally, than it does the government of the United States.

WikiLeaks, Diplomatic Secrets and US Foreign Policy

Image courtesy of Beehivecity.com

More likely than not if you’re reading this blog and interested in issues of foreign policy you’ve heard about the most recent WikiLeaks controversy.  Regardless of one’s opinion on American foreign policy, and however one may feel about organizations like WikiLeaks, a quarter-million confidential diplomatic cables being publicly released is a pretty big deal.  Judging by the reactions of our administration the “candid” nature of these cables is likely to cause all manner of problems in regard to the country’s current efforts abroad.

More than judging the moral righteousness of the recent leaks or pondering the potential dangers they present to individuals in the field, this most recent WikiLeaks scandal strikes at issues relevant to all Americans.  This leak is an excellent reflection of our growing troubles with domestic privacy and the ability to speak freely. Amusingly, the fact that our government is the victim of this recent espionage has raised some interesting questions regarding the broader issue of the secure nature of communication.  In a way our government seems tragically slow to catch on to the same realities of security the rest of us have to deal with on a daily basis.

I understand the importance of being able to have candid communications with Washington, but on a certain level I’m surprised that leaks of this magnitude are still possible.  I find it deeply disturbing that given the issues of domestic spying in recent years and the ongoing difficulties of keeping government secrets secret, our government continues to communicate internally in a fashion that could be so dangerous if exposed.  It seems to me that US citizens caught on much more swiftly than did our government when it comes to issues of insecure communications.  As we personally must grow more and more careful about what is said in public and through private communications like email, it gets much harder to be understanding when government gaffs like this occur.