The cold, post-Cold War truth about Putin's -- er, Medvedev's Moscow? It doesn't matter as much it used to. But if Obama's got his wits about him next week, he'll pretend like it does.

Continuing reading this week's World War Room column for Esquire.com.

NATIONAL WEEKLY EDITION: "Countering the Military's Latest Mantra: It's possible that the 'counterinsurgency' isn't responsible for progress in Iraq," buy Celeste Ward, Washington Post, 25-31 May 2009.

An uninspired op-ed that "breaks" the wisdom that's become so conventional as to be stale: Maybe the surge wasn't just about better counterinsurgency ops?!?!?!

A long-time (20 months constitutes a long time in my book) political adviser to Gen. Chiarelli, Ward says it wasn't really an insurgency so you can't credit COIN.

Her argument is akin to the "hybrid war" perspective: look closely enough and it's a cats-and-dogs world, ranging from low-tech this to high-tech that and it's all impossible to categorize so we must prepare for everything (hmmm, helpful, so let me now begin to prepare for all contingencies equally and I will call that a strategy). And such a "chaotic scrum" doesn't meet the official definition of a group dedicated to overthrowing the existing government (Ah, always good to review the official rule book for technical definitions).

Hence, a closer look at why the violence went down in Iraq says there were multiple reasons, and citing our change in tactics as the be-all answer isn't enough. Plus, there were officers all along in various places who engaged in solid rebuilding efforts--however isolated.

So now COIN is derided as the proverbial hammer searching the entire world for nails. It must, therefore, be doctrinaire in the extreme, I guess, and unable to adapt itself whatsoever to local conditions.

Alrighty then!

Thus, we are told that we have to adapt ourselves to the new complexities of Afghanistan, so dubbing McChrystal the new "Petraeus of Afghanistan" isn't enough!

Whew!

That was a close one!

Glad to have that mess all cleared up. I really thought a one-size-fits-all COIN manual would take care of the entire world--from now til the end of time.

Imagine my disappointment.

But I guess it had to be said.

Here's my essential beef with the piece (besides all the previous snark): just when we start to learn, we now get people complaining that we're learning too much too fast, thus the strawman-renderings of COIN have begun.

NATIONAL WEEKLY EDITION: "On Rough Seas: A U.S. program to train regional navies aims to promote stability off a volatile coast," by Karin Brulliard, Washington Post, 25-31 May 2009.

This is the stuff my Enterra colleague Harry Ulrich (USN, Admiral, retired) started while he was in Naples, "owning" most of Africa for European Command.

Great stuff and the right way to prove our intentions with Africa Command--namely, local capacity building.

ARTICLE: After Outcry, China Delays Requirement for Web-Filtering Software, By MICHAEL WINES, New York Times, June 30, 2009

China yields some on the Green Dam--for now.

ARTICLE: Key in Afghanistan: Economy, Not Military, By Bob Woodward, Washington Post, July 1, 2009

This is why we're getting such great traction with Combatant Commands on Development-in-a-Box™.

Jobs aren't just the exit strategy, they pave the path to victory--no matter who provides them.

OP-ED: How to Stop North Korea's Weapons Proliferation, By GORDON G. CHANG, Wall Street Journal, JULY 1, 2009

I like this logic and would like to see it pursued.

Either we ratchet up or we are backing down to a known repeat offender.

(Thanks: Michael S. Smith II)

ASIA: "Taiwan's opposition: Street life: The opposition barks for want of bite," The Economist, 23 May 2009.

Ma Ying-jeou and the KMT are proceeding in their efforts to bring Taiwan closer to the mainland, primarily in commercial terms.

Past word was that the current economic downturn was sapping the KMT's popularity, to include the policy of economic tethering to China.

This is true. The only problem with this analysis is that the main opposition party's popularity has not gone up in the meantime, while popular benefits are starting to appear, such as the improved stock market (responding to economic deals with China) and Taiwan's health minister getting a seat at the WHO for the first time in 38 years.

And so Taiwan's application for membership in an embryonic China-centric Asian union continues to be processed . . .

ARTICLE: Zelaya accused of drug ties, By FRANK BAJAK, Associated Press, June 30, 2009

Part of the backstory worth considering on Zelaya--a true sign of his Chavezmo.

MIDDLE EAST NEWS: Iran's Turmoil Opens Rift Among Shiites Across Mideast, By YAROSLAV TROFIMOV and GINA CHON, Wall Street Journal, JUNE 26, 2009

Key bite

With his open support of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Ayatollah Khamenei has departed from his traditional role as a neutral arbiter and consensus builder.

Like I said in the first Esquire piece on the election, the rigging showed the regime is neither "Islamic" in spirit nor a "republic" in function.

ARTICLE: Unease Mounts as U.S. Troops Leave Iraq's Cities, By GINA CHON, Wall Street Journal, JUNE 29, 2009

With my two nephews just back in, I naturally welcome this.

Yes, violence will go up inevitably, as regime opponents test the Iraqi Army, but that is a necessary step forward.

OP-ED: Our Decaying Nuclear Deterrent, By JON KYL and RICHARD PERLE, Wall Street Journal, JUNE 30, 2009

Gist: "The less credible the U.S. umbrella, the more likely other states are to seek weapons."

ARTICLE: New Honduras Leader Faces Backlash From Coup, By PAUL KIERNAN and DAVID LUHNOW, Wall Street Journal, JUNE 30, 2009

All official condemnations aside, no surprise that the Honduran military wasn't interested in going down the Chavez route. That sort of statism just doesn't work absent the "resource curse."

We shall see what comes next.

INTERNATIONAL: "Indonesia's TV Makeovers Now More Extreme Than Its Politics," by Norimitsu Onishi, New York Times, 23 May 2009.

Strange spiking of American-style reality TV shows in Indonesia. True, the form begins in Britain, but then it is given a weird American spin (like usual) that makes it seem--on a global basis--to be more our creation than Britain's (ah, to be a popularizer/bastardizer!).

The basic diagnosis: radical Islam scared the public and thus peaked recently, so now Indonesian pop culture pendulums are swinging back into a pro-American stance. It's sort of, "Wow! Is that what re-traditionalization is going to be all about? Man, let's rethink the whole modernization thing again and see what can be done--better--there."

There are 79 such shows now in Indonesia, a lot of which explore social tensions (e.g., put the rich person in a poor area--and not so much for laughs).

The truly fascinating bit: most Indonesians don't view these as American shows but as programs that explore universal values.

Ooh! That's exactly how we get ya!

Americanization isn't the future of globalization, but merely today's prism soon to be supplemented with several others.

FRONT PAGE: "Lose the Traffic. Keep That Times Square Grit." By Nicolai Ouroussoff, New York Times, 26 May 2009.

I travel a lot to many great global cities. Obviously, NYC is a premier venue in that sense.

But what it lacks that other great cities have is that signature open venue that defines its greatness.

And no, Central Park is not it. Central Park is the antithesis of that--by design. It's for New Yorkers.

The obvious place that defines NYC in an iconic sense is Times Square. For some reason, it's taken up to now for the city government to realize that it could do more to accentuate that signature venue by closing traffic there, but to me, it's an obvious move, because it's truly scary to navigate there because of the traffic and that really detracts from the experience, which is otherwise very cool.

Yes, Times Square has been cleaned up from its "Midnight Cowboy" roots and thank God. This move should improve it all the more.

THE FORUM: "The heavy burden of war, shouldered by the few," by DeWayne Wickham, USA Today, 26 May 2009.

Well meaning but completely backasswards logic.

I will not even engage on the lack of desire within the U.S. military to go back to a non-professional force.

Here's another take: going for the draft will only encourage all of America's worst tendencies toward going-it-alone.

ARTICLE: Nigerian Rebels Drive Up Oil Prices, By Steven Mufson, Washington Post, June 30, 2009

A point to Robb's global guerrillas thesis WRT weak states: nonstate actors driving up global oil prices.

FRONT PAGE: "Iranian Leaders Gaining the Edge Over Protesters," By NAZILA FATHI and MICHAEL SLACKMAN, New York Times, June 27, 2009.

The key bit:

Throughout the crisis, events in Iran have focused on two camps: the opposition, led by Mir Hussein Moussavi, a former prime minister, and the camp surrounding Mr. Ahmadinejad, including the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and the military and security agencies. But there is a third group of more pragmatic military and security figures who have competed with Mr. Ahmadinejad but are believed to remain close to Ayatollah Khamenei.

Two of the most influential in that group are the mayor of Tehran, Mohammad Baqer Ghalibaf, a former commander in the Revolutionary Guards, and the speaker of Parliament, Ali Larijani, the nation's former chief nuclear negotiator. Both ran for president four years ago and want to run again, and have at times been sharp critics of Mr. Ahmadinejad's stewardship. Political analysts have described them as loyal to the leader and committed to Islamic government, but eager for a more modern state integrated with the rest of the world.

Ghalibaf (I usually spell Qalibeaf, but who's counting?) is the one who has long interested me, because he's the technocrat, but Larijani is far more important now as speaker of the parliament and arguably the real opposition leader of note going forward (he has voiced plenty of concerns about the election). I see one long and ugly fight between the presidency and the parliament.

BONDS: "Cashing In On Foreign Debt," by Ben Levisohn and Tara Kalwarski, BusinessWeek, 29 June 2009.

Just an interesting map where Old Core largely has the best bond ratings, New Core roughly the next best, and Gap countries the worst.

NUMBERS: "Where to Find The Highest Yields," by Tara Kalwarski, BusinessWeek, 29 June 2009.

Pakistan leads. Other current leaders are Brazil, Turkey, Hungary, South Africa, Mexico, Peru and India.

Almost nobody pays what they were paying a year ago, with the biggest percentage drops among the Old Core's stalwarts.

OPINION: "Inside North Korea's Gulag," by Melanie Kirkpatrick, Wall Street Journal, 16 June 2009.

The usual scary stuff from those rare few who have escaped the political camps.

Nice bit at end:

In the epilogue to "The Aquariums of Pyongyang," his 2000 book about growing up in the infamous Yodok prison camp, Kang Choi-Hwan expresses his anger at the world's indifference to the human-rights abuses in the North. "We're told that this debate would be better left until another day," he writes. "But by then we'll all be dead."

THE WORLD: "Iraqis Aren't Buying It: Media campaign dismissed as U.S. propaganda," by Ernesto Londono, Washington Post, 15-21 June 2009.

A caustic description of Baghdad Now, an Arabic-language newspaper that highlights the usual skill sets the U.S. Government brings to strategic communications.

Other efforts are mentioned, none kindly.

One Iraqi sums up a set of commercials thusly: "These commercials are boring, poor and annoying. Everyone knows they're American--not Iraqi-made."

PROFILE: "The Negotiator: Unlike his predecessors, the new U.S. ambassador in Baghdad can't rely on cash and troops to push Washington's interests in Iraq," by Bobby Ghosh, Time, 22 June 2009.

Four-to-five years ago I had dinner with Christopher Hill (set up by a mutual friend), and I will tell you: the guy comes off as completely genuine and sensible and quite smart. He struck me as having the perfect sort of mind for a negotiator: intelligent and flexible but not excessively imaginative; not your "vision guy" but your deal-maker--thus incredibly grounded.

No, he's not a Middle East expert. But I think he's a great choice for Iraq. Lots to negotiate there between them and us, and between them and them and them.

UNITED STATES: "The politics of debt: Seeing red; America's debt is Barack Obama's biggest weakness," The Economist, 13 June 2009.

It's the late 1980s and early 1990s all over again.

Remember when we were going to retire America's debt in X years and we debated whether or not that would be a good thing?

Still, no argument that this is once again a preeminent political issue--with good reason.

OP-ED: "Why I Now Support Gay Marriage," by Tom Suozzi, New York Times, 13 June 2009.

Good piece.

Gist: civil unions just don't cut it (they smack of separate but equal systems), but civil marriages are no threat to religiously sanctioned marriages.

So you allow same-sex civil marriages to give gay couples all the same legal rights as straight ones, but you also allow churches to opt out at their discretion. There are and always will be plenty of civil laws that churches essentially opt-out of--like the right to have an abortion (legal, but not acceptable in the eyes of many churches). The same will always be true for gay marriage. But since the government has always granted non-believers the same marriage rights (civil marriages) as believers, such rights must inevitably be extended to gays.

Only fault I take with piece: I could have used a listing of the deficiencies of civil unions compared to civil marriages.

I think most of this debate occurs in a knowledge vacuum, the predominant question being, "Should we let gays get married just like heterosexuals do?"

I guess I'd like to see the debate framed more popularly as: "These are the rights denied to same-sex civil union participants that would be granted to same-sex civil marriage participants. [List.] Now, when it comes to your siblings or your kids or your good friends, do you think it's correct for America to deny gays those rights, so long as your church would still be able to decide on its own whether or not it wanted to solemnize such marriages according to its spiritual traditions?"

That, I think, would be a fairly easy evolution to pursue politically.

So what is the list?