Subject: Friday, January 20, 2017
From: "The Weekly GAB" <[email-masked]>
To: "Hunter Biden" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 08:37:08 -0600

The Weekly GAB  Friday, January 20, 2017
U.S. Global Leadership Coalition | www.usglc.org
http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=9GWBR6NndMBX9eanmaaKTQ

Transition 2017

THE NEW YORK TIMES

Trump Team's Queries About Africa Point to Skepticism About Aid
|

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=ra6CRr0WTxBZMV-AvSOddg

Helene Cooper

President-elect Donald J. Trump's views of Africa have, until
now, been a mystery. But a series of questions from the Trump
transition team to the State Department indicate an overall skepticism
about the value of foreign aid, and even about American security
interests, on the world's second-largest continent. A four-page
list of Africa-related questions from the transition staff has been
making the rounds at the State Department and Pentagon, alarming
longtime Africa specialists who say the framing and the tone of the
questions suggest an American retreat from development and
humanitarian goals, while at the same time trying to push forward
business opportunities across the continent.

THE WASHINGTON POST

Nikki Haley Departs Sharply From Trump on a Range of Foreign Policy
Issues, Including Russia  |

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=j7kd612SYwXYxg6xH6_fhg

Anne Gearan and Sean Sullivan

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley departed sharply and sometimes
awkwardly from President-elect Donald Trump on several foreign policy
issues Wednesday and told senators that as United Nations ambassador
she would not hesitate to disagree with her boss. The Republican
rising star who had been critical of Trump as a candidate struggled at
times to distance herself from some of Trump's most
controversial positions without openly contradicting him. During her
confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
Haley voiced heavy skepticism about Russia and optimism about NATO,
both deviations from some of Trump's statements. She
unequivocally shot down the idea of a Muslim registry or ban, which
Trump has never fully disavowed.

POLITICO
Trump's Team Weighs Retooling State to Focus on Terror  |

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=7nRqLhXLbZ-59LKHNq4-Bg

Nahal Toosi and Josh Dawsey

Donald Trump's team wants to restructure the State Department to
focus more heavily on counterterrorism - a move that could
dramatically reduce the time and resources devoted to climate change,
promoting democracy abroad and other programs seen as liberal
priorities. A retooling plan would likely include enhancing State's
intelligence unit, eliminating several special envoy positions and
promoting the use of the contentious term "radical Islam."
At the same time, the department is looking to de-emphasize policies
that are centered on nation-building abroad, in keeping with Trump's
"America First" rhetoric, according to the sources.

DEVEX
Wade Warren Appointed Acting USAID Chief |

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=PCqfIHZuk2Cyqs54WbE8RQ

Michael Igoe

U.S. Agency for International Development Administrator Gayle Smith
informed employees Wednesday that Wade Warren, who leads the
agency's policy bureau, will take over as acting administrator
at noon on Jan. 20. As of Tuesday most of the agency's political
appointees had departed their offices. Smith included with her note to
staff a list of interim leadership appointments who will take over
"until any changes are made by the Trump administration."
Warren, who has been leading USAID's internal transition effort,
was selected by Smith for the interim post - a selection
approved by President Barack Obama and supported by the
president-elect's transition team, according to the email.

Who's in the News

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
[See below for full text]
Don't Make Any Sudden Moves, Mr. Trump

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=IRYyMZ9gu-VD4NERzJ9huA

Richard Haass is the President of the Council on Foreign Relations.

There is much to be said for a foreign policy equivalent of stare
decisis. To say so isn't to argue against all change: Every
policy should be reviewed regularly and revised as circumstances
warrant. Fresh opportunities arise, as do new threats. But wholesale,
frequent reversals of foreign policy run the risk of unnerving friends
and emboldening adversaries. The U.S. should be especially wary of
sudden or sharp departures in what it undertakes abroad. Consistency
and reliability are essential attributes for a great power. Allies who
depend on Washington for their security need to know that this
dependence is well placed. Serious doubt about America would
inevitably give rise to a very different and much less orderly world.

THE HUFFINGTON POST
Making America Good Again

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=Ao9c9VQQNC61F1sdyXzOqw

Anne Goddard is the President and CEO of ChildFund International

Add me to the list of those who have serious concerns about the years
ahead, especially when it comes to our nation's capacity - and
willingness - to help those who live beyond our shores. While I
understand the patriotic fervor behind returning the country to some
perceived level of greatness, the fact is, enhancing America's
fortunes does not require that we do less for others. In other words,
this is not a zero sum game, and making America "great
again" is not dependent on making other countries less great or
even less good. Greatness, by all accounts, has room for many.

THE NEW YORK TIMES
John Kerry: What We Got Right

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=wqnBBcoqRAQTT-MHb8NDzQ

John Kerry is the Secretary of State.

With a new administration taking office this week, it is natural to
assess the inheritance it will receive from the old. There are some
who see nightmares wherever they look and insist that the entire
global system is unraveling and that America's position as world
leader is in precipitous decline. As the departing secretary of state,
I cannot claim objectivity. But I will leave office convinced that
most global trends remain in our favor and that America's
leadership and engagement are as essential and effective today as
ever.

Development & Diplomacy

THE HILL

New Administration Must Look to Recent Past for Global Health Lessons
|

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=f1tV0hNQI70K3G_o-WB2bA

Noelle Sullivan

Leading up to the Inauguration of President-elect Trump, experts have
made the case for why global health should be a top priority for the
new administration. Global health has a long history of bipartisan
support and is, frankly, good business. However, Ebola in West Africa
and Zika in the Americas should teach us something about progress in
global health: selective funding for narrow targets do little when
unpredicted diseases or ailments emerge. Meaning, we may target Ebola
and Zika as global health priorities, but doing so does nothing to
prepare us for the next emergent health crisis. To truly make a
difference, global health initiatives must directly target weakened
health systems, not narrow initiatives.

THE NEW YORK TIMES
How the Response to Zika Failed Millions |

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=wjCzMiUN5Vyj1V1NhQVubg

Donald G. McNeil Jr.

Almost a year ago, the World Health Organization declared the Zika
epidemic a global health emergency, calling for an epic campaign
against a virus that few had ever heard of. As it spread to almost
every country in the Western Hemisphere, scientists and health
officials at every level of government swung into action, trying to
understand how the infection caused birth defects and how it could be
stopped. The W.H.O. ended the emergency status in November, but the
consequences of the outbreak will be with us for years to come. So
maybe now is a good time to ask: How'd we do? Not so great,
according to more than a dozen public health experts who were asked to
reflect on the response. The battle was a series of missed
opportunities, they said, that damaged still-uncounted numbers of
babies across a whole hemisphere.

FOREIGN POLICY

Samantha Power Scolds Trump for Embracing Russia as it 'Tears
Down' World Order |

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=d0rqmbHa7Zhk40IUzPs-rg

Robbie Gramer

While Russian intervention around the world - from
paramilitaries in Ukraine to strike fighters over Syria to email hacks
in the United States - seem unrelated to each other, Power
identified a common thread: "What Russia is against."
Russia took "one aggressive and destabilizing action after
another" in recent years, she said, recounting its illegal
annexation of Crimea, war in Ukraine, and "atrocities" in
the Syrian civil war to shore up Bashar al-Assad's regime.
Moscow, she said, is not trying to shape a new global order, but
rather "tearing down the one that exists." "This is
what we are fighting against," Power said. "Having
defeated the forces of fascism and communism, we now confront the
forces of authoritarianism and nihilism."

THE HILL
Graham, Cruz Proposal to Defund the U.N. Is Misguided  |

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=I8eA6tH2G_GDvIUbyAS9kQ

Melanie Nezer

Republican senators Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Ted Cruz of
Texas last week introduced legislation that would block U.S. funding
for all United Nations functions, a response to last month's
U.N. Security Council vote opposing Israeli settlements. In so doing,
the senators chose to take out their frustrations about the outgoing
administration's Israel policy on some of the most vulnerable
people on earth. The decision will negatively affect countless
refugees and others who rely on the U.N.'s worldwide
humanitarian efforts to keep themselves and their families safe from
violence, starvation and homelessness.

Politics & Foreign Policy

NPR
How to Salvage U.S.-Russia Relations: One Expert's Take  |

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=OV-hZxRGEMGxpCMYk25yQg

Lucian Kim

Thomas Graham, managing director of the Kissinger Associates
consulting firm, doesn't like to discuss speculation that he may
become President-elect Donald Trump's next ambassador to Moscow. But
the former diplomat and adviser on Russia in the George W. Bush
administration does like to talk about something else: how to salvage
U.S.-Russian relations following accusations that Russian President
Vladimir Putin interfered in the November presidential election. For
all of Trump's praise for Putin during the election campaign, there is
still no coherent line on how the incoming Republican administration
plans to deal with Russia.

THE NEW YORK TIMES
What the U.S. Gets for Defending Its Allies and Interests Abroad  |

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=vf6GEWuWXxXPPthWLZJEBQ

Max Fisher and Sergio Pecanha

President-elect Donald J. Trump has questioned the return that the
United States gets for defending its allies. Here's the current
picture of what America puts in and gets out of global alliances: 1)
Treaties with more than 30 countries help bring stability to the most
economically and politically important regions for the United States.
2) The European Union is America's top trading partner. Keeping
Europe peaceful and unified has been a top United States priority
since World War II. 3) The United States keeps a large footprint in
Asia to counter the influence of China and to support allies against
North Korea. 4) Thirty percent of global maritime trade runs through
the South China Sea. The United States is competing with China to lead
in that fast-growing market. 5) In the Middle East, the United States
wants to maintain access to oil and gas, and partners against
terrorism and Iran.

THE WASHINGTON POST

China Quietly Gears Up For Possibility of Trade War With United States
|

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=gkYmaBmRJcOIoOfi5qqTuQ

Simon Denyer

China is gearing up for the possibility of a trade war with the
incoming Trump administration and has fired a small warning shot,
according to the American business community here as well as the
Chinese themselves. At the World Economic Forum in Davos this week,
Chinese President Xi Jinping warned that a trade war would benefit
nobody, but at home, his government is quietly getting ready for one.
Publicly, China's Ministry of Commerce has responded calmly to
Trump's repeated criticism of the two countries'
relationship, with its spokesman Shen Danyang insisting last month
that the transfer of power in Washington won't change ties,
which he described as "interwoven,"
"interdependent" and "mutually beneficial."
But behind the scenes, the ministry is not standing still.

THE HUFFINGTON POST
Security Goes Beyond the Military and James Mattis Knows It  |

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=3PUeF8wvM0e9e4w5iyCVCw

Lorelei Kelly

Last week, #Maddog was a top trending hashtag during General
Mattis' (ret.) Senate confirmation hearing for Defense
Secretary. While this nickname may be ideal for social media
discourse, it's completely inadequate to describe what James
Mattis and other military leaders have experienced over the course of
the last two decades. Incoming Secretary Mattis is a strategic thinker
who understands how US strength is a cooperative endeavor.
Today's military readiness, in fact, requires it.
"Maddog" Mattis is a military man through and through. But
he fully understands that the challenges we face will require
supportive teamwork beyond the military. Incoming Secretary Mattis can
uniquely make the case for a modern national security strategy -
one that insists on prevention - to all of our political
leaders.

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
Don't Make Any Sudden Moves, Mr. Trump

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=agxFyAyHFtvkCvA4J-uonQ

Richard Haass is the President of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Stare decisis ought to apply to foreign policy. In legal circles, that
phrase-Latin for "let it stand"-means that
judges and courts emphasize precedent and allow existing decisions to
prevail unless there is strong reason to overturn them. The idea is to
discourage individual courts from doing their own thing, which could
create a dysfunctional patchwork of rulings. The notion reflects an
understanding that the integrity, reputation and legitimacy of the
legal system would suffer were the law to shift too frequently.

There is much to be said for a foreign policy equivalent of stare
decisis. To say so isn't to argue against all change: Every
policy should be reviewed regularly and revised as circumstances
warrant. Fresh opportunities arise, as do new threats. But wholesale,
frequent reversals of foreign policy run the risk of unnerving friends
and emboldening adversaries.

The U.S. should be especially wary of sudden or sharp departures in
what it undertakes abroad. Consistency and reliability are essential
attributes for a great power. Allies who depend on Washington for
their security need to know that this dependence is well placed.
Serious doubt about America would inevitably give rise to a very
different and much less orderly world.

There would be two reactions. First, "self-help" would
increase, as countries take matters into their own hands in ways
inconsistent with American interests-including by developing
their own nuclear weapons. Second, many countries could fall under the
sway of stronger regional states, undermining the balance of power.
This is a prescription for instability.

As soon as President-elect Trump is inaugurated, he will face many
difficult challenges: from an unraveling Middle East to an uncertain
Europe to a blustering North Korea. Rushing to reverse longstanding
American policies could generate new challenges and make existing ones
harder to resolve.

A few items already in the news suggest precisely what the new
administration should not do. The first would be to discard the
"one China" policy. For 4? decades, Washington and Beijing
have successfully finessed the difference between the mainland's
claims to Taiwan and America's commitment to the principle that
any change in the island's status can only come about peacefully
and voluntarily. Central to this successful maneuver is the idea that
there is only one China and Taiwan is part of it.

The formula has not only allowed Taiwan to flourish economically and
become a thriving democracy, it has enabled the U.S. and China to
develop important economic ties and cooperate on a range of regional
and global challenges. Continuing to finesse the issue is far
preferable to abandoning "one China." The latter course
risks triggering armed conflict with Beijing, ruling out any
possibility of cooperation on North Korea, and poisoning what will be
the most important bilateral relationship of this century.

A second error would be to "tear up," or not to comply in
any way with, the 2015 nuclear pact with Iran. The agreement
isn't ideal: The U.S. arguably paid too much for too little. But
undermining it now-or being perceived as doing so-would
isolate Washington, not Tehran. Reconstituting the world-wide regime
of sanctions that existed before the agreement would prove impossible.
The U.S. would quickly face the unpalatable choice between watching
Iran cross the nuclear threshold or starting a war in an effort to
stop it.

The Trump administration would be wiser to focus on ensuring that Iran
complies with the existing accord. At the same time, though, the U.S.
and its partners should develop a strategy to deal with Tehran's
push for regional primacy. It could include bolstering Sunni states
and groups, aiding Kurdish forces, and imposing new sanctions on Iran.
The U.S. could also begin planning a follow-on pact that would
constrain Tehran's nuclear options once important aspects of the
current deal expire.

A third mistake would be to immediately move the U.S. Embassy in
Israel to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv. This might at first seem like a
sensible proposal, even an obvious one. Jerusalem is the capital of
Israel and where most government officials reside and work. But moving
the embassy comes with real downsides, only some of which relate to
the diplomacy-going nowhere slowly-intended to resolve the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The bigger argument is that moving the embassy risks making Jerusalem
an even greater magnet for protest, violence and terrorism. The move
could take a conflict that has lost more than a little salience in the
Muslim world and transform it into a crisis, increasing the threat to
American embassies and personnel world-wide.

American foreign policy could stand some change, but it should be
introduced only when the probable benefits outweigh the risks and
costs. The new administration should proceed with caution: It is
inheriting a global situation that can only be described as daunting.
This is no time to make conditions worse.

The U.S. Global Leadership Coalition
1129 20th Street NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20036
Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | USGLC.org

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=kbwqkkHP0Kl5VMgnKyzFVw
http://action.usglc.org/site/CO?i=ie5KUcpJwpn6ilWAzWVgkO6DueBiEA3Y&cid=0
http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=4ALvts0hkYlvhCIJtFEbqg

http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=EaCjLCEETsbVv2MHpRx8Mw