Two perspectives on air power and insurgency

These two articles provide contrasting views on the use of air power by coalition forces in insurgency situations, such as those in Afghanistan and Iraq:

The first is much more personal, written by a woman who spent months living with soldiers in the Afghan valley where the campaign is ongoing. It does a good job of capturing the chaos and violence being endured by coalition soldiers, as well as the psychological toll of doing so. The second is more removed and – unsurprisingly – more straightforwardly critical.

Both do a good job of setting up questions about how to ethically, legally, and effectively use air power when fighting insurgent wars. At the end, it’s pretty clear that no unproblematically ‘good’ answers to them exist.

Adding Dennis the Menace to the crime bank

Apparently, Scotland Yard wants schools to collect DNA samples from five year old children who “exhibit behaviour indicating they may become criminals in later life.” While there are plenty of reasons for opposing the Orwellian scheme, the more interesting implication is that the police think they can anticipate criminality in adulthood on the basis of the behaviour of five year olds. If so, to what extent can we consider a predisposition towards criminal behaviour to be a manifestation of an individual’s choices? The premise behind our justice system is that people generally commit crimes as an act of will, and it is the wilful disobedience of law that is being punished. If the police believe that crime can largely predicted on the basis of problematic behaviour beginning in childhood, it calls into question the overall validity of our concept of what crime and criminals are.

The Art of Intrusion

Ottawa war memorial

I bought Kevin Mitnick‘s book largely out of nostalgia for elementary school days involving 2600 Magazine and a phone system that still used in-band signaling. While it does demonstrate that computer hacking skills don’t translate brilliantly into writing ability, it is a quick and interesting read for security-inclined nerds.

The lesson for the general public is that decent security is very hard to achieve; there are just too many avenues of attack. When dealing with something as complex as a corporate or government network, there will virtually always be some obscure forgotten modem, some employee who can be tricked, some wireless signal that can be intercepted. Faced by opponents with sufficient time, resources, and risk aversion, pretty much any network is likely to fail.

Of course, that doesn’t mean we should throw up our hands and ignore security. It remains possible to stop many breaches, to notice the ones that happen, to limit the damage they do, and to improve our chances of catching those who pulled them off. For those whose business it is to do such things, the Mitnick book may provoke a bit of new thinking. For interested amateurs, it provides a decent glimpse into the real character of computer hacking: an activity apparently more akin to patient, precise occupations like archeology than to fast-paced daredevil stunts like those in Hackers or The Matrix. Overall, Bruce Schneier is more interesting and a better writer, but Mitnick has a lot more focus on (and perhaps more access into) the blackhat community.

Oyster cards cracked

A while ago, I posted on how the Mifare RFID system had been reverse-engineered. Now, it seems that the Oyster Cards used in the London Underground have been cracked. Painstaking microscope work and a weakness in the encryption algorithm employed were enough to compromise the system – allowing cards to be cloned and arbitrarily modified. Given how fares for one-way trips run from £4.80 (C$9.58) for Zone 1 and 2, off peak, to £11.30 (C$22.55) for Zones 2 – 8 + Watford Junction at peak time, you can be sure that there will soon be a lucrative underground market in cloned cards and passes.

It goes to show how when you are deploying such an expensive and extensive system, you cannot trust the vendor to simply provide secure products. Robust external evaluation is necessary. Furthermore, you had better be sure to design the system such that a problem that does emerge can be contained and acceptable cost. Hopefully, that will prove true of the London system.

Helmets and driver psychology

Ian Walker, a researcher at the University of Bath, has uncovered an unfortunate tendency in human psychology. Drivers are more likely to hit cyclists who are wearing helmets. The hypothesis is that they compensate for the sight of a bare head by giving a wider berth when passing. On average, they gave a cyclist with a helmet 8.5cm (3.5″) less space. This was confirmed observationally by Walker himself, who used a sensor to evaluate 2,500 such incidents in Salisbury and Bristol. Motorists were most cautious around him when we wore a female wig and no helmet. Wearing the wig earned another 14cm (5.5″) of clearance, on average.

The study also found that larger vehicles are more likely to cut it close: “The average car passed 1.33 metres (4.4 feet) away from the bicycle, whereas the average truck got 19 centimetres (7.5 inches) closer and the average bus 23 centimetres (9 inches) closer.” That’s especially discouraging, given how the relative masses of a cyclist and a bus affect the dynamics of a possible colission.

A more comprehensive examination of the results (PDF) is available online.

The situation demonstrates the kind of game theory situation so common in safety and security. If you fall by the grace of your own actions, you are better off wearing a helmet. If a car actually does hit you, having a helmet is probably also a good idea. The degree of trade-off between reducing the probability of occurrence and mitigating the probable consequences is rarely easy to set effectively.

The take home lesson: there is a bit more reason to be wary of helmets, but cross-dressing could save your life.

Kosovo and Quebec

Andrea Simms-Karp at the Elmdale Tavern

A recent (and very unscientific) poll in The Globe and Mail suggests that many Canadians see the Kosovar declaration of independence as a “precedent that could be used in Quebec.” Personally, I found the question ambiguous. If anything, the situation in Kosovo is a demonstration of why Quebecois succession is a poor option.

Since at least the end of the first world war, there has been a profound tension between civic and ethnic nationalism. At best, ethnically defined nationalism has been a means of peacefully dividing empires into groups of states that get along decently; at worst, it has been a significant cause of genocide and ethnic cleansing. Virtually all states have minorities. Many have minorities in border regions, alongside states where those people have a majority. Given the difficulty and bloodiness of adjusting national borders, it is generally preferable to maintain states capable of accommodating members of ethnic minorities as full and equal members of the society – a possibility only likely to be manifest when the society has some philosophical basis other than ethnicity.

Normally, then, we should hope for pluralistic states that base their legitimacy around popular consent. What Kosovo exemplifies is a case where this has not occurred: where a central government has undermined its legitimacy in an entire region (as Russia has done in Chechnya) and has thus made it impossible for that area to be a legitimate portion of the state. The Kosovar case shows just how far such abuse must generally go before it constitutes good cause to break up a civil federation. Quebecois grievances are not on the same level, and thus do not constitute a license for succession.

CIA given license to torture

President Bush vetoed legislation that would have forbidden the CIA from using certain torture techniques, such as simulated drowning. It seems a clear sign of what we have lost due to excessive concern about terrorism – the understanding that governments are the most dangerous entities in the world. While they generally lack the desire to cause mayhem that defines terrorist groups, the powers governments have are so vast that they can do great harm through simple ineptitude, or a failure to police the actions of their agents. Facilitating torture is an international crime, and for good reason. It is a shame that geopolitics ensures that none of America’s new generation of torturers will even find themselves on trial in The Hague.

Stopping this legislation ensures that a few more people will be tortured needlessly, in violation of international law and the kind of ethics that we are supposedly trying to defend from terrorism. Furthermore, I think it’s likely that decisions like this will be looked back on in thirty years time much as we now look back on using the CIA to arm Osama bin Laden and the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, or help keep Pinochet in power. In the long term and in purely geopolitical terms, it will prove to be an own-goal for the United States – further tarnishing its increasingly shaky reputation on human rights and emboldening governments like China and Sudan to treat the idea even more disdainfully.

This Michael Ignatieff article, which I have doubtless linked previously, does a very good job of treating the subject of torture ethics intelligently. Henry Shue has a less convincing argument.

Pessimism and the Future Leaders Survey

Emily Horn in the ByTowne Cinema

Increasingly, there seems to be a strong correlation between a young person’s level of education and their level of pessimism. Arguably, this is on account of the related correlation between education level and level of interest and engagement with current events. Somebody who never watches the news or picks up a newspaper just has less to worry about.

A recent British survey has produced some numbers that support the pessimism hypothesis. The Future Leaders Survey polled 25,000 applicants to British universities. The findings demonstrate a widespread anticipation of a worsening world:

Asked about likely outcomes for humanity by 2032, the responses are gloomy to say the least. Nine out of 10 surveyed think Africa will still be starving and oil will be prohibitively expensive, and eight in 10 expect more terrorism and the effects of climate change to be hitting hard. Inequality within the U.K. and between rich and poor nations will have worsened, according to around 70 percent of those surveyed. Half expect nuclear weapons will have been used again and that the U.S. will still be in Iraq.

16% of respondents said that they expected humanity to go extinct within a century; 78% of respondents said that could only be avoided through radical lifestyle changes. Admittedly, these are people who are just starting out at university, so it doesn’t demonstrate much about the linkage between education and pessimism. It would be quite interesting to have the same group re-polled in four years time. It would not surprise me if they were significantly more dispirited the second time.

One has to wonder whether this makes today’s society an aberration. Surely, history has been full of people who never really expected the world to change, one way or the other. Periods of history have also included large numbers of people believing that big improvements were possible or even inevitable. I am not sure if the kind of apocalyptic feeling spreading through the most influential segments of the most powerful states has much precedent. One can only speculate about what the long-term consequences might be.

Big picture uncertainty

Buildings in central Ottawa

Climate change policy focuses on constant attempts to make guesses about the future: about economic development in rich states and poor, about patterns of technological evolution, about climatic responses to radiative forcing caused by changes in the gas mixture of the atmosphere. One cannot always evade the feeling that too many uncertainties are being layered. Consider, for instance, the possibility that hydrocarbon fuels will peak in world output within the next few decades. If that happened, most of our ‘business as usual’ economic projections would be badly wrong.

An even more ominous consideration relates to global conflict. When the world is generally doing well, it is devilishly hard to convince states to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions for the universal good. Imagine how hard it would be in a geopolitical environment based around rising tensions and the growing expectation of great power war. We make projections for 2100 without acknowledging that making it from now to then without such a war would be a historical aberration.

In the end, I suppose, cynicism does us little good. The vast majority of ordinary people – and of powerful people – will not believe in the disastrous potential consequences of climate change until they start to manifest themselves visibly. As such, agonizing about them just makes you more marginal to the debate that exists among those not kept awake by fear about the possibility for self-amplifying positive feedbacks in the climate system. We must do the best we can, avoid confusing engagement with the mainstream debate with genuine complacency, and hope that humanity possesses more wisdom than it has ever demonstrated before.

Natural gas and Russian politics

Snowy Ottawa street

The results of the election in Russia yesterday are not surprising, though they are part of a very worrisome overall trend. Bolstered by high energy prices and strategic overstretch on the part of the United States, Russia is regaining some of its nastier old habits. Of course, it is unreasonable and unacceptable to hope that Russia will remain as powerless as it has been since the fall of the Soviet Union. As much as is the case with China, the question of how a powerful Russia will return to geopolitics is an interesting and somewhat frightening one.

Europe’s vulnerability to Russian control of natural gas supplies has been well demonstrated of late. Poorer Central European states are potentially even worse off in the medium term, if Russia manages to build pipelines that go around them. Turning off the heat in Kiev is unlikely when it means doing the same in Berlin. Being able to do the first without the second would further worsen the strategic situation presented to the states in the middle. I expect they are feeling pretty nervous right now, given how generally spineless NATO and the EU have been recently in the face of Russian bullying.

Hopefully, concerns about access to gas will help to advance the drive towards renewable energy in Western Europe, eventually reducing the economic vulnerability of those states to Russian machinations. Such an outcome would have positive consequences in relation to the state of the global environment, and may embolden Europe’s democracies in relation to an increasingly assertive and unapologetically totalitarian Russia.