Earle Scarlett is a Jamaican born U.S. diplomat with global experience; diplomatic postings include: Cameroon, Brazil (twice), Philippines, Ex-Yugoslavia, Bosnia, and Charge' d'Affaires a.i. in Ireland. Postings at the State Department include: China and Somalia Desks. As Lecturer, he was a State Department Dean Rusk Fellow at the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University where he subsequently was examiner for Master’s theses in foreign affairs. In the U.S. State Department, he was Director of Training for Political Officers at the George Shultz National Foreign Affairs Training Center. Scarlett was also Advisor for International Affairs at Maxwell Air Force Base where he taught at the Air War College.

After a 30 year career in diplomacy he has taught and lectured at the following institutions: University of Bologna (2005-2010), Emory University (2004), University of Georgia, Columbia University, Georgia Technical University, and Lynn University. Before entering the Foreign Service he taught Political Science and International Relations at Loyola-Marymount University Los Angeles.

Scarlett was educated in Jamaica, US, France, and UK.

Sunday, December 14, 2014

Western Balkans and the Enigma of EU Accession

With the exception of Slovenia, the Western Balkans (WB), still in the wake of the dissolution of Yugoslavia, face daunting challenges to gain accession to the EU. At different stages in the process of inclusion the six countries have developed unevenly with inchoate institutions, glacial state building, and elusive civil polity. Omnipresent are inefficient judiciaries, malfunctioning public administration, and crime and corruption. These unsavory conditions retard entry to the EU. WB candidate status is circumscribed by strict criteria such as rule of law as fundamental to democracy.

However, WB, individually or collectively, may consider other approaches beyond the means to accelerate EU accession. In the context of rapidly changing international relations and geo-politics, WB could envision alternatives that circumvent the hurdles they face for entry into European regional institutions, particularly EU and NATO.

Perhaps WB opine the criteria for their acceptance are dissimilar to those set for recent EU entrants. An underlying concern therefore is whether WB pursuit is Sisyphean and their goal of membership unattainable. Aware that EU’s present configuration is subject to changes, WB may assess that EU’s future character might not be conducive to their needs. History shows that the EU evolved from the Coal and Steel Community to EEC, and EC. Aware that EU in not static, aspirants may choose to evaluate whether the ongoing EU metamorphosis and expansion will meet their specific aspirations.

Given the economic rise and political clout of Asia, influential countries are focusing on that region. The EU is adjusting to this reality also in its current foreign and security policies. Its present loose union conceivably could be converted in the future to a federal or confederal configuration. Clearly, EU capitals would resist this shift as threats to their national sovereignty. Beyond that, these developments would be replete with complexities and manifold implications for geo-politics.

Nonetheless, in calculating their position in a mutating , albeit incremental, world order,
WB would be obliged to evaluate their prospects in a possibly transformed future EU. In
addition, the EU is now engaged in harmonizing its organization and decision-making
structures attentive to its publics and external exigencies. These are important factors that
the WB must also address.

Having rejected what some WB countries considered a heavy-handed Belgrade domination
of former Yugoslavia, it is conceivable they may shy away from a Brussels supranational
state that has not only imposed difficult conditions for membership but also could limit
implicitly their autonomy or even independence.

It is not far-fetched to consider nascent challenges to the Westphalian concept of the
nation-state. In the context of rapid changes globally, including the rise of new powers,
innovative trade, economic , political, and strategic alliances will be forged, and new matrix and status of international institutions will emerge: for example, the composition of the Permanent Members of the UN Security Council, revealing unprecedented power relations. WB cannot rely on largesse from international financial institutions or expect easy access to new formations and alliances. The financial crisis that Greece, Ireland, and Portugal now face are serious and the EU is not inclined to assume additional burdens of this nature. Alternatively, WB must undertake serious internal reforms and abandon traditional norms that impede progress in social relations, political decision-making , and economic initiatives. They must shed autarchic policies and instead seek opportunities to strengthen trade among themselves as well as other areas of common interest.

Concomitantly, tolerance should be encouraged so that religious, ethnic differences are respected. Political parties formed on strict ethnic lines should be eschewed and supplanted by parties that transcend these primordial clusters. In the ex-Yugoslavia, Prime Minister Ante Markovic ‘s Reform Party espoused pragmatic policies but unfortunately did not win popular support.

Imbedded in these sclerotic traditional norms are seeds of conflict which entice foreign intervention ostensibly to protect inhabitants from untoward acts committed by nationalists. This situation raises questions regarding the appropriateness, magnitude, and duration of military intervention. Clearly, warranted intervention requires external powers to assess budgetary, strategic, and national security concerns with respect for universally accepted principles enshrined in domestic and international covenants. And of course foreign military intervention should be obliged to consider the implications of civilian casualties as well as the rights of sovereign states.

To the extent that the WB fail to implement domestic policies that conform to universally accepted democratic principles, the prospects of foreign intervention lurk . The underlying presumption is that EU membership conditionality will engend maturation and that NATO security umbrella will discourage chances of violent conflict. The challenge that WB leaders face is to manage conflict and display vision.

Education is a critical area for capacity building. Imperative is the preparation of the WB youth to meet the challenges of a competitive future and to promote a process of socialization that builds trust across ethnic and religious lines. And rewriting history must adhere to the canons of scientific inquiry and historiography.

With infrastructural advances, institutional efficiency, and social cohesion, WB will be in a better position to chart a future within or outside the ambit of the EU if indeed membership is deferred indefinitely. The asymmetry between current EU and NATO membership, emerging international realignments and trade relations, and the vast implications of globalization present a unique historical crossroads for WB to define and pursue their individual or collective interests.

In this scenario, WB leaders and their citizens would have an opportunity to weigh the costs and benefits of joining the EU, their own responsibilities as members, and their relative status and clout. On the other hand, WB could consider how they would fit in an apparently emerging new world order, not divided by ideology, as during the Cold War and the existence of the Non Aligned Movement, but by intricate levels of economic, financial, resource disparities, geographic power shifts, palpable global instability, and unruly nonstate actors.

Thursday, September 18, 2014

Scotland's Independence Potentially Destabilising

FOR many reasons, Scotland's vote for independence today embodies troublesome global complexities. As salutary as a "yes" vote may appear to advocates, there are potentially destabilising ramifications for the international context.
Among some of the domestic issues that London could face following an affirmative outcome is the impact on David Cameron's Government, Labour leader Ed Miliband's concern over his party losing seats in parliament, replacement of the Union Jack, and resolution of currency and finance issues. Free education in Scotland versus paid education in Britain and access to North Sea oil would be other bones of contention.
Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/Scotland-s-independence-potentially-destabilising_17559041

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Brown and Foley cases evoke urgency of justice and national security

REACTIONS to the killing of teenager Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, and the aftermath of the assassination of United States journalist, James Foley, resound throughout the US and abroad, as watchful eyes focus on the US's international image, strength, and action.
Admirably, President Barack Obama has displayed full respect for the constitution and US legal jurisdictions enshrined under federalism. Likewise, US Attorney General Eric Holder reminded concerned parties in Ferguson and the general public that legal procedures must be followed for justice to be assured. In the era of instant news coverage, the domestic and international community were alerted to their official statements.


Thursday, February 27, 2014

Global diplomacy is not for beginners (Feb 26, 2014)

WHAT to make of this latest episodic media flurry over President Obama naming political ambassadors to plush diplomatic postings and limiting the majority of career ambassadors to conflict-ridden and developing countries?

For many years it has been common practice for US Presidents to nominate as ambassadors personal friends and significant contributors to their election campaigns. In this instance, over one-third of current ambassadors are political appointees. As a result, some retired diplomats are expressing indignation and even public outcry.

Tuesday, February 4, 2014

Obama’s Foreign Policy: Opportunities and Constraints (January 28, 2014)

A discussion paper presented by Earle St. Aubin Scarlett at the University of the West Indies, Mona, Sir Arthur Lewis Institute for Social and Economic Change

Candidate Barack Obama’s stirring victory in 2008 under the mantra “hope and change” engendered great excitement for a renewed America and a refreshing approach to statecraft. At the outset, he faced serious difficulties: first, being the first black person at the helm of the United States – with all the historical implications and attendant overlay; second, a global financial crisis of monumental proportions; and third, US involvement in two unpopular wars, Iraq (which he had opposed), and Afghanistan which he reluctantly accepted. In addition to these three major issues, there was a sagging US image abroad, large national debt, high unemployment, neuralgia over immigration, and an ineffectual US Congress due largely to a corrosive partisan unwillingness to compromise on an array of presidential initiatives, graphically evident in a contentious struggle over the Affordable Health Care Act—a revival of the debates of states and individual rights and the role of the government in solving domestic ills.

Read more: http://www.uwi.edu/salises/pdf/Paper_by_EarleScarlett.pdf




Thursday, January 9, 2014

Obama's Game Plan (Sept. 30, 2007)

"Politics is not a game, it's a mission for me ... the times are too serious and the stakes too big to continue with the current game plan", presidential candidate Barack Obama cautioned on September 20 before a crowd of approximately 5,000 at the World Congress Center, Atlanta.

 In yet another step to the White House, there were allusions to biblical Joshua and his rod of correction that echoed Obama's earlier remarks in March at the AME church in Selma, Alabama.   Again, he expressed his aversion for the present Washington political ethos in conducting the nation's business and urged the pursuit of a new order that was free of special interests politicking, and implicitly millennial.  Herein lies his unbridled optimism, reassuring hope, and enlightened perspective of the aspirations of Americans broadly writ. 

Obama reiterated his unswerving commitment to justice, integrity, and innovation.  His proposals and resolve reflect that.  For example, he criticized the "no child left behind" policy for inadequate funding.  Similarly, health care and insurance for all Americans is a cornerstone of his envisioned social policy.

 Obama steered clear of Reverend Jesse Jackson's alleged criticism, denounced violence, and appealed for equal justice in the Jena-6 case in Louisiana.  Yes, the junior Senator from Illinois drew a comparison between the possible penalty for the black teen-agers and that imposed on former Vice President's Cheney's aide Scooter Libby for obstruction of justice after having disclosed the remit of the CIA employee Valerie Plame.

 In the pragmatic world of day-to-day politics, leadership requires more than vision; effectiveness more than hope.  True grit is often the indispensable ingredient in the rough and tumble of the legislative process as well as the international political and economic environment.  Promoting U.S. interests and ensuring the security of the country are fundamental duties that Obama must handle in the context of a diminished US image abroad and in the face of unprecedented threats.

 So the current administration's game plan must be transformed.  And this requires taking risks that could even back fire.  But the dividends could be higher.  Therefore, as head of state, Obama cannot afford to rely only on intellect, instinct, and experience.  He needs capable advisers who can help him rescue the country from the precipice caused in part by reckless and expensive military expeditions that were orchestrated by officials who have none or scant military service. 

The enigma facing Obama is to find an equilibrium between the merits of tradition and the justification for change.  In his view, the administration's current game plan is disastrous both at home and abroad where current economic policy fosters the growing division between the rich and the poor, woeful social policies, and squandering of US prestige abroad. 

 Obama has not been afraid to admit his fallibility.  Clearly, he will be hard pressed to live up to his promises when he assumes office as president in January 2009.   But from all indications, he has the mettle, insight, and drive to find the equilibrium, put his plan into action, and manage change effectively.

Obama on Diplomacy (Dec. 4, 2008)

Solving world problems requires a calibrated use of the instruments of national power: diplomacy, military, information, and economics.

Presumptive Democratic candidate Senator Barack Obama has been focusing on these instruments as evidenced by his statements during his recent visit to Afghanistan, Middle East, and Europe.
                                   
On his return to the US, he immediately consulted with his chief economic advisers seeking ways to improve capital formation and domestic production, promote trade, reduce oil dependency, and expand financial markets.   Resolving trade imbalance with China and other countries is uppermost in his mind as he will certainly face domestic protectionist pressure if he becomes president.

In a recent op-ed, Nicholas D. Kristof points to the paucity of funds and Foreign Service officers in comparison to the abundance of materiel and the proposed increase of military personnel for Afghanistan ostensibly to preserve our national security. 

Similarly, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has been calling for strengthening of our foreign service in order to handle the array of diplomatic challenges and engage in preventive diplomacy.  With adequate staffing, skilled US diplomats and their intelligence colleagues can probe and uncover indicators and flash points of unrest in foreign countries, notwithstanding the CNN factor.

 Diplomatic readiness and preventive diplomacy require the deployment of adequate personnel to our embassies, consulates, and other missions abroad.  In fact, these diplomatic missions are on the front line of our national security: vetting, denying  or issuing  visas; reporting on political and economic developments; promoting trade; explaining America; debunking falsehoods that are often propagated against the US; engaging in academic exchanges; and facilitating dialogue between our visiting officials and host country officials.  Showing the American flag and participating in representational events are also essential responsibilities.

 Our diplomatic effectiveness -- in an era where US prestige has fallen -- will improve in foreign lands by establishing reading rooms, showing films about the US, and promoting intellectual exchange across small communities.  By so doing, our diplomatic personnel will have a far reach and a sense of the pulse of the people as our perspectives are shared.

Senator Obama cites the JFK initiative of the Peace Corps as an example of the kind of voluntarism and selflessness that had a positive impact and effectively solidified relations between our volunteers and their interlocutors at the local level.  Trust and humility were key elements of the relationship.  Of course, this exchange was generally free of arrogance and didactics.

 Foreign influence makers and publics are keen observers of the US actions in world affairs so tangible results from US volunteer presence often went a long way.

 Obama's recent visit overseas confirms his facility at conveying the message of hope and respect for foreign countries.  His avowed admiration of the US military apparently struck a resonant chord. 

 However, in order to give credence to his rhetoric he must take active steps to promote our diplomatic corps so that they can utilize aptly the tools at their disposal to influence events by, for example, the use of incentives and disincentives as the situation warrants.  This will indeed mean speaking to adversaries from a position of strength based on expertise, with a strong military backing evident.

Calibrating the instruments of national power is critical, as is refinement of diplomatic training to meet the challenges of a rapidly changing world.  Without adequate funding by Congress diplomacy will suffer. 

Obama seems to understand this imperative. Therefore he must intensify his efforts in Congress for increased diplomatic funding and presence if his earnest appeal for diplomacy is to prevail in current conflicts.