We grabbed Hawaii as a coaling station; could we give it back now?

Could we right one of our foreign policy wrongs and give Hawaii back to the natives?

From Sea Power: The History and Geopolitics of the World’s Oceans:

The advent of coal-powered ships in the 1860s changed how the United States interacted with its Pacific domain. Coal ships were faster and more reliable than their sail-powered counterparts, but coal is heavy and exhaustible. Ships could not carry an unlimited amount of coal without sinking into the briny deep. They needed dedicated coaling stations at regular intervals in order to maintain their impressive speed. Fortunately, the Pacific for all of its vastness was dotted with islands perfectly situated to serve as coaling stations. It was this impulse that drove the U.S. annexation of Hawaii in 1898, with the beautiful port of Pearl Harbor serving as the fulcrum for its Pacific presence.

If we grabbed it because it was needed for refueling, why not give it back now? A Chinese container ship doesn’t need to refuel when crossing the Pacific, does it? Certainly the big Airbus and Boeing planes that cross the Pacific need not stop in Hawaii.

Plainly our annexation of Hawaii was expedient at the time, but it is no longer necessary. Is there any way to claim that this annexation was somehow legitimate and should be continued?

Related:

Full post, including comments

Company that makes business jet engines decides that business jets serve no business purpose

While on that cruise with mom I missed a big story about two of my favorite topics: aviation and corporate looting.

GE is one of the world’s leading manufacturers of business jet engines (product line). Recently the company decided that it shouldn’t operate business jets: “GE to shut down corporate jet fleet in cost-cutting move”

Related:

 

Full post, including comments

Surfacing a submarine at the North Pole

One of my favorite parts of Sea Power: The History and Geopolitics of the World’s Oceans:

Any U.S. Navy sailor who has gone above the Arctic Circle is awarded a certificate as a Blue Nose sailor. But very few even of the limited number of Blue Nose sailors have done the most challenging maneuver of all: breaking through the icepack itself in a submarine and bursting to the surface at the North Pole.

Each U.S. Navy submarine that has performed this feat recognizes the significant danger imposed on the boat by the dangling ice keels, large tongues of ice hanging down from the ice pack itself. Avoiding these is crucial, as is understanding the precise thickness of the ice pack at the proposed point of surfacing.

The entire maneuver is controlled carefully by the submarine’s captain himself and uses a detailed checklist with two-man control over each step of the standard operating procedure or SOP. Sonar— a pinging of sound through the water that measures distance by listening to the reverberation back— is used to find a flat spot, and the delicate controls of the submarine are used to maneuver the boat just below the surface of the ice. Throughout most of the cold war, most of our boats had hardened sails (the towerlike structure on the top of the boat) for this operation, but even given the hardening, it remains imperative to lower all masts and antennae while situating the boat below just the right patch of “clean” and hopefully thin ice. To make a cheap pun, finding the thin ice feels like “walking on thin ice” above— you know that a wrong step could be disastrous.

Once the thinnest ice patch is located and the ship is positioned beneath it, air is then blown into the ballast tanks, creating the reserve buoyancy and the essential upward thrusting energy needed to break through the ice. Like most submerged operations, this one is quiet and nearly silent throughout most of the boat. But in the conning space— the underwater part of the submarine where all maneuvering is conducted while the boat is submerged— and of course in sonar control, the crunching sound of the ice on the hull is discernible— a low, grinding, pulsing sound until the final breaking of the ice layer.

Once the boat has broken through, the crew can ascend the tower and carefully open the clamshells on the sail of the submarine and check the full status of the hull of the boat as it hangs just through the ice on the surface. Sailors wearing special cold weather exposure suits are initially tethered to the boat as the hull above the ice is checked for damage. Eventually, the goal is to get every one of the hundred or so sailors over the side to walk on the ice, snap pictures, and safely avoid polar bears— which amble right up to the hull. There are many places in the

Separately, it seems that not everyone got the global warming memo. The author says that we need to build a lot more icebreakers (the Russians and Chinese are building them!) and we can do this for only $1 billion per ship. At the same time he says that “By 2040 there will be an open passage for essentially twelve months of the year, and another decade later there will no longer be ice over the North Pole.” Given that it takes the U.S. military 10 or 15 years to get a new ship designed and ready, won’t these icebreakers be mothballed just a few years after completion? Until the icebreakers are built, the retired admiral suggests that we cooperate with the Russians… (he didn’t get the memo from Hillary about what a bad idea this is?)

It is worth noting in this regard how fundamental the Arctic is to Russia. Fully 20 percent of Russia’s population lives within the Arctic Circle, as opposed to essentially zero Americans and really only a handful of Canadians. The Russians, by the way, fully self-identify as an Arctic nation in ways that certainly transcend the feelings of any other sovereign state with the possible exception of Canada. They have just launched the largest and most powerful nuclear icebreaker in the world, the Arktika— 567 feet long, 33,000 tons, 80,000 shaft horse power, and capable of breaking through up to ten feet of ice. Strangely, for a region that is essentially devoid of human settlement, the Arctic is today the fastest-growing region in the world— each of the Arctic nations is actively pushing for the opening of settlements, increasing military activity, expanding resource exploitations, and generally staking claims with humans in the High North.

More: read Sea Power: The History and Geopolitics of the World’s Oceans.

Full post, including comments

Harvey Weinstein is the business traveler’s best friend?

Harvey Weinstein is the gift that keeps on giving for this blog. Reactions to his escapades are almost as rich a source of material as that provided by the Google heretic.

A few days ago, for example, I posted “Hollywood book idea: I went to this married guy’s hotel room and then…

The cited article is by Léa Seydoux, an actress, who implies that 100 percent of the women ultimately cast by an unnamed director she “really liked and respected” had traded sex for career advancement: “He has slept with all of the actresses he filmed.”

Ms. Seydoux says that she herself was planning to attend a non-work encounter with Mr. Weinstein in the privacy of his “hotel room”:

This was never going to be about work. He had other intentions – I could see that very clearly. … He invited me to come to his hotel room for a drink. We went up together.

The Outraged-by-Harvey Club seems unhappy with a story that begins “I went to this married guy’s hotel room in order to do something other than work.”

Here’s a comment from Neal on my post:

George A: We’re using the phrase “hotel room” in this thread, but I don’t think the image it conjures for us plebeians corresponds to the kind of suite Harvey Weinstein actually inhabited. It seems unlikely someone like Harvey Weinstein would invite an unknown extra (male or female) to a one on one. Thus, the invitation is probably to a social event in the suite’s living or dining rooms. Of course, in the scenario you don’t know this for sure.

And one from a (female) Facebooker on a friend’s posting of the Léa Seydoux article (how I found out about it):

Could you also mansplain how you would deserve to be harassed if you went to a business meeting at a hotel suite? Maybe you could mansplain how all hotels which have suites for conducting business are doing it wrong? Waiting to hear this information from a man, because of course no women could possibly know anything.

Let’s ignore for the moment that Ms. Seydoux made it explicit that her meeting in the hotel room/suite was to be an extracurricular encounter.

I’m wondering if the Harvey brouhaha is going to be liberating for people married to those who defend the shrinking female violets of Hollywood. Consider the person who is married to someone who explains the interactions between Harvey and the aspiring starlets in the above manner. He or she can fly out to a work conference, call up the spouse and say “Sweetheart, there was no good place to meet in the lobby or a breakout room so I am going up to hang out alone with an [opposite sex] executive from another company in [his/her] hotel room for a few hours. Hope you’re enjoying watching Planes with the kids for the 75th time.”

To cement Harvey Weinstein’s place in the pantheon of villainy it has become necessary to designate hotel rooms as places for opposite-sex married-to-other-people strangers to hold innocent 1-on-1 meetings. Can that designation now be used by ordinary folks who want to spice up their business trips?

Full post, including comments

Should we expect the Puerto Rico labor force participation rate to fall further?

Puerto Ricans are having a rough time, but it has been a month since Hurricane Maria hit and, in between the tears, maybe we can think unsentimentally about the future.

As noted in Can Puerto Rico be a laboratory for the future of the rest of the U.S.? (2015), Puerto Rico already had the lowest labor force participation rate in the U.S.:

The federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour is 77% of the median wage (comparable to a $13 per hour minimum wage in May 2014 (BLS data showing median hourly wage of $17.09 nationwide)). In other words, it is illegal for companies to hire a large percentage of Puerto Ricans at what would be a market-clearing wage for their particular skills. The result is that labor force participation in Puerto Rico is 43 percent [compare to a national average of about 63 percent at the time] …

In the short run maybe there is some extra demand for labor created by government and non-profit organizations pouring into the territory. But in the long run, now that employers are reminded of the hurricane risk, should we expect less capital investment in the island and therefore less demand for labor at the Federal minimum wage or higher?

Presumably a reduction in the Federal minimum wage is politically impossible. What politician is going to tell voters “Due to your mediocre skills and education, a lot of you aren’t worth too much to employers“?

So should part of the hurricane clean-up and rebuilding effort include planning neighborhoods and cities for a future in which few people work? (The standard American development pattern is horrible for this. Suburbia was designed for people who are going to commute into and gather quasi-socially at a workplace. They’ll be mostly alone at home when they’re home, but they’ll be home and not asleep for only a few hours per day.)

Full post, including comments

New York Times complains about the lack of dark-skinned executives at other companies

“Tech’s Troubling New Trend: Diversity Is in Your Head” (nytimes) complains about the lack of dark-skinned employees in “leadership roles” at technology companies. It becomes interesting when viewed alongside this page showing portraits of the executives who manage the New York Times.

Comments on this article can be interesting, e.g.,

After 20 years in one field I decided change careers and go into tech. I enrolled at my local university and learned multiple programming languages. I’ve taught entry level classes and volunteered at conferences, including a diversity conference. This is what I have to say about diversity in tech: diversity ends at 40. I can’t get an interview, let alone a job. But those in theirs 20s that I taught? Yeah, they have jobs. Tech is not interested in diversity except to tick off boxes.

Full post, including comments

Our trillion-dollar navy versus the pirates

The author of Sea Power: The History and Geopolitics of the World’s Oceans had direct personal experience trying to protect ships from Somali pirates.

The author states that the world’s awesome navy ships turned out to be irrelevant. The key was putting a handful of guys armed with rifles on each commercial ship (1/100th the cost of patrolling via Navy destroyer?):

What ultimately changed the dynamic altogether and has largely resulted in the dramatic reduction of piracy on the east coast of Africa was the decision by the shipping companies to put security teams on board. … This has led to the embarkation of two to six personnel from private contractors, normally well armed and reasonably well trained (at least in the use of the firearms). The host of problems raised by this include how to provide weapons and ammunition, where to base such groups, how they are trained and certified, and what the rules of engagement are for them. Because their activities occur largely on the high seas beyond the jurisdiction of any one nation, this has become a complicated branch of international law. There is a sort of Mad Max quality to these forces, despite the efforts of the contractors to train and certify them. While they are not exactly rogue warriors, their presence can make more traditional military sailors nervous, much as police in a city don’t like to see armed bodyguards or armed mall guards for that matter. Nonetheless, the results have been striking: no ship embarking an armed security detail has ever been successfully hijacked. This is because the defending team has such a huge advantage in the height of the big tankers and also because the pirates are very lightly armed, untrained themselves, and quite vulnerable during the actual act of boarding.

As the human population on Earth expands and fish become harder to catch we might expect more piracy:

When young, unemployed men find a relatively lucrative (although very dangerous) way to make a living, they are easily recruited. Second, the traditional source of income for many who turned to piracy had been fishing. Due to overfishing and ecological damage in the immediate waters, the ability to make a living fishing had diminished in the latter part of the twentieth century. … Third, the local water conditions are conducive to pirate activity. Before the real ramp-up in pirate activity, the normal shipping route was quite close to the coast of Somalia as well-laden commercial ships sailed to and from the Suez Canal. The water conditions are calm enough to permit small-boat assaults on the vastly larger commercial ships.

A pirate in a $500 open boat might be facing $20 billion in military hardware:

Over my four years as NATO commander we typically had three to five NATO vessels on station, matched with a similar number for the European Union. Given that the rest of the informal coalition against international piracy also had three to five ships, this became a substantial force. However, despite the presence of those warships, we were often a step behind the pirates. This was because of the sheer size of the operational area off the coast of Northeast Africa, a space roughly the size of Europe. When people would question why we couldn’t catch all the pirates, I would point out that even fifteen warships would be like fifteen police cars trying to cover all of western Europe. We also supplemented the ships with long-range maritime patrol aircraft. These heavy, wide-bodied, four-engine aircraft lumbered over vast amounts of territory and could remain airborne for eight to twelve hours, operating from bases in Oman, on islands in the Indian Ocean, or from the Horn of Africa. Used throughout the cold war for antisubmarine patrols, these airplanes have the ability to swoop down to the very surface of the ocean, use radar from higher altitude to scan the ocean surface, and provide command and control to helicopters or ships engaged in searching for the pirates. The United States operated P-3 Orion aircraft and the British the comparable Nimrods, and several other allies had similarly equipped planes. Additionally, for overall command of the operation from the air, NATO had available the massive Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) E-3 plane, a flying village with extensive radar, communication, and well-trained personnel.

Catching a pirate turns out to be pointless due to a lack of paperwork:

The hardest part of the operation was actually what occurred after we caught a pirate, which we did with increasing frequency. These were young men, ethnically Somalis, … They have no papers, don’t self-identify with a particular functioning government, and thus we had no one to whom we could turn them over for prosecution. Naturally the minute we closed in on them, they would also throw overboard their scaling ladder and guns, so when we boarded their small vessels we would find “innocent fishermen” and have little evidence of their wrongdoing in many cases … The pirates were lucky that we couldn’t fall back on the centuries-old punishment for such crimes and string them up from a yardarm. While several of the nations in the coalition might have been actually willing to do so, we followed normal mores of Western judicial process throughout the time I was engaged in the exercise.

The author says that we can look forward to more piracy in the Gulf of Guinea, even as the waters off the coast of Somalia have become safer.

More: read Sea Power: The History and Geopolitics of the World’s Oceans.

Full post, including comments

Science as a career

In “Women in Science,” I wrote

One of my students, we’ll call him Bill, in an introductory computer science class said that he wanted to be a biologist when he grew up. What biologists had Bill met? They were all professors at MIT and about half of them had won the Nobel Prize.

The gist of the article is “sure, science is great if you’re working at the Nobel Prize level, but that’s not where the average scientist ends up.”

It looks as though I was, as usual, wrong.

Apparently, science can be a terrible career even for Nobel winners. See this article on Jeffrey Hall, who won the 2017 Nobel in medicine but quit science 10 years previously.

Full post, including comments

The next war at sea will actually be entirely under the sea?

One interesting part of Sea Power: The History and Geopolitics of the World’s Oceans is the idea that the best way to attack a country by sea might be to cut its undersea communications cables:

In 2006 and 2008, accidental destruction of cables effectively shut down Internet services to several large countries or parts thereof, including, among others, Egypt, India, China, and Pakistan. Fortunately, the cables are fairly substantial: typically, a couple of inches thick and well insulated with galvanic padding. But they are quite vulnerable, especially at cable heads when they emerge from the water. In Egypt just a couple of years ago, swimmers were caught while trying to cut through a major 12,500-mile cable. Internet speeds throughout Egypt plummeted by more than 60 percent. Overall, the cable system is fairly robust in facing routine challenges— accidents, anchors dragged over them, corrosion, low-level attacks. The challenge will come as nations and transnational groups (criminal cartels, terrorists) find ways to disrupt them on a massive scale. Even with the 285 cables on the bottom of the world today and the 22 “redundant” or “dark” cables in reserve, the vulnerabilities are clear.

We have 16 $2.7 billion Virginia-class submarines. How could they possibly protect even a single 12,500-mile cable, though? What stops an enemy from building an underwater robot to go down and cut through these vital cables? Instead of investing in another 32 of these submarines should we be building anti-robot robots to patrol up and down the cable paths?

Full post, including comments