Illuminating the Arts-Policy Nexus 
Illuminating the Arts-Policy Nexus is a fortnightly series of articles on the role of art in public policymaking. This series invites WPI fellows and project leaders as well as external practitioners to contribute pieces on how artists have led policy change and how policymakers can use creative strategies.
In Every Nation for Itself: Winners and Losers in a G-Zero World, World Policy Institute Senior Fellow Ian Bremmer illustrates a historic shift in the international system and the world economy—and an unprecedented moment of global uncertainty.
Wojciech Lorenz: Patriots Come to Morag
WARSAW—The Polish Ministry of Defense has decided to allow American forces to place a Patriot missile battery in Morag, barely 75 miles from the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad that borders Poland. For months, unofficial reports had claimed that missiles would be stationed in Wesola, some 150 miles to the southwest—near Warsaw, and thus further from Russian territory.
The Defense Ministry alleges that the decision has nothing to do with Russia. They say that the military base in Morag is simply better prepared to host an American installation than any other base within reasonable distance of the Polish capital. Though a host of commentators are up in arms about the decision—seeing in it signs of a new Polish aggressiveness—these worries are misplaced.
Whether one battery of Patriots would add anything to the Polish air-defense system is questionable, but if so, the proposed location is probably the best place for these defensive weapons.
Yet, to be fair, it is difficult not to see the strategic importance of—and dangers inherent in—this decision. Russia has short-range missiles called Toczka in Kaliningrad, which can be armed with nuclear warheads. The Kremlin has also warned Warsaw that should it accept a U.S. missile defense system, it will be forced to move batteries of more dangerous Iskander missiles to the enclave.
As is to be expected, Moscow has reacted aggressively to any idea of new, advanced military installations being placed in Poland. The Kremlin's initial reaction to the new location was a prompt (though unofficial) report, suggesting that it would move to strengthen its Baltic Fleet, which consists of some 100 ships. During the Cold War, this fleet was an advanced fist of Soviet power directed toward the West. Clearly, though, decisions of this caliber are not made easily or quickly. So is this just reflexive rhetoric from Moscow, or the beginnings of a new arms race?
David A. Andelman: State of the Nation, But What About the World?
It was quite clear by the time President Obama got to the end of his State of the Union speech last night that it was very much—the state of America, not the state of the world. Barely 10 minutes—roughly 900 of 7,500 words—were devoted in his hour-long address to global issues, a passing nod, an odd rhetorical flourish, a vague threat to America’s enemies—North Korea and Iran, al-Qaeda and the Taliban (not even by name, in the latter’s case). Controlling global warming? Good. Withdrawal from Iraq? Leaving behind a democratic government? Well, we shall see in the wake of the coming elections. Among the few accomplishments he cited? Thirty thousand more troops to Afghanistan and a big multilateral conference opening in London today to prop up the government of President Hamid Karzai. But within hours, this latter president undercut Obama’s whole message, suggesting it would be five to ten years before his nation could stand on its own against its many enemies, foreign and domestic. No route home soon for those 30,000 additional men and women apparently. So what was on the agenda of the American president, and what was not? Certainly not the Middle East. Despite his stem-winding speech in Cairo nearly a year ago, and the appointment of a master envoy, George Mitchell, Israelis and Palestinians are as far apart as ever. “If we had anticipated some of [the] political problems on both sides earlier, we might not have raised expectations as high,” Obama admitted to Time’s Joe Klein last week.
A quick laughline over global warming. (“I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change....”) But no mention of the buzz-saw he walked into in Copenhagen which all but collapsed, leaving environmentalists puzzled at best, bitter at least. Global trade? A pledge to double U.S. exports in the next five years—and move toward some Doha accord. Hardly a message many of America’s trading partners would like to hear. And especially those who were somehow left out of the message entirely: “And that's why we'll continue to shape a Doha trade agreement that opens global markets, and why we will strengthen our trade relations in Asia and with key partners like South Korea and Panama and Colombia." What happened to China? India? Brazil? Clearly straw men, purely passing cautionary tales: "China is not waiting to revamp its economy. Germany is not waiting. India is not waiting.” Look out America, the world is out there breathing down our backs, waiting to steal our first-place position: “These nations aren't playing for second place. They're putting more emphasis on math and science. They're rebuilding their infrastructure. They're making serious investments in clean energy because they want those jobs. Well, I do not accept second place for the United States of America. (Applause.)” Nuclear disarmament? “The United States and Russia are completing negotiations on the farthest-reaching arms control treaty in nearly two decades.” When? No deadline. When they’re finished.







