Nick Ottens

Freelance analyst, editor, reporter

January 30, 2012
by Nick Ottens
0 comments

The North American Energy Export Boom

Wikistrat just started running a new community-wide simulation called “The North American Energy Boom?” Notice the question mark there because even if there’s tremendous potential, governments, especially in Mexico and the United States, remain hesitant to exploit it as fully as they could.

Barely half a day into the simulation, some interesting scenarios have already been raised. Among them, “Mexico takes the lead in North America’s fracking boom.” Did you know Mexico is estimated to posses the fourth largest shale gas resources in the world? James Bosworth, who’s a Wikistrat Contributing Analyst, did and he suggests that if there isn’t the political will to push ahead with shale gas exploitation in the United States, Mexican imports could prove a win-win for both. America gets the energy it needs while avoiding the immediate environmental consequences; Mexico takes the business.

South of the border, there may be less popular resistance to unorthodox energy production but up north, there is considerable opposition to tar sand exploitation.

Teale Phelps Bondaroff, who is another Contributing Analyst with Wikistrat and specialized in radical and terrorist movements, predicts that the opposition in Canada will not be able to outweigh the industrial lobby though. “Many of these groups are disorganized and ad hoc and often criticized for advocating ‘not in my back yard’ issues,” he writes.

That may be true but I do think they have an impact. Consider President Barack Obama’s recent refusal to permit construction of the Keystone XL pipeline which would have carried oil from the Alberta tar sands to Houston, Texas. Part of that may have been to call the Republicans’ bluff for the heck of it but he is pouring billions into subsidies for solar and wind energy at the same time. Who knows? I may get to see a scenario about that, too!

January 20, 2012
by Nick Ottens
0 comments

A Question About CNN’s Priorities

I’m watching the presidential debate which CNN last night kicked off with a question about Newt Gingrich’s marital past. We got a decent question on whether the candidates believed the Federal Government could do anything to fight unemployment next as well as a segment about immigration near the end of the debate. In between, though, the candidates were asked, among other things, about their tax returns, what they’d do better if they could start their presidential bids all over, and, of course, abortion.

Social issues were a big item in the most recent ABC News debate as well where Governor Mitt Romney was asked whether he’d allow states to ban contraception. Is this an issue? Are there any states planning to ban contraception? Not really, unless if you’re very suspicious of pro-life legislation.

In any event, these aren’t the issues that voters list as their priorities for the next election. They care about jobs, the deficit, regulation. Why are ABC and CNN trying to make this about personal and social issues? I understand they’re hoping for a bit of sensation during their debates but millions of people are watching anyway! The audiences who show up to watch these debates live certainly don’t seem very appreciative of this line of questioning.

And then they have commentators on air complaining about how Republicans like to talk about social issues so much! They don’t. (Except Rick Santorum.) The media does.

January 16, 2012
by Nick Ottens
0 comments

Why Jon Huntsman Failed to Gain Traction

There’s this narrative in left leaning and non-American press about Jon Huntsman’s failed candidacy where people say he failed to enthuse conservative voters because he wasn’t a populist and didn’t embrace the Tea Party. I don’t think this is right.

Mitt Romney isn’t a populist and hasn’t embraced the Tea Party and he’s probably going to be the nominee.

The candidates that are running as populists, Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry, are losing support with their anticapitalists, un-Tea Partyesque attacks against Mit Romney. Rick Santorum isn’t a Tea Party conservative. He’s a George W. Bush compassionate conservative who doesn’t believe there’s such a thing as “personal autonomy.”

The reason Huntsman didn’t do better is because he didn’t run as a conservative from the start. He positioned himself as a right of center candidate in the belief that the country is right of center. It is. Most Americans think of themselves as either centrist or conservative. He would have done well in a general election but you don’t run a general election campaign in the primaries.

Huntsman realized this too late. Only in the final weeks before the New Hampshire vote did he start running ads that touted his very conservative record as Utah’s governor. Indeed, he may have been the most conservative man in the race given that he implemented a flat tax in Utah, reformed health care there without a mandate, enacted a school voucher program and was staunchly pro-free trade.

The mistake, I think, Huntsman made was running as an ambassador who put “country first” and not as a former conservative governor whose state was number one in job creation during his tenure. There was a real desire for a true and trustworthy conservative among Republican primary voters. None of the supposedly right wing candidates are. Huntsman is and he could have been that candidate.

Maybe he will be in 2016 if Romney loses in November.

January 12, 2012
by Nick Ottens
0 comments

US Military Presence in Europe Unlikely to “Evolve”

The new defense strategy that was unveiled by President Barack Obama last week emphasizes a strong American military presence in the Pacific at the expense of the Atlantic realm. Although the document underscores the United States’ “enduring interests” in Europe, it also suggests that the force posture there must “evolve” in recognition of a strategic shift to East Asia.

I don’t think it’s going to happen. You can read why in my article for the Atlantic Sentinel but here’s the gist of it:

As long as the United States far outspend European nations in defense and maintain an extended and permanent military presence on the continent, there is little incentive for NATO partners there to enhance their own defenses. There may be a “dwindling appetite and patience in the US Congress,” as [defense secretary Robert] Gates put it, to continue to make up for Europe’s lack of an independent defense capacity; if [Leon] Panetta believes that he has to “make clear” to Europe that he is “committed” to its security nonetheless, there won’t be any change.

There may be some change in that a combat brigade is withdrawn from Europe but at the same time, the United States building a missile shield over the continent which is a far more expensive but also a far more effective way of protecting Europe.

January 7, 2012
by Nick Ottens
0 comments

Atlantic Sentinel 2.0

3.0, actually, if you count in the original design, but the latest version of the Atlantic Sentinel is very Web 2.0 with social media integration and a lean and light layout.

The result of roughly a week of coding, the current theme is totally my own, so totally devoid of superfluous coding and functions the site doesn’t need. What’s more, this should survive further WordPress upgrades unlike the previous theme which was so heavily customized that it couldn’t bear an upgrade.

Hopefully, WordPress will soon release the ability for readers to comment with their Facebook and Twitter identities. I’m waiting for, not wanting to install an outdated and code heavy plugin, so right now, it’s just the default comment form.