Who made the worst predictions for 2011?

Foreign Policy is soliciting nominations for the worst predictions for 2011. Great idea. If they keep doing this (it looks like this will be the second year), it might help to hold accountable people who made foolish predictions. It would be even better if they could tag people who made predictions that were back by the worst analysis, or that served their own interests.....

America's Shadow State in Pakistan

This article suggests that the US has developed and paid for counterterrorism sections of the Pakistani intelligence agency as well as some police agencies. These allies of the US would be more loyal than the rest of the Pakistani state. It's not the first time this has happened. As I discuss in some detail here, the US has established patron-client relations with intelligence services, or sections of such services, with a number of countries in the last decade. This typically occurs when (1) the country has valuable intelligence that the US wants, (2) the US cannot trust the country to share intelligence, and (3) the US has the interest and resources to persuade elements in the country to cooperate in ways that allow the US to directly assess the reliability of the intelligence it shares.

The Many Faces of Counterterrorism

Public Choice just published a special issue edited by Todd Sandler on "The Many Faces of Counterterrorism." Lots of good articles by top counterterrorism people that are definitely worth checking out.

Drone Shoot Down: The Flipside of UAVs

Iran claims to have shot down a US drone. They type of drone in question was developed to spy on Iranian and North Korean nuclear technology.

If the Iranian claims are true, it illustrates some often overlooked costs of drone technology. Drones are great for surveillance because they lack on-board pilots. Having pilots complicates things because they are exposed to harm or capture. Drones can also fly for much longer periods than many piloted aircraft.

These lower costs for drones likely makes political leaders more likely to authorize their use for surveillance (each flight is authorized by the White House, according to Marc Ambinder). More drone flights means more provocation, more that can be shot done, more incentive for the targets to better hide their activities. So over the longer run, the lower political costs of drones leads the US to use them more frequently, but also prompts more countermeasures by the targets. Not clear if this leaves anyone (other than pilots) better off.