Republican Unity Project 2016- Leadership Skills Survey

*REPUBLICAN UNITY PROJECT 2016*

 

What leadership skill attracts you the most in a Presidential Candidate? Check or circle one choice.

­­­­­_____Motivational Skills. Ability to motivate and inspire those on their team and across the isles.

_____Collaborative Skills. Ability to work with their team and accomplish tasks across the isles.

_____Persuasion. Ability to win adversaries over to their point of view.

­_____Communication Skills. Ability to articulate messages in an articulate way that is easy to understand.

­_____Change Agent. Ability to initiate change where it is needed

_____Manage Conflict. Ability to negotiate and resolve disagreement

 

What personality trait attracts you the most in a Presidential Candidate? Check or circle one choice.

_____Genuine interest in others. Cares about other people’s needs and struggles.

_____Flexibility. Open minded to advice and contribution of others.

_____Sound judgment. Experienced wisdom, Reliable decision making.

_____Honesty. Never making exaggerated claims or half-truths.

_____Empathy. The ability to relate to others.

_____Engaging. Charm, ability to hold the attention of others.

 

Tell us about yourself. Check or circle.

_____Female _____Male

_____Married _____Single

Zip Code (Please write): ____________________

Age Range: ___18-25 ___26-35 ___36-45 ___46-55 ___56-65 ___66-75 ___76+

Political Stance: ___Democrat ___Republican ___Independent ___Undeclared

Women and Candidate EQ for Republicans in 2016 – The first Republican Unity Project 2016 Commentary

By: Terence Rosenthal

 

The largest demographic, and one that Republicans cannot ignore in 2016, is women. Top candidates must be able to prove that they are accomplished, and intelligent. However, 2016 requires that the Republican presidential nominee have a high EQ, or emotional quotient as well.

What level of trust and identification do women have with current Republican messaging and leadership? Which personality traits, and leadership qualities do women find most alluring in potential leaders? These are questions that must be considered with regard to 2016. Imagine the outcome of 2012 if an extra five percent of women voters felt a closer connection with Romney than Obama.

What characterizes a Republican woman? Can there be an improvement in the percentage of single women voting Republican in 2016? Is it possible for certain women to feel enough of a connection with the candidate that they vote Republican even if they disagree with key parts of his or her platform? These questions require answers from Republicans in 2016.

In terms of consumerism, women focus and reevaluate details more than men. They search for ideal answers, and are less satisfied with merely accommodating a need or challenge. For this reason, Republicans must consider a candidate’s EQ, as well as qualities women voters find most alluring.

Trust is a key element as related to who a voter will support. Candidates must do more than persuade, they have to be able reach potential constituents as if they are communicating with them one-on-one. It sounds squishy, but in an age of numbers, facts, figures, and numerous quantitative polls, some will still need an emotional bond with the candidate to give them their vote. Many believed Romney was competent enough to be the President, however, enough people felt that he was out of touch with their circumstances. In the end, a significant percentage either stayed home, or reluctantly voted a second time for Barack Obama.

Do Republican candidates care about the circumstances of potential female constituents, or do they just want to be right? Ardent Republican voters are satisfied with messages that they believe to be correct. However, if Republican messaging is carried in such a way that seems uncaring, or inconsiderate of the circumstances of certain people, it will fail no matter how correct it is.

Although debates are an important part of the campaign process, it must be noted that many points that are made during those debates are off topic, and are attempts to win the heart of voters. Remember Bill Clinton tenderly biting his lip as he stated, “I feel your pain.” Many people just want to know if a candidate is human, and has a heart.

            People are complex. They often make decisions in their head, and all they need is vindication from the heart to either take action, or reconsider their path. During elections, is that person motivated by a candidate? Do they believe in that candidate’s sense of empathy? Are they responsive to a clarity of message and how a candidate carries his or herself?

What personality trait do women find most effective? There is honesty. Humility, and flexibility in reconsidering certain points of view are also highly regarded. There is social interaction, and the ability of the candidate to be able to crack a joke under pressure, as well as be sensitive to one’s feelings even in the hardest of times. Many respond to candidates that are decisive and confident under fire. These variables must be researched and quantified in order to assure Republican victory in 2016, especially among female voters.

Israeli Enterprise – Conduit of Major Economies, East and West

Israeli construction of two natural gas pipelines and a trans-national railroad will unite global powers. Although there are formidable regional challenges, Europe will achieve greater mobility in the Middle East, and the West will attain better access to commodities and labor in Africa.

 

The new Israeli pipelines and railroad will serve as alternate passage to the Indian Ocean with less obstruction than the Suez Canal. They will also help to diminish Iranian dominance in the region. The E.U., India, Saudi Arabia and the GCC, Turkey, Jordan, the West Bank, and one of its major backers, China all benefit. Recently, the U.S. has started to take notice.

 

If it decides to get more involved in these projects, the U.S. will experience greater connectivity with Africa, balancing the dominance of rival power, China. There are significant challenges. The first is the peace process between Israel and the West Bank, brokered by the U.S. and the E.U. However, Israeli-West Bank relations have a lot of potential. Israel is one of the most developed nations in the world, the West Bank has a young, highly educated population, especially in IT and software development.

 

New Israeli natural gas pipelines will reinforce ties with Jordan, an ally of both the West Bank and Israel.  This year, Israel agreed to increase the amount of water it gives to the West Bank by over 20 percent, and make Jenin a distribution center for its natural gas.

 

Next is Saudi Arabia and the GCC, not traditionally allies with Israel. However, due to common disagreement with Iranian nuclear proliferation, they have grown closer. A block consisting of Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the G.C.C. neutralizes Iranian presence in the region.

 

Then there is the Red Sea corridor. Yemen and Somalia experience conflict on a regular basis. Somalia, infamous for pirates near their waters, is a headquarters for the Al Shabaab terrorist organization. The anti-Western regime in Yemen is highly unstable, and riddled by Al Qaeda. However, due to the fact that trade from the E.U. must pass through the Red Sea to arrive in the Indian Ocean and Asia, there is already constant military presence on the part of the U.S., China, and England.

 

E.U., China, Middle Eastern powers aligned with the West, as well as Africa will benefit from new construction of new Israeli natural gas pipelines and national railroad. The question is, when will the U.S. find the incentive to get more involved?

U.S. – Saudi Relations Need Reconciliation

Last November, Saudi Arabia granted Israel permission to use its airspace in the event of a strike against Iran, and is planning on forming a coalition with its partners in the GCC. Currently, Saudi Arabia believes that the U.S. has forgotten them. So strong are feelings of neglect that they actually campaigned for a seat on the U.N. Security Council last October, only to reject it. An unprecedented historic gesture, Saudi Arabia was undoubtedly giving the U.S. a wake-up call.

 

Presently, the Shiites dominate Iran and Iraq. Iran’s proxy, Hezbollah controls politics in Lebanon, and aids the Assad regime in Syria. In Saudi Arabia itself, there is substantial opposition to the monarchy which, if stoked by Tehran, could result in a power vacuum, and regime change favorable to Iran. This year, King Saud turns 90. The fact that Saudi Arabia, and the GCC are having talks with Israel is a true sign that they are doubtful of U.S. support. Twenty years ago, this was unimaginable.

 

January 20th marks the start date for Iran to stop key parts of its nuclear program. U.S. senators are skeptical of Iran’s abidance of new nuclear agreements. There is bipartisan effort to add sanctions and override a presidential veto if Iran violates current terms. For many Iranian officials, recent nuclear agreements merely pause enrichment while international sanctions are lifted. Even with existing international diplomatic agreements, some countries follow international sanctions less than others. Russia is presently bartering equipment and goods for approximately $1.5 billion worth in oil per month.

 

Saudi Arabia does not like U.S. unpredictability regarding current foreign policy in the Middle East. Since the onset of the Arab Spring, the U.S. has been courting regimes next to or near the Saudis contrary to their interests. Consider the poorly executed transition of power in Egypt, and the ushering in of the Muslim Brotherhood under Mohammed Morsi. In Yemen, the U.S. was indecisive regarding the ousting of Ali Abdullah Saleh. In Bahrain, a relatively tolerant island off the coast of Saudi Arabia, home to 15,000 U.S. troops, and a Jewish ambassador to the U.S., the Saudis had to stop a major Shiite uprising.

 

So, how can U.S.-Saudi relationships be repaired? First, U.S. assistance in military technology for surveillance and intelligence would provide reassurance by helping to alleviate possible threats. Then the U.S. can assist in “Saudization,” increasing the number of Saudi citizens in its private sector work force. Saudi Arabia is recognized for its dominance in petrol production and refinement. However, Chemicals, food and beverage, metal and mineral production are among their fastest growing economic sectors.

 

The future of the Saudi economy may depend on how well these sectors merge with its cash crop, petrol. The U.S. can consult with existing Saudi companies and universities to assure a vital, productive future. The U.S. alliance with Saudi Arabia and the GCC is quite crucial considering its location between the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea, and the fact that its population is young and multiplying.

 

The world benefits from peaceful economic rivalry in the Middle East with regard to Iran and Saudi Arabia. The idea of the Saudis developing nuclear technology is already prevalent. If the U.S. is lax in its diplomatic assistance regarding future economic planning, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Monarchies may seek other means of assuring their future regarding national security, and reliable oil production. Consequences will be dire if two of the world’s largest oil nations are equipped with nuclear weaponry. Proxies like Hezbollah and Al Qaida will be a much greater threat than they are now.

“Deterring U.S. Rivals On The String of Pearls” Terence Rosenthal

History reveals that when rising powers match established rivals, the result is war. The cost of global goods and transport will drastically increase, and conflict will arise if China and Iran continue asserting control over Indian Ocean shipping lanes. The U.S. must assure security in the West Pacific, China Seas, and the Indian Ocean along the “string of pearls,” a route of ports that the Chinese have invested in starting from Hong Kong, and ending in the Mozambique Channel.

The Indian Ocean is home to the world’s largest center of manufacturing, commodities, and service industries, as well as the largest transport hub for imports and exports, especially petrol. U.S. presence in the Indian Ocean directly addresses deterrence of Chinese and Iranian occupation of disputed territory. The most important challenge is neutralizing Chinese and Iranian saturation in the Strait of Hormuz, the Strait of Malacca, and the Mozambique Channel.

Consider China’s confiscation of the Scarborough Shoals from the Philippines, the Senkaku dispute, and the Iranian presence in Bahrain. Maybe an attack on Taiwan is next. For this reason, the U.S. must be the manager of strategic alliances in the Indian Ocean. Confiscation of territories including Taiwan will catapult China to becoming the new super power in the world.

China depends most on exports, as well as imported oil, primarily from Iran, and developing economies in Africa. While conflict and encroachment on the high seas may satisfy nationalist tendencies in China and Iran, the U.S. must convey to these two nations that it will also hamper their economy severely.

U.S. commercial development of ports of its allies proximal to Chinese and Iranian bases along its “string of pearls” is necessary, especially near the Strait of Hormuz. There are two tactics that the U.S. must explore in order to stabilize the Indian Ocean, assure safe global economic security to nations proximal to China and Iran, and assure open passageways for the shipment of goods through the Indian Ocean to the rest of the world.

First, the U.S. must aid in the enhancement of civilian cargo and fishing vessels in nations allied with the U.S. In the past, the Chinese have saturated the Indian Ocean, West Pacific, and China Seas with civilian cargo, establishing a presence before declaring occupation. Part of pushback against unwanted encroachment requires that waters of allies of the U.S. near the “string of pearls” be frequented to reduce the possibility of encroachment. With consent, these ships will communicate either U.S. forces, or the armies of countries of residence.

Frequent communication regarding developments in these waters as well as enhanced presence and activity will keep military forces aware of the tendencies of Chinese and Iranian vessels. The possibility of sudden intervention on the part of Iran or China well be less likely as well. If the threat of military intervention is required, due to constant surveillance, the most vital targets can be isolated. Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, India, Oman, U.A.E., Qatar, and Saudi Arabia are all allied with the U.S. to some extent, and are proximal to the “string of pearls.” Vietnam and Ethiopia have communications with the United States, and offer the potential for becoming vital allies.

The U.S. is meeting in Thailand this year for a military conference with ASEAN nations. Perhaps Indonesia and Malaysia should be considered as potential primary U.S. allies. Maybe Oman can be a transfer point for goods shipped from Africa, and fuels delivered from the Gulf Monarchies.

Second, the U.S. must update the fleets of its main allies in the region with unmanned technology, naval submarines, and mining. This weaponry could be stored at U.S. bases in Sunda, Lombok, the Cocos Islands, and Diego Garcia, and would be supplied its strongest allies in the region.

The Chinese have created notoriety regarding submarine launched ballistic missile technology. With a 4,000 mile range, these missiles can hit Hawaii or the Continental United States depending on where they are launched. Although ballistic missiles grab headlines, they also create controversy due to the threat of potential loss of mortality they can incur.

Submarine and mine technology do not grab headlines, however, the U.S. is potentially decades ahead of its competition in these military technologies. In addition, this weaponry poses great economic threat with drastically less loss of mortality.   An abundance of U.S. allied submarine and mine technology would be successful deterrents to conflict and further encroachment.

A strong, well-connected United States in the Indian Ocean, West Pacific, and China Seas is better for all global economies. A two pronged approach including enhanced civilian presence, and development of submarine and mine technology regarding U.S. allies proximal to the “string of pearls.” Enhanced U.S. presence in the Indian Ocean should be about exercising deterrence with regard to Iran and China.

“Indian Ocean – Premier Global U.S. Theatre” Editorial by Terence Rosenthal

Currently, the most important global region to forge new alliances is the Indian Ocean, South and East China Seas, and surrounding countries. What the U.S. must accomplish in its pivot to Asia is the ability to create functional partnerships with countries that have key ports of operation.

In terms of military, economic, and diplomatic prowess, China presents the biggest challenge to the United States. In 2013, Chinese military budget was approximately $119 billion. Currently, it is asserting jurisdiction and control of almost the entire South and East China Seas, effectively placing potential roadblocks in the middle of these routes.

China will be activating patrols in an Air Defense Identification Zone in the East China Sea over islands claimed by the Japanese, and waters disputed by Vietnam and the Philippines. The Chinese are demonstrating to the world that they would like to call the shots regarding naval passage. There will be significant economic challenges to the U.S. and many other countries if China decides to exercise tariffs, regulations and fines for the use of those waters.

China has been very contentious in recent years because they are developing stronger bonds with the Middle East and Africa, transporting oil over Indian Ocean sea routes. Because of the size of China, as well as its increase in consumption and lifestyle over the past decades, the Chinese are asserting control in entire regions bordering the Indian Ocean and its shipping routes.

80 percent of Chinese oil imports are delivered through the Indian Ocean. It is through these and neighboring waters that China would like to rise in Global prominence. The partnership of China and Iran has the potential to dominate the Straits of Hormuz. In Africa, China working tirelessly to reverse the flow of oil, diamonds, precious minerals, being transported westward from South Sudan to Cameroon. The Chinese wish to transport resources eastward from Africa through the port of Kenya, and through the Indian Ocean.

Imagine the increase in the cost of goods, difficulty of transport, and the friction this will cause with countries and businesses trying to remain globally competitive if the Chinese are allowed to assert full control over Indian Ocean shipping lanes. The potential for wars, hot and cold would be greatly increased. As a result, naval dominance and security over the high seas is of utmost importance.

Chinese military aggression is more than mere posturing. This year, unprecedented numbers of Chinese air craft were scrambled over Japanese air space. Nearly 300 air craft were scrambled, up approximately 80 percent from the previous year. Countries in the Indian Ocean are strengthening there armed forces for potential conflict in the region.

India, China’s biggest military rival in the hemisphere, just purchased military aircraft from Japan. The Japanese have not sold military aircraft since WWII. Their air craft will be able to fly well into the interior of Southeast Asia. India has spent nearly $13 billion on military equipment from 2007-2011. It has also purchased military equipment from Russia, the U.S. and Israel. India plans on building its naval fleet to approximately 145 vessels. This year, both India and Japan, as well as 21 other countries including the U.S. and China will meet for war games at RIMPAC in Hawaii.

Even Australia is concerned with conditions in the region. It will be spending $3 billion on Triton superdrones used to detect illegal craft from Sri Lanka and Indonesia. This will undoubtedly be a source of contention for China. The U.S. will be stationing Tritons in Guam, and will have access to the South China Seas.

The U.S. may not be able to function as the global police. However, its alliances can be better managed, optimizing the interests of itself and its allies. Evaluation of key U.S. bases abroad must be reviewed in terms of future challenges. Regarding the Indian Ocean, and neighboring regions on land and sea, questions need to be answered as related to U.S. strategy and objectives. What is of central importance to the U.S. economy and its allies? At what point is it required for U.S. response? When should the response be military versus diplomatic? Is there potential for U.S. response to threats against itself and its allies to be approached with hard diplomacy, a blend of military strategy and diplomacy?

Starting with the Indian Ocean and the South and East China Seas, the U.S. should establish a hierarchy of criteria for determining what constitutes primary, secondary, and future allies and threats. In terms the amount of fuels and commodities shipped through it, as well as the number of developing service and manufacturing economies dependent on it, the Indian Ocean is of utmost importance.

Regarding U.S. global interests, true partnerships with other economies need to be reinforced, and alliances merely consisting of dependency of U.S.  Armed Forces have to be reevaluated. Perhaps Indonesia and Malaysia will join the likes of the BRICS and should be considered as potential primary U.S. allies. Maybe Oman can be a transfer point for goods shipped from Africa, and fuels delivered from the Gulf Monarchies. Future allies require assessment in how well they can partner with the U.S. in how they can help in detection and prevention of potential threats and challenges. Time is of the utmost importance, as China is fast developing alliances with developing nations with ports on the Indian Ocean.