Day: May 21, 2012
Hats off!
International institutions of all sorts come in for so much criticism in Washington these days I thought I would take a moment off from the usual bashing. Compliments are due to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), its head of mission in Kosovo Ambassador Werner Almhofer, and his deputy (my colleague and friend) Ed Joseph, for a small, serious and highly positive contribution to stability and peace in the Balkans.
The occasion was the recent presidential election in Serbia, which completed its second round yesterday (yes, I’ve got a piece drafted on its results, but my traveling co-author needs a chance to read it before we go to print). Serbs throughout Kosovo were entitled to vote, but it was not obvious how to enable them to do so. Pristina is none too happy these days with Belgrade’s monkeying around in north Kosovo, and Belgrade had to ensure that Serbs could vote throughout Kosovo in a way that did not put in doubt the results.
Enter a last-minute negotiated solution via the OSCE, the only viable alternative. In record time (I’m told 5 days!) it managed the electoral process in a way that seems to have satisfied both Pristina and Belgrade.
Anyone who wants to hear how this is done can attend Ed’s talk at the Center for Transatlantic Relations, his perch before going off to Pristina, Friday 10-11:30 in room 500 at 1717 Massachusetts Avenue, NW (BOB to the cognescenti). I won’t be there, as I’m headed Thursday for Istanbul, then Pristina next week. But Ed is a really good speaker and has a great tale to tell!
This week’s peace picks
A light week in DC. The big events are elsewhere: NATO Summit continuing today in Chicago, nuclear talks with Iran in Baghdad Wednesday, and Egyptian presidential election Wednesday and Thursday.
1. Egypt’s Presidential Election and Public Opinion: What Do Egyptians Want? Brookings, May 21, 3-4:30 pm
Brookings Institution
Washington, DC
Summary
The elections of 2012 could prove to be even more consequential for Egypt than the turbulence of 2011. Various Egyptian factions have spent the last year trying to find their place in the new post-Mubarak order, and for the first time Egyptians have an opportunity to choose their president. It is a critical time to take the pulse of the population.
On May 21, the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings will unveil the results of a new University of Maryland poll. Conducted in the weeks leading up to Egypt’s historic presidential election, the poll gauges which candidate is most favored by the public, what issues are driving public preferences, what Egyptians want their leader and their country to look like, and what role they want religion to play in politics. In addition, the poll explores Egyptian public attitudes toward the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty, the Iran nuclear issue, the Syria crisis, and the American presidential election. Brookings Nonresident Senior Fellow Shibley Telhami, principal investigator of the poll and the Anwar Sadat professor for Peace and Development at the University of Maryland, will present his latest research and key findings. Steven Cook, the Hasib J. Sabbagh Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations will provide commentary and offer his insights from his own research. Senior Fellow Daniel Byman, director of research for the Saban Center, will moderate the discussion.
After the program, panelists will take audience questions.
2. The Dynamics of Iran’s Domestic Policy, WWC, 9-10:30 am May 22
Bernard Hourcade
Public Policy Scholar, Woodrow Wilson Center, and Senior Research Fellow (emeritus) CNRS
Bijan Khajehpour
Managing Partner, Atieh International
On the eve of the Baghdad meeting between Iran and the P5+1, two Iran experts will discuss the role of domestic dynamics—recent parliamentary elections, divisions among the ruling elite, economic difficulties—in Iran’s decision to return to the negotiating table on the nuclear issue.
- post-war political agreements, especially the effects of excluding or including parties to the conflict both in governance and in security institutions, such as the military and police;
- the role of international diplomats and mediators;
- economic arrangements in peace agreements;
- the role of peacekeeping missions.
An array of cases will be discussed.
Speakers
- Charles “Chuck” Call, Presenter
Associate Professor, American University, and former Jennings Randolph Senior Fellow (2008-2009) - Caroline Hartzell, Presenter
Professor of Political Science, Gettysburg College and former Jennings Randolph Senior Fellow (2010-2011) - Lise Howard, Presenter
Assistant Professor of Government, Georgetown University, and current Jennings Randolph Senior Fellow - Ambassador Robert Loftis
former Acting Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization (S/CRS) at U.S. Department of State, current USIP Interagency Professional in Residence; - Pamela Aall, Moderator
Provost, USIP’s Academy for International Conflict Management and Peacebuilding
4. The Day After Baghdad: Assessing the Iran Nuclear Talks, National Iranian American Council, 2-3:30 pm May 24
A panel discussion featuring:
PJ Crowley Former Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs |
George Perkovich |
Bijan Khajehpour |
Aaron David Miller |
Trita Parsi |
Thursday, May 24, 2012
2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.
101 Constitution Ave, NW
Capitol View Conference Room, 7th Floor
Greece is defeating its own purposes
Nikos commented on my previous post urging Athens to export stability:
An article from 2.150 A.D.: “Northern Mexico wants to join NATO with the name Virginia. We must hear those peoples voice because they have the right for self-determination. Recognizing them by this name means also that every Virginian that lived there the last thousand years is only Virginian and they never have been Americans there. Including the eight Presidents that born there and any other historical figure that Americans demand as their own. Virginians are no Americans and the opposite. And ancient Virginians were no Americans also. The history of Virginia is the history of the Former Mexican Republic of Virginia. And some day Virginians (Mexicans) will have the historical right to take Virginia state into their territory because it is their right.”
This is a little example which can make Americans see the problem with the Greek view. I chose this example because this page is American. With the use of our imagination we can think other examples with other American states or other countries. But still it will be a minor example because Macedonia (Greek, Ancient) is many more for the Greeks of what is any American state for Americans. I’ve tried to be brief here. Dozens of books have been written which they cannot fit in a comment.
Let me assure you, Nikos, that your example rings hollow to American ears: we would take it more as a risible compliment than anything else. Only those terribly insecure in their own identity and uncertain of their capacity to defend their own territory would object. If this Virginia were ready to contribute seriously to NATO defense capabilities, it would be welcomed with open arms.
As for the supposed territorial ambitions of your neighbors, I’ve yet to find a FYROMer who thinks one inch of Greece will ever become part of their territory. There are surely more Mexicans who would like to recover parts of Texas, New Mexico and California than FYROMers who want a piece of Greece. Moreover, the best guarantee that it will never happen is of course NATO membership, which requires that all such problems be resolved.
Greece has nevertheless done what its political leadership thought best at the NATO Summit and blocked any consideration of The FYROM’s membership. This is not only a clear violation of the International Court of Justice decision but it also increases ethnic tension in Macedonia and puts at risk of partition Kosovo and Bosnia as well as Cyprus. Should I mention that everyone in the world except Greece calls the country whose capital is Skopje “Macedonia”? It’s a habit that neither its inhabitants nor the rest of the world will give up easily, especially if the practice continues for another decade or two.
Some day there will no doubt be a political leader in Greece who recognizes how counter-productive Athens’ resistance to The FYROM becoming a member of NATO is, but it is not clear that either Skopje or anyone else will see any reason to accommodate. The sooner Greece comes to recognize that it is defeating its own purposes, the less damaged those purposes will be.