Month: March 2013
Diminishing returns
Secretary Kerry is getting a lot of ink today for his meetings in Egypt. He is pushing hard for the economic moves that will make available $4.8 billion from the International Monetary Fund.
Here is what April 6 Movement leader Ahmed Maher, who did not meet with the Secretary, had to say:
Because Eng. Ahmed Maher (the founder and the leader of April 6 movement) couldn’t met with Secretary Kerry yesterday, and didn’t listen to him, also to any representative from youth movements in the meeting, so we send this points to deliver our message
1. April 6 Movement supported Morsi in the presidential election after his promises to all revolutionary movements and political figures about compromise and constitutions and collation government and electoral law
And now we received a lot of criticism from the people for supporting Morsi
April 6 movement helping provide Morsi’s margin on victory (51%)
2. Violence v. Police Reform
April 6 movement demands its members stick to non-violent protest tactics.
US sold 140,000 rounds of teargas to Egypt to be used against us. Shouldn’t the US point out how that money could be better spent on improving the economy? How does this help?
MOI must stop retaliating: They shoot unarmed protestors. They throw rocks from the tops of buildings (attempted murder). This brings more protesters.
Torture, children in prison, beatings, sexual assault, disappearances.
Police: No justice. No accountability. No DIGNITY. Morsi needs to understand that when the police strip and beat a man on live TV it drives more people to the streets.
Every Egyptian with a smart phone is both a journalist and human rights watchdog.
Morsi must reign in the police and security forces. Minister of Interior was appointed by Morsi – blaming Mubarak won’t work.
3. Anti-NGO Law
Morsi’s on words as FJP Chair, December 2011:
“… The FJP supports immediate lifting of restrictions on the establishment and registration of NGOs, so interested groups can work legally and transparently…indeed, Egypt needs the support of NGOs especially in the areas of human development, education, technology transfer and public administration.”
Hypocrisy: Human Rights NGOs fought Mubarak for rights of M[uslim] B[rotherhood] prisoners
Hypocrisy: Human Rights Watch fighting for rights of MB detained in UAE
Hypocrisy: Morsi wants foreign investment, but they deny foreign investment in NGOs.
Hypocrisy: The largest illegal, unregistered NGO in Egypt: Muslim Brotherhood
And also Hypocrisy: US abandoned its own NGO workers in Egypt – 13 Egyptians on trial again March 6
This anti-NGO law is designed to shut us down.
4. Elections
Are they constitutional? Courts struck down parts of the law; Shura never went back to the courts. Why can’t Morsi make sure the law is legal before we spend millions on another election that may be thrown out? Would not that make sense?
International Election Observers (NGOs). The anti-NGO law would prevent them from being in Egypt. In 2011 they raided two of the certified Election Observer NGOs and charged them with felonies.
Rising prices, bad economy, torture, arrests, fatwas, broken promises, NGO crackdown, bad election laws… how well do you think elections will go?
April 6 Youth Movement will not stop until we have bread, freedom and social justice… and DIGNITY.
– US must make human rights THE priority.
– Relations must be more than just Israel… human rights & dignity leads to stability leads to democracy… peace depends on this.
– The agenda must not be only regional security — it must be a DIGNITY agenda.
Two things strike me. First, the April 6 statement completely ignores the economic situation, which is what Kerry has focused on. The Egyptian economy is going down the tubes, which is a real threat to the welfare of most of the population. It is not wise for April 6 to completely ignore issues that will preoccupy most Egyptians.
Second, the April 6 focus on human rights is not mistaken. President Morsi has taken an authoritarian turn. The security forces are misbehaving (as they did under Hosni Mubarak), nongovernmental organizations are under pressure and conditions for the parliamentary elections scheduled to start in April are non-ideal (though an American NGO is recruiting international election observers, contrary to the April 6 statement).
April 6 obviously thinks the Secretary is soft-pedaling human rights because of concern about Egypt’s commitment to the peace treaty with Israel. They may well be correct. But there is no fundamental incompatibility between the rights-focused agenda April 6 wants and the economy-focused agenda the Secretary is pushing. It is a shame they did not meet and talk this out. These two ships should not have passed in the night.
The deeper issue is that there are a lot of people in Egypt who believe the reforms the IMF requires will put the burden of economic adjustment in Egypt on the poor. Dignity requires not only respect for human rights but also a measure of social justice. Morsi may well follow Mubarak’s example not only in political repression but also in economic policy.
That said, the big political issue is whether the Egyptian opposition will participate in the spring elections. The National Salvation Front, which unites a good part of the more liberal opposition in Egypt, has announced a boycott. This is a serious error, as it will exclude them from the parliament for the next five years. If they want human rights and social justice, the Egyptian opposition will need to find better ways to express themselves than street demonstrations, which have reached the point of diminishing returns. Even a small number of parliamentary seats could give them substantial influence.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Kenya: preventing electoral violence
Global Communities hosted a discussion Thursday morning with their own Kimberly Tilock, Jackie Wilson of the U.S. Institute of Peace and Lauren Ploch Blanchard of the Congressional Research Service. Tara Candland, a master’s student at SAIS, reports:
Presidential elections will take place in Kenya Monday, March 4. Many domestic and international observers worry about a recurrence of the violence that followed the 2007 elections.
Kenya was a one-party state until 2002, when an ethnically based opposition finally succeeded in pressuring the five-term president to step down. The subsequent elections were peaceful, assuaging the international community’s fears of a violent transition and giving a false sense of electoral stability. Despite warning signs in the lead-up to the 2007 elections, the violence took many by surprise. Ethnic tensions had led to violence in the 1980s and 1990s, but international observers considered it marginal.
The electoral contest this year is primarily between the current Luo prime minister, Raila Odinga, and Uhuru Kenyatta, a Kikuyu. The Luo and the Kikuyu are two of the largest ethnic groups in the country and frequently compete with each other. Kenyatta would be the current president’s (also a Kikuyu) chosen successor.
The situation is complicated by the fact that both he and his running mate have been indicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against humanity associated with the 2007 electoral violence. The current president has been liaising with Kenya’s business community to try to determine the potential impact on Kenya’s economy if the new president were to be an ICC indictee.
Despite progress since the 2007 elections, Blanchard cautions that there are still numerous problems as the election approaches and clear warnings of possible violence. In 2010, a new constitution was adopted through a peaceful and credible referendum. It overhauled the electoral system. Nevertheless, vote buying has already begun, politicians are resorting to hate speech and ethnically based politicking, and grievances associated with land tenure and natural resources remain unresolved. Furthermore, decentralization, a key aspect of the new system, has proven problematic, as both Blanchard and Tilock highlighted. Many of the new districts are drawn along ethnic lines, reinforcing ethnic differences.
In the midst of these problems, Wilson explained, come reports of weapons stockpiling, increased presence of armed groups, rising police brutality and civilian aggression against the police. The violence cannot usually be traced back to a particular candidate, but there are reports of politicians orchestrating the violence through late-night meetings and secret phone calls. Tilock added that people have started to relocate to their tribal lands or have been evicted from their communities based on ethnicity. Businesses are shutting down in anticipation of the election. Observers are trying to determine what the trigger to violence might be, including long lines expected in most voting stations and intimidation.
According to Wilson, there are two main challenges to preventing electoral violence:
- There is a lack of analysis on how it occurs and how to prevent it.
- There is a critical gap between early warning and early response.
The Kenyan government has tried its best, making this one of the best elections in terms of available information, but there is still a need for action. Local communities no longer trust the national system or the police and now want to form their own local response teams that would be based on text messaging networks and local dispute resolution committees.
One area that has commanded a lot of attention are the informal settlements, especially those in Nairobi where Global Communities works. Tilock explained that they were a hotspot in the last election because the settlements are a microcosm of the country, with many different ethnic groups segregated into their own communities but living side-by-side. There is high unemployment and a large youth population from which the leaders of the 2007 violence drew many of their supporters. Global Communities is working in the settlements to try educate people and help them recognize the way the national leaders are manipulating them. The youth are destroying their communities for a couple of dollars a day to help leaders who have ignored the communities’ plight.
Global Communities has used different strategies to try to prevent violence in the informal settlements. It has tried to establish meaningful dialogues between the different ethnic groups by training community mediators who are also responsible for monitoring the situation in the settlements and reporting on it. It has also tried to depoliticize the situation by focusing on educating the residents as to their rights and the government’s responsibilities according to the 2010 constitution.
The focus has been mainly on settlement leaders and youth. Global Communities believes that leaders will be leaders no matter the circumstances. Therefore the best leaders for a peace campaign are the people who are currently leading the settlements: the gang leaders. This has proven remarkably successful.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Mali matters
Global energy security depends on stability in North Africa, particularly Algeria. The Islamist take-over of the 2012 Tuareg coup in northern Mali directly affected these global interests, prompting French and concerted African intervention. The Center for National Policy discussion on Wednesday focused on the broad implications of Mali’s internal problems. Speakers were Alexis Arieff, Congressional Research Service; Stephanie Pezard, RAND; and Paul Sullivan, Georgetown University.
Security and politics
According to Stephanie Pezard, the French intervention in Mali runs three risks: radicalizing local populations, exacerbating ethnic tensions between the North and South, and triggering Islamist insurrections in the region. Although Mali does not pose a direct threat to the US, the Tuareg-Islamist insurgency poses several indirect threats.
The Tuareg rebellion stems from Tuareg political grievances the Malian government has failed to address since the 1960s. Long-term resolution of the issues would require internationals and the Malian government to understand Northern politics and to identify the most representative group with which to reach an agreement. Internationals should focus on reconciling the North and the South by encouraging the formation of a government more universally palatable than the one brought down in March 2012. Internationals should also encourage Bamako to deliver on its commitments to the North.
Mali poses indirect criminal and terrorist threats to US interests. In order to fund their activities, terrorist groups in the Sahel and North Africa increasingly engage in kidnappings and cocaine trafficking. Although the drugs are destined for European markets, the proceeds go toward funding terrorist activities elsewhere as well.
The economic opportunism of the Malian fighters provides internationals with an opportunity to reduce their appeal. Clan logic is a vanishing factor in enlistment of terrorists. Fighters follow the money and weapons, giving little weight to ethnic or religious affiliation. Terrorist offers of high salaries and subsidies for the fighters’ families motivate young men to join their ranks. Addressing the root issues by honoring government commitments to the North could alleviate conditions that make becoming a militant appealing.
Energy
A disruption of Algerian oil and gas flow to Europe would damage Algerian and European energy security, with repercussions for the global oil market. Algeria is the third largest natural gas provider to Europe, and in 2011 provided OECD Europe with 38.5% of its crude oil. Continued access to Algerian oil is crucial for Europe to climb out of its economic crisis. According to Georgetown professor Paul Sullivan, 12% of Italy’s liquid fuels, 9% of Spain’s, 13% of France’s, 7% of Brazil’s, and 5% of the Netherlands’ come from Algeria. Likewise, 10% of Turkey’s gas imports, 36% of Italy’s, and 32% of France’s come from Algeria. Still, the US ranks as the largest importer of Algerian oil, importing 500,000 b/d, or 4.5% of US supply.
Sullivan characterized the Islamist attack on the Ain Amenus oil field as a direct attack on the Algerian, European, and American governments and economies. Following the incident, gas pumped through a trans-Mediterranean pipeline connecting Algeria and Italy dropped by 10 million cubic meters a day.
Oil and gas provide 97% of Algeria’s export revenues, 60% of its government revenues, and 40% of GDP. Three quarters of the oil industry relies on two oil fields (Hasi Massaoud and Ourhoud). The intervention in Mali threatens to push militants into Algeria, whose destabilization would send Europe and the US reeling.
US Policy
Alexis Arieff argued that the use of counterterrorism as the lens through which the US formulates policy towards the region is inadequate for resolving the situation in Mali. Previously the US approach aimed to strengthen the security apparatus of weak Sahel states. The US lacked a strategic design with comprehensive inter-agency cooperation and effectiveness. US efforts to encourage Algerian leadership and multilateral cooperation on countering terrorism domestically and regionally suffered from distrust among the partner governments in the region.
The US faces the challenge of weighing the costs and benefits of direct versus indirect involvement in Mali. American officials disagree on the nature of the threat posed by the terrorist groups. Congressional restrictions make US military assistance to the Malian army difficult. At UN talks on Mali, the US and France have not seen eye to eye on Mali’s future. The US Administration wants the African-led International Support Mission for Mali (AFISMA) to be a fully UN funded peacekeeping mission, while implying the need for a French commitment to maintain troops on the ground as a rapid reaction force. The US role in Mali will hinge on evaluation of whether the violent extremists pose a serious threat to the US.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Beginning to do the right thing
John Kerry ‘s first trip abroad as Secretary of State is focusing on a problem the Obama Administration has been trying hard to ignore: what to do about Syrian President Bashar al Asad, whose recent use of Scud missiles against civilian population centers is just the latest of his war crimes. His indiscriminate shelling of Homs, Hama, Aleppo and smaller Syrian towns will long be remembered as crimes against humanity that went on for far too long.
Washington has so far preferred to focus on the humanitarian crisis in Syria. A million Syrians are now refugees in other countries, several million are displaced inside Syria, more than 70,000 are dead and half of those alive and still inside the country are in need of relief. The U.S. government has committed upwards of $365 million already on humanitarian assistance, hoping an opposition military victory would determine the political outcome.
It has not worked out that way. The Asad regime has cracked with myriad defections but has not crumbled. Its core, based on an Alawite minority that has reason to dread its fate if the regime fails, remains intact. Iranian and Russian military and financial support remains solid. Scud missiles and the Syrian air force have provided the regime the means to challenge the opposition even in liberated areas. The regime is unable to “clear and hold” territory, but it can still prevent the opposition from doing so.
The flow of military assistance is increasing. Saudi and Qatari funding has flowed mainly to Sunni Islamist groups, some of them affiliated with Al Qaeda. This tilts the playing field against the more moderate opposition, now more or less unified in the Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces. It is fractious, but has managed to put forth parameters for a political solution that would allow talks with the regime while reaffirming that Bashar al Assad and his coterie have no role to play in Syria’s future. The Coalition will appoint a provisional prime minister on Saturday.
The Obama Administration has hesitated to provide lethal assistance to the Coalition for good reasons. It fears anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons would fall into the wrong hands and be used against civilian targets outside Syria. This would amount to “fast and furious” (an operation in which guns provided by the U.S. were used in the murder of an American border patrol agent) on steroids. The Administration also worries about the Russian reaction. It needs Russia to keep open the routes through which American withdrawal from Afghanistan will occur this year and next. It also needs Russia to maintain sanctions and UN Security Council unity against the Iranian nuclear push, promising talks on which occurred this week in Almaty, Kazakhstan.
While others (including some Europeans) supply arms, President Obama should support the Syrian Coalition with the resources it needs to begin governing liberated areas inside Syria. At Thursday’s meeting of the Friends of Syria, Secretary Kerry announced that the United States will provide $60 million to the Coalition, for use in supplying humanitarian relief, essential services and law and order through the local administrative councils that have been set up in liberated areas of Syria.
As soon as the provisional Syrian prime minister is named, Secretary Kerry should also announce that the Syrian embassy in Washington, already in the hands of employees sympathetic to the revolution, will be turned over to the Coalition. These gestures would give the Coalition credibility and legitimacy with Syrians that it has all too obviously lacked in the past. They would also signal to Bashar al Assad as well as his Russian and Iranian sponsors that the Coalition will eventually become the internationally recognized authority in whatever territory it is able to liberate.
Washington today is focused mainly on its own budget problems. Convincing Americans it is a good idea to shell out hard cash for a Syrian revolutionary government that has yet to prove itself is a hard sell. But there are members of Congress on both sides of the aisle who find the situation in Syria intolerable. And there is every reason to believe that the bill for humanitarian relief in Syria will grow by far more than $60 million if the fighting continues. If there is even a 50/50 chance that strengthening the Coalition will shorten the war, the investment is likely to be a good one.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Myanmar: making reforms count
Julian Palma, a SAIS master’s student, reports from Tuesday’s discussion at Brookings:
After half a century of dictatorship and self-imposed isolation, Myanmar is rapidly emerging from a pariah state. Over the last two years, the government has made great progress in political and economic reforms: from releasing political prisoners to the unification of the exchange rate and the possible establishment of a central bank. The concerns ahead, however, lie on will Myanmar sustain the momentum of such reform and transformation.
Panelists
Priscilla Clapp, Former U.S. Mission Chief to Myanmar—U.S. State Department
Lex Rieffel, Nonresident Senior Fellow—The Brookings Institution
Anoop Singh, Director of the Asia and Pacific Department—IMF
Frances Zwenig, President—US-ASEAN Business Council Institute, Inc.
Moderator: Vikram Nehru, senior associate in the Asia Program and Bakrie Chair in Southeast Asian Studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Priscilla Clap: institutions
Clap began the discussion by stating that one of the biggest challenges in the country today is institutionalization. She argued that during the 50-year military rule little was done to develop institutions. The officials behind the reform agenda today are therefore unaware of what kind of institutions they need in order to develop a sustainable democracy. In order to bridge that gap, the international community must play an essential role in institutional building but “they [Burmese] need to do it themselves.”
Although rapid advancements have already been made, sustainable results will only be visible within the next two to three generations. Rule of law is particularly important: “they do not have a system that delivers justice and fairness.” While laws exist, institutions are weak. Clap is currently working on two projects with the US Institute of Peace (USIP) to meet the challenges.
Anoop Singh: transparency
Anoop Singh was very optimistic with how the reforms are being supported across the spectrum in Myanmar. The biggest concern at the macro level is making the economic transition from a “segmented, informal parallel market” into a unified economy. The objective is to reduce the scale of “off-budget activities.” The establishment of a central bank with a framework that is open and transparent is imminent.
Frances Zwenig: investment climate
Zwenig commented on Myanmar’s investment climate and U.S.-Myanmar relations. It is not clear what the investment regime will look like. The lack of training and capacity building is unquestionably a concern for investors. Although the U.S. has approved four major banks in Myanmar with which to conduct transactions, two are run by ‘cronies’. The recent resignation of the Minister of Telecommunications has raised eyebrows and has left the industry in further chaos. Myanmar’s big success so far has been healthcare. American presence in-country has helped set up NGOs that advocate effectively for maternal and child health.
Lex Rieffel: money, regional factors and military reform
Foreign aid
An assessment of foreign assistance entitled “Too Much Too Soon” will be released next Wednesday (March 6) detailing the implications of aid in Myanmar. While great strides have been made on the government side to manage and guide donor aid, Rieffel pointed out that this is a sensitive topic because “donors bring an awful lot of chaos.”
Regional relations
The three critical regional are China, India and Japan.
Myanmar has long aligned itself with China, whose rise is generating nervousness. Some in Myanmar fear China is taking advantage of Myanmar’s wealth of natural resources, so the country is looking for other partners to help build its nascent economy. Rieffel referred to suspension of construction of the Myitsone dam in Myanmar. This Chinese project was of great commercial interest to Beijing, but President Sein said he responded to the “will of the people”.
While India aims to become Myanmar’s ally, it is unlikely to happen, partly for geographic reasons and partly because of distrust of the Indian minority. Japan recently announced cancellation of $3 billion in debt, making it Myanmar’s closest friend today.
Military reform
Military reform is important. Twenty per cent of the national budget (2013-2014) will be allocated to the military, despite public concern. There is also concern about the resources that former military heads are claiming.
Conclusion
The moderator remarked in conclusion that there are important cultural impediments to development. In Myanmar, authority is concentrated in individuals, not institutions. The shift to institutions will be one of the most difficult challenges.
RSS - Posts
