Month: May 2013
Opinion matters
Shibley Telhami presented his new book, The World Through Arab Eyes; Arab Public Opinion and the Reshaping of the Middle East, at Brookings this week. BBC’s Kim Ghattas was quick to offer an alternative title: “Everything you want to know about the Middle East but aren’t getting from the headlines.”
Telhami explained that Arab public opinion is now the source of real insight into the layers of conflict spread across the Middle East. The Arab uprisings have increased its importance. The essential theme emerging after the first uprisings of 2011 was Arab identity. Understanding identity is central to understanding public opinion.
While domestic issues and authoritarian abuses may have triggered the Arab uprisings, foreign policy was also important. The years leading up to the Arab uprising were not inherently different from decades past in regards to domestic and economic woes. But Arabs are angry about the collapse of Israeli/Palestinian negotiations in 2000, the war in Afghanistan, the Iraq war and the Gaza wars. It was a strikingly violent decade (and more) in international relations.
Arab populations are angry because their leaders and governments were powerless to stand up to foreign invasions and defend the wishes of their citizens. Arab identity and sovereignty were compromised. Arab leaders played no role in stopping it.
Arab public option polls during this period were striking. One question, “who is the leader you admire most in the world?” is a crucial lens for seeing how Arabs judged and chose leaders at that time. Jacques Chirac, Hassan Nasrallah, Hugo Chaves and even Saddam Hussein were the most common answers. Telhami attributes these responses to each leader’s strong and defiant role in foreign affairs. Post Arab spring polls show Turkey’s Prime Minister, Erdogan, as one of the most popular leaders for his assertive stance in foreign policy and his ability to stand up for Turkey’s identity.
Telhami observes that identification with the state has declined while identification with Islam has increased. The adage, “you are what you have to defend” applies here, as Muslims see Islam as under assault. Increased identification as ‘Muslim’ or ‘Arab’ is also correlated with the rise in transnational media in the Middle East. Arabs are associating with others outside their national borders. This has important implications for the relationship between people and their governments, which have to take into account public opinion that extends beyond their borders.
The discussion of transnational Arab identity naturally led to a discussion of Israel and Palestine. For Arabs, the Palestinian issue reflects decades of painful defeats and remains a humiliating reminder of their powerlessness. It as an open wound.
Kim Ghattas disagreed that the Palestinian issue was central to Arab identity. She thought the Israeli/Palestinian conflict has taken a back seat now that people finally have a chance to change their domestic situation. In the past, Palestinian issues were used as a rallying cry for Arab autocrats trying to suppress and distract their own people. Finally, Arabs have a say within their own country, and they are going to speak.
There is no going back. Public opinion has been empowered.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The land of dead is alive
The vast problems facing Mali and the greater Sahara region can be illustrated geographically. To provide a sense of scale, a map of Mali, superimposed over a map of the United States, stretches from Minnesota, down to Texas, west to New Mexico and east to Ohio. Have a look.
Conversely, a map of the United States superimposed on Northern Africa:
When we criticize national and international forces for not doing a better job transforming the North African region and ridding it of insecurity, it is important to keep in mind the geographic scale of what they are dealing with.
Eamonn Gearon of John Hopkins SAIS and the Middle East Policy Council began his presentation this week at the Center for American Progress with these powerful visuals. Geographic context also needs historical context. As far back as ancient Egypt, the land west of the fertile Nile river valley was referred to as the land of the dead. Egyptians saw the Sahara as insecure and unstable, and its inhabitants ungovernable.
When discussing conflicts in North Africa, everyone wants to hear about the jihadist threat or al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb. But these are part of the larger security threat in the region.
Mali’s problems are political, social and economic. They are also interconnected and overlapping.
Politically, Mali’s democracy is a lightweight. Voter turnout around 30% suggests weak community engagement in politics due to jaded attitudes in the northern, more impoverished regions of the country. They see the elite population in the south as corrupt and self serving. This has been a problem in Mali for more than 30 years and is a major roadblock to fixing its democracy.
The political dynamic overlaps with the social dynamic of the country. Northern populations are mostly Arab and identify as white while most of the southern population identify as black. This north/south divided is not however a clash of civilizations. Ninety per cent of Malians considers themselves Muslim. Their Islam is heavily influenced by Sufism. The influx of foreign jihadist elements has only occurred in the past 15 years. Without the Muslim Brotherhood as an alternative to Sufism, Salafist Islam has gained a strong hold.
Economically, Mali has never been an easy place to live. Poverty, violence and failing crops all create desperation that feeds criminal and terrorist activity. Criminal gangs have the ability to pay off struggling families more effectively than the Malian government. Crime and corruption is rumored to exist in the highest rungs of the government as well.
Ransoms are the key mechanism perpetuating criminal and terrorist groups in Mali. Some millions of dollars are requested every year in kidnapping cases. Every ransom paid fuels these groups for more. Groups are forming faster, and splintering more often. As a result, they are smaller and more difficult to track down. Drone usage for surveillance is an important tool for counter terrorism, but it should be used with caution and in conjunction with other practices. International efforts in Mali have a bad reputation, but in Gearon’s opinion this comes from a dearth of development and training. The international community should be stepping up itsefforts and shaping its efforts towards long term development.
Any solutions proposed to fight Mali’s problems should come from the Malians themselves. International forces should seek to partner with willing groups within the country. Often, when the British or French attempt dialogue with the people of Mali, they go to the Tuareg population because of their familiarity. The Tuareg are fine interlocutors, but dialogue at any level within Mali must become more inclusive and diverse than it is now.
Gearon posed strong objection to the upcoming July elections in Mali. Many regional and international players are pushing to hold elections as soon as possible, hoping it will move Mali towards greater stability. But elections this soon will not be credible. Mali is facing a massive internal displacement issue, rendering a large part of the population unable to vote. Additionally, infrastructure and roads are still lacking in the northern part of the country. Travel is made more difficult in the July rainy season, when many roads will be washed out and communication is often down. Take into account the size of Mali, as illustrated above, and understand how much of the country could be excluded from the democratic process.
Gearon concluded with some thoughts on Libya’s role in the Malian crisis. The fall of Qaddafi was an accelerant, not a catalyst, to the violence in Mali. Libya faces big problems, but they are different from Mali’s. Libya is wealthy enough to pay for whatever it needs from abroad. The West should be providing training, not arms, to the Libyan security forces. Regarding the attack on the American facility and ambassador in Benghazi, Gearon believes that the tragedy is not central to the future of Libya. Continuing to play the blame game will make us miss the opportunity to ask the Libyans what they need to prevent it from happening again. The attack should not distance America from Libya, but instead should lead to more engagement on the ground and more efforts toward finding solutions to Libya’s economic and political woes.
When proposing any solution, Gearon added, whether in Libya or Mali, we must remember that these countries are alive and always evolving. There is never a point when every problem is solved and society becomes utopian. Solutions must be adaptable and continuous.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
No questions are a bad sign
Myanmar’s President Thein Sein put on a good show at SAIS yesterday. In his prepared remarks, he talked about:
- His country’s transition from autocracy to an open society and democracy;
- Ending Myanmar’s isolation and its internal, communal wars;
- Bringing perpetrators to justice;
- Pursuing national dialogue;
- Establishing the state on the basis of the people’s sovereignty;
- Opening the economy in a way that is fair to all;
- Taking advantage of Myanmar’s geopolitical situation in a resurgent Asia;
- Protecting the natural environment;
- Reforming the military;
- Opening the political system to multiple parties, civil society and free elections;
- The coming of age of a new generation unburdened by past conflicts;
- Meeting the challenges of natural disasters, sea-level rise and epidemics;
- Broadening the concept of national identity and finding ways to work together to build the state and nation.
All this he noted will require compromise, tolerance and patience. It will also require going beyond the 10 ceasefires already in place to another imminent one with the Kachin. The ceasefires will have to be made sustainable by devolution, resource-sharing and broad popular support.
What more can a proper 21st century American professor ask of a former dictator?
Then two things happened that cast a shadow on the event: he did not take questions, and when I got back to the office news of a two-child limit on Muslims in an area where they are already subject to ethnic cleansing reached me. I already knew that the President had not fulfilled his commitments on a number of reform issues.
So what are we to make of this virtually impeccable speech and a less than perfect record? I wouldn’t doubt Thein Sein’s sincerity. I thought his speech written in Washington (a couple of well-informed colleagues disagreed), but he read it with conviction and the things it said were vigorous. He’ll have to wear them when he gets home. But his performance in an interview at the Washington Post was at times been opaque and at times defensive of the military role in Myanmar.
Thein Sein is a transition figure who can’t avoid the contradictions of his transitional position, even if he was unequivocal in describing the regime he spent his career in as an autocracy. He said a lot of the right things. What was missing in the presentation was however something fundamental: he never mentioned human rights. The transition he was describing was an elite-decided and elite-led transition, not one respectful of the rights of individuals.
Had there been a Q and A session, I and likely others would have explored this lacuna. That is only proper, in particular at a university event. It’s only the second time in many years of attending such events that I remember no Q and A. The last time was more than 10 years ago, when Michael Armitage appeared as deputy secretary of state at USIP to justify the Iraq war. No questions then either. It was a bad sign.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The jig is up, time to waltz
Jerry Gallucci, who is an eloquent spokesman for the views of northern Kosovo Serbs, writes:
No matter what the Kosovo Albanians say to their internationals, the local Serbs do not believe that they will be allowed to remain in possession of the land, water and border with Serbia in the north should they be forced to accept Pristina law and control.
Let’s not dissemble. No one is intending to leave the local Serbs in control of the land, water and border with Serbia in the north. Under the agreement Belgrade and Pristina have signed onto, the local Serbs would govern themselves at the municipal level in most respects. Their property rights would be respected under Kosovo law. But sovereignty would clearly be exercised by Pristina, not by the locals or by Belgrade.
This means customs duties would be collected at the border. Pristina will manage the Gazivoda reservoir and other water resources. I assume this will be true also for the mines of the north. Whoever told the northerners that they would be allowed to walk off with most of Kosovo’s water supply and a good piece of its (so far as I know worthless) mining assets?
I get, as Jerry puts it, that in the north
the great majority simply refuse to accept rule from Pristina because they see it as eventually being used against them. They don’t trust NATO and the EU to remain and protect them.
They are correct. NATO will not be in Kosovo five years from now. The troop contributing countries want out. The EU likely won’t be there either. The EU rule of law mission has been extended only through mid-June 2014, but it isn’t very good at protecting anyone anyway.
In five years though, Kosovo can hope to be lining up to get candidate status and a date to start negotiations with the EU. So I fully expect the northern Serbs to find EU leverage used on their behalf, if need be.
Those whom Jerry describes as frightened and hating need to consider their serious options. They mock Pristina’s office in the north as “Potemkin,” but it is clearly intended to begin providing services there, and Pristina has made it clear it is prepared to expand economic development efforts in the north. Those who don’t want that are entitled to stay and vote their consciences, as Serbs south of the Ibar have done in recent years. Last time I passed through Štrpce/Shtërpcë there was a big sign painted in English on a rock at the entrance to town: “Kosovo Is Serbia” it read. Those Serbs who don’t want to stay should be entitled to leave. Belgrade should be prepared to absorb those who want to live under its rule.
Jerry describes the northern Serb resistance this way:
The northern Serb resistance so far has been almost entirely peaceful. Perhaps KFOR is simply more aware of the tensions in the north as the locals feel that they have been abandoned by their government as the price for EU admission.
KFOR knows better because of experience. Its soldiers have been injured. That’s one of the many reasons Chancelor Merkel decided she would not put up with the resistance any longer. And no one should doubt that northern Kosovo Serbs prevent return of Albanians, and exercise of UN and Pristina authority there, by the threat and use of force.
The truth is Belgrade has abandoned its claim of sovereignty over northern Kosovo as the price for beginning negotiations on EU admission, which won’t actually happen until after 2020. Making the best of this deal would require that serious people in the Serb communities of northern Kosovo sit down with the Pristina authorities, including Serb officials, and discuss the details, in order to ensure a smooth and peaceful transition.
The jig is up. Time to waltz.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks, May 20-24th
A busy week with the Hill active and the Sahel attracting more attention than usual:
1. Jihad and Politics in North Africa, Monday, May 20 / 12:00pm – 1:30pm , New America Foundation
Venue: New America Foundation, 1899 L St., N.W., Suite 400, Washington, D.C. 20036
SPEAKERS: Eamonn Gearon, Peter Bergen
French intervention in Mali earlier this year quickly dislodged insurgents from their strongholds in the northern part of the country, but even before victory had been secured, Paris began making moves to bring its troops home. Most of the 4,000 French troops sent to Mali remain there today, but they plan to hand over security operations to a UN-mandated African force in the coming weeks. With continued unrest and regular attacks by insurgents, any withdrawal at this stage leaves northern Mali vulnerable to becoming a safe haven again for al-Qaeda and others.
The war in Mali is not merely fallout from the Arab Spring. Rather, it is a complex but not insoluble set of issues, with local roots and regional implications. A successful outcome in Mali is possible, but the solution requires Bamako to be inclusive and the West to be realistic by acknowledging that what is happening in Mali is about more than terrorism. The New America Foundation is pleased to welcome Middle East expert Eamonn Gearon for a discussion about the drivers of conflict in Mali and what the international community should do to manage them.
Register for the event here:
http://www.newamerica.net/events/2013/jihad_and_politics_north_africa
2. The Call for Economic Liberty in the Arab World, Tuesday, May 21 / 9:30am , U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs
Venue: Rayburn House Office Building, 45 Independence Ave SW, Washington, DC
2172 House Rayburn Office Building
SPEAKERS: Hernando de Soto, Madeleine K. Albright
Witnesses:
Mr. Hernando de Soto, President
Institute for Liberty and Democracy
The Honorable Madeleine K. Albright, Chairman
Albright Stonebridge Group
For more information, click here:
http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/hearing/hearing-call-economic-liberty-arab-world
3. Bahrain: A Conversation About Its Challenges and Opportunities, Tuesday, May 21 / 10:00am – 12:00pm, National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations
Venue: Rayburn House Office Building, 45 Independence Ave SW, Washington, DC
B-308
SPEAKERs: Ambassador Ronald E. Neumann, Professor David Des Roches, Ms. Sarah Leah Whitson, Professor Paul Sullivan, Dr. John Duke Anthony
On May 21, 2013, the National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations and the U.S.-GCC Corporate Cooperation Committee are hosting a public affairs briefing on “Bahrain: A Conversation About Its Challenges and Opportunities” featuring Ambassador Ronald E. Neumann, President, American Academy of Diplomacy and former U.S. Ambassador to Bahrain, Afghanistan, and Algeria; Professor David Des Roches, Senior Military Fellow, Near East South Asia Center for Strategic Studies, National Defense University; Ms. Sarah Leah Whitson, Executive Director, Middle East and North Africa Division, Human Rights Watch; and Professor Paul Sullivan, Professor of Economics, National Defense University and Adjunct Professor, Georgetown University. Dr. John Duke Anthony, Founding President & CEO, National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations, will serve as moderator.
Register for the event here:
4. Conceptualizing A New US Pakistan Relationship by Ambassador Touqir Hussain, Tuesday, May 21 / 12:00pm – 1:30pm, Rumi Forum
Venue: Rumi Forum, 1150 17th St. N.W., Suite 408, Washington, D.C. 20036
SPEAKERS: Touqir Hussain
Ambassador Touqir Hussain is a former senior diplomat from Pakistan, having served as Ambassador to Brazil, Spain and Japan (1998 – 2003). Ambassador Hussain held senior positions in the Pakistani Foreign Office, including that of Additional Foreign Secretary heading the bureaus of the Middle East and of the Americas and Europe.
From 1996 to 1998, Ambassador Hussain was the Diplomatic Adviser to the Prime Minister where he had an opportunity to work with a range of foreign policy issues at the highest policy levels.
Ambassador Touqir Hussain moved to the United States in 2003. Since then he has been pursuing an academic career. He was a Senior Fellow at the United States Institute of Peace( 2004-2005) and Research Fellow at the Center for the Study of Globalization George Washington University ( 2006-2010). Currently he is the Senior Pakistan Visiting Fellow at SAIS Johns Hopkins University and Adjunct Professor at Georgetown University and the Syracuse University ( Washington DC campus).Earlier he had also taught at the University of Virginia Charlottesville.
Ambassador Hussain’s overall specialization is South Asian security issues, the Kashmir dispute, U.S Pakistan relations, civil military relations, democracy in the Islamic world, political Islam, terrorism, and US relations with the Islamic world. Ambassador Hussain has written nearly thirty op-ed pieces for US and Pakistani newspapers on some of these issues.
Ambassador Hussain has been a guest speaker at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville; American University, Washington DC; The George Washington University, Washington DC; Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond; the Defense Institute of Security Assistance Management, Dayton, Ohio; The National Defense University, Washington DC; The College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA; and the World Affairs Council, Peoria, IL.
More information here:
http://www.rumiforum.org/upcoming-events/qconceptualizing-a-new-us-pakistan-relationshipq-ambassador-touqir-hussain.html
5. The Growing Crisis in Africa’s Sahel Region, Tuesday, May 21 / 2:00pm, U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs
Venue: Rayburn House Office Building, 45 Independence Ave SW, Washington, DC
2172 House Rayburn Office Building
SPEAKERS: Donald Y. Yamamoto, Nancy E. Lindborg, Rudolph Atallah, Mima S. Nedelcovych
Witnesses:
Panel I
The Honorable Donald Y. Yamamoto, Acting Assistant Secretary of State
Bureau of African Affairs
U.S. Department of State
The Honorable Nancy E. Lindborg
Assistant Administrator
Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance
U.S. Agency for International Development
Panel II
Mr. Rudolph Atallah, Senior Fellow
Michael S. Ansari Africa Center
Atlantic Council
Mima S. Nedelcovych, Ph.D., Partner
Schaffer Global Group
More information here:
http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/hearing/subcommittee-hearing-growing-crisis-africas-sahel-region
6. Prospect for Afghanistan’s 2014 Elections, Tuesday, May 21 / 2:45pm, U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
Venue: Dirksen Senate Office Building, Constitution Avenue and 1st Street, NE, Washington, DC
Room 419
SPEAKERS: Mr. David Pearce, Dr. Andrew Wilder, Ms. Sarah Chayes
More information here:
http://www.foreign.senate.gov/hearings/prospect-for-afghanistans-2014-elections
7. How Arab Public Opinion Is Reshaping the Middle East, Tuesday, May 21 / 3:00pm – 4:30pm, Brookings Institution
Venue: Brookings Institution, 1775 Massachusetts Ave, NW, Washington, D.C. 20036
Falk Auditorium
SPEAKERS: Martin S. Indyk, Shibley Telhami, Kim Ghattas
The Arab awakening that began in 2011 is transforming the Middle East in ways that continue to surprise seasoned observers. As new political leaders and movements struggle for power and work to shape the region’s future, one thing is clear: public opinion is more consequential now than it has arguably ever been. How Arabs view themselves and the world around them will have enormous consequences for the region and the larger international community in the years ahead. How are changes in Arab public opinion shaping the changes occurring across the region? Have the U.S. and its allies done enough to understand and support the voices of Arabs seeking greater representation and opportunity?
On May 21, the Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World, as part of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings, will host the launch of The World Through Arab Eyes: Arab Public Opinion and the Reshaping of the Middle East (Basic Books, 2013), the latest book by Nonresident Senior Fellow Shibley Telhami. Kim Ghattas, BBC’s State Department correspondent, will engage Dr. Telhami in a discussion of the book and the issues it raises. Martin Indyk, vice president and director of Foreign Policy at Brookings, will provide introductory remarks.
Register for the event here:
http://www.brookings.edu/events/2013/05/21-arab-public-opinion?rssid=UpcomingEvents&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BrookingsRSS%2Ftopfeeds%2FUpcomingEvents+%28Brookings+Upcoming+Events%29
7. Seeking Wisdom Beyond Our Comfort Zone: How Assumptions About “The Other” Limit Growth, Tuesday, May 21 / 6:30pm – 8:30pm, Rumi Forum
Venue: Rumi Forum, 1150 17th St. N.W., Suite 408, Washington, D.C. 20036
SPEAKERS: Eileen Gale Kugler
Each day we make judgments in our business and personal lives about the value of others. We don’t make these decisions in a pristine vacuum, but rather based on our own experiences and influences. Our complex individual culture—an interconnected web of factors ranging from our religion, race and ethnicity to where we grew up, our family structure and our gender role—is the prism through which we view the capabilities of others. These assumptions, whether conscious or unconscious, limit our own growth, as well the growth of other people. To break through these biases, we each need to be conscious of them and reflect on the origins of our attitudes about “the other.” When we move beyond our own prism and seek wisdom from everyone we come in contact with, no matter their background or status, we grow —and so do our organizations and society at large.
Eileen Gale Kugler is a global speaker and consultant on the unique benefits that diversity brings to schools, communities and worksites —and strategies to strengthen them. She is author of the award-winning Debunking the Middle Class Myth: Why Diverse Schools are Good for All Kids and executive editor of the new Innovative Voices in Education: Engaging Diverse Communities. Eileen’s articles and commentaries appear in wide-ranging publications, including USA Today and the Washington Post, Educational Leadership, and Education Week. Eileen’s work is informed by her continuing on-the-ground involvement, including an active volunteer life. Her family’s volunteer commitment at a South African school, including creating a 23,000-book library, was featured in The Washington Post and Voice of America TV.
More information here:
http://www.rumiforum.org/upcoming-events/seeking-wisdom-beyond-our-comfort-zone-how-assumptions-about-the-other-limit-growth-eileen-gale-kugler.html
8. Perilous Desert: Security Challenges in the Sahara and Sahel, Wednesday, May 22 / 9:00am – 5:00pm, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Venue: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20036
SPEAKERS: Anouar Boukhars, Frederic Wehrey, Marwan Muasher
While the world’s attention was fixed on the momentous events in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya after the outbreak of the Arab Awakening, the desert states to the south were undergoing their own transformations with major global implications. Long overlooked by policymakers and scholars, the broader Sahara region has always possessed an underappreciated geopolitical significance. And changes should not be ignored. To explore regional sources of instability and what can be done to minimize the threat of simmering conflicts, Carnegie will gather top experts from the United States, Europe, and the region at an all-day conference to mark the launch of the new book Perilous Desert: Insecurity in the Sahara. Copies will be available for purchase.
Register for the event here:
http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/05/22/book-launch-perilous-desert-insecurity-in-sahara/g005
9. Syria‘s Humanitarian Crisis: A Briefing by Marianne Gasser, Wednesday, May 22 / 12:00pm – 1:00pm, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Venue: Woodrow Wilson Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20004
SPEAKERS: Marianne Gasser
Marianne Gasser, outgoing Head of the Delegation for the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in Syria, will discuss Syria’s humanitarian crisis.
More than two years after the onset of the conflict in Syria, the humanitarian toll continues to grow. With estimates of 4 million Syrians displaced internally, and another 1.2 million seeking refuge in neighboring countries, the impact on civilians continues.
Register for the event here:
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/syria%E2%80%99s-humanitarian-crisis-briefing-marianne-gasser
10. Two States, One Country, Israel-Palestine: A Path Towards a Shared Future, Wednesday, May 22 / 2:00pm – 4:30pm, Universal Peace Federation
Venue: 3600 New York Ave., NE, Washington, DC 20002
The Green Room
SPEAKERS: Kamal Awash, Dr. Andrew Wilson
Our co-moderators will be Kamal Nawash, Esq., President, Free Muslims Coalition, and Dr. Andrew Wilson, Academic Dean and Professor of Biblical Studies at the Unification Theological Seminary.
More than 20 years since the historic handshake between Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin, that sealed the Oslo accords and outlined the path to a two state solution, Israelis and Palestinians are no closer to reaching a permanent solution to their conflict and many experts now believe that the two state solution is no longer practical nor feasible.
Over the last five years, an increasing number of prominent Israelis and Palestinians have openly called for or began considering the practicality of a shared future where the two state solution is seen as an obstacle to peace rather than a path to peace. The new proposals generally include concepts such as a federation, confederation or a one state solution between Israel and Palestine.
More recently, the idea of a shared future has expanded to include grassroot, leaderless efforts among Palestinians and Israelis who pursue their own initiatives to explore the concept of a shared future. One notable effort occurred in 2012 when a group of Palestinians and Israelis organized a historic conference in the settlement of Ariel to discuss the possibility of living together in a united country.
Moreover, a plethora of Facebook groups, which focus on creating a united country of Israel/Palestine, have spontaneously popped up. The roundtable will explore alternatives to the two state solution with emphasis on a shared future for Israelis and Palestinians.
RSVP for the event at:
wselig@upf.org
11. The Middle East and North Africa FY 2014 Budget: Priorities and Challenges, Wednesday, May 22 / 2:00pm, U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs
Venue: Rayburn House Office Building, 45 Independence Ave SW, Washington, DC
2172 House Rayburn Office Building
SPEAKERS: Beth Jones, Alina L. Romanowski
Witnesses:
The Honorable Beth Jones, Acting Assistant Secretary of State
Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs
U.S. Department of State
Ms. Alina L. Romanowski, Acting Assistant Administrator
Bureau for the Middle East
U.S. Agency for International Development
More information on the event here:
http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/hearing/subcommittee-hearing-middle-east-and-north-africa-fy-2014-budget-priorities-and-challenges
12. ‘Afghanistan 2014: Transition to What?’, Wednesday, May 22 / 5:00pm – 7:00pm , Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies
Venue: Johns Hopkins SAIS – Rome Building
1619 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C.
SPEAKERS: Ali A. Jalali
Ali A. Jalali, distinguished professor of the Near East South Asia Center for Strategic Studies at the National Defense University and former interior minister of Afghanistan, will discuss this topic. Note: A reception will precede the forum at 5 p.m.
To RSVP, contact
saiscaciforums@jhu.edu.
For more information, please visit:
http://sais-jhu.edu/events/2013-05-22-170000-2013-05-22-190000/afghanistan-2014-transition-what
13. Muslims and International Religious Freedom: An Overview, Wednesday, May 22 / 7:00pm , Al-Hewar Center
Venue: Vienna Community Center, 120 Cherry Street, S.E., Vienna, VA
SPEAKERS: Azizah al-Hibri
A conversation with Dr. Azizah al-Hibri, Esq., Founder and Chair of KARAMAH
For more information, visit:
http://www.alhewar.com/newevents.html
14. A Conversation with His Excellency Mr. Ahmet Uzumcu, Thursday, May 23 / 12:00pm – 1:30pm , Center for Strategic and International Studies
Venue: Center for Strategic and International Studies
1800 K Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20006
SPEAKERS: Ahmet Uzumcu
The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) entered into force in 1997 and today has 188 parties. This treaty, which bans the development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, transfer or use of chemical weapons, has a robust verification regime including challenge inspections. Work to eliminate existing stockpiles of chemical agents continues among the treaty parties. But none of that applies to non-parties to the treaty. Allegations of the possible use of chemical weapons in Syria, which is not a party to the CWC, points to the need to do more.
Please join CSIS for a discussion with H.E. Mr. Ahmet Uzumcu, Director General of the OPCW, about the challenges to the chemical weapons nonproliferation regime today, including appropriate responses to the allegations regarding the use of chemical weapons in Syria.
Register for the event here:
http://csis.org/event/conversation-his-excellency-mr-ahmet-uzumcu
14. What’s Next for Pakistan’s New Government?, Thursday, May 23 / 12:15pm – 1:45pm, New America Foundation
Venue: New America Foundation, 1899 L St., N.W., Suite 400, Washington, D.C. 20036
SPEAKERS: Shamila Chaudhary, Andrew Wilder, Malik Siraj Akbar, Dr. Simbal Khan, Peter Bergen
On May 11, Pakistanis turned out to the polls in record numbers to vote in a momentous election: the country’s first transition from one democratically elected government to another. The party of former two-time prime minister Nawaz Sharif quickly surged ahead on Election Day, easily winning a simple majority in parliament. But Sharif and his Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz face a range of thorny problems, from a vicious insurgency to a crippling energy shortage.
Register for the event here:
http://www.newamerica.net/events/2013/pakistan_new_government
15. Iran: The Battle for the Presidency, Thursday, May 23 / 12:30pm – 1:30pm , Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Venue: Woodrow Wilson Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20004
SPEAKERS: Barbara Slavin, Ali Vaez, Meir Javedanfar
Iran’s Council of Guardians will announce the list of candidates for the next president of Iran on May 22-23. Our panel of experts will discuss the candidates, their platforms, and their likely impact on future domestic and foreign policy.
Register for the event here:
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/iran-the-battle-for-the-presidency
16. Egypt: Political Challenges for the Youth Movement, Friday, May 24 / 12:00pm – 1:00pm , Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Venue: Woodrow Wilson Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20004
SPEAKERS: Jawad Nabulsi, Marina Ottaway
Egypt’s young generation played an important role in the country’s revolution, and they continue to be a political force. Nabulsi, an activist and organizer in the revolution who was shot multiple times, will discuss the future of the youth movement in Egypt.
Register for the event here:
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/egypt-political-challenges-for-the-youth-movement
17. Summer Films: Fire on the Marmara & Sacred Stones, Friday, May 24 / 6:30pm – 8:30pm , Jerusalem Fund & Palestine Center
Venue: The Jerusalem Fund, 2425 Virginia Ave, NW Washington, DC 20037
Fire on the Marmara: On May 31, 2010 while still in international waters, Israeli commandos killed nine people who were traveling on a humanitarian mission on the Mavi Mamara. Traveling together with them, 700 activists from Caracas to Valencia, Barcelona, Brussels, London, Stockholm, and Istanbul attempted to bring supplies and break the blockade that the Palestinian population of Gaza has been suffering for years. A documentation of the events taking place on board the ship before, during and after the attack, filmmaker and passenger David Segara interviews the journalists and activists who survived, exploring their motivations for participating in the Freedom Flotilla.
Sacred Stones: Natural stone is the most requested Palestinian raw material, considered white oil. The Palestinian stone industry has to serve the construction needs of Israel, including that of illegal settlements on the Palestinian territory. The natural stone’s extraction system causes environmental, social, and health problems within villages, refugee camps and cities. The Israeli occupation responds with persecution of Palestinian complaints, whose voices are unanswered by international organizations and ignored by the Palestinian authorities.
Register for the event here:
http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/ht/d/EventDetails/i/38238
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Politics are the enemy of negotiations
The discussion surrounding the Palestine/Israel conflict continues to be split between pessimists and optimists. Jane Harman, president of the Woodrow Wilson Center, sided with the optimists when introducing this week’s panel on “Getting to a Two State Solution: A Regional Perspective.” She cited Secretary Kerry’s fortitude, President Obama’s good relationship with the Israelis and a recent freeze on settlement building.
Ghaith Al-Omari of the American Task force on Palestine, does not share her optimism. The regional chaos has complicated the situation and drawn attention away from the Palestinian issue. This distraction happens every few years. Palestinian issues currently take a back seat to events in Syria, Egypt and Libya. One of the major problems in the peace process is the constant fluidity and re-arrangement of regional alliances, which creates a knot of competing interests and stops progress.
Internal politics are also a crucial factor. Palestinian Authority President Abbas has no reason to come to the negotiating table right now. He currently has no real political competition and would not want to risk losing political capital to engage in talks doomed to failure. Abbas has a record of gaining political points by standing up to the United States and Prime Minister Netanyahu. Aaron David Miller of the Wilson Center reinforced this point from the American perspective. To govern, the Obama administration has to pick and choose issues. Right now, domestic politics are a heavy priority. Like Abbas, Obama would only facilitate negotiations if there is a likelihood of political gain, which seems unlikely. No one is coming to the table for fear of failure.
Marwan Muasher of the Carnegie Endowment joined al-Omari in his pessimism. Time is running out and waiting is futile. A two-state solution is optimal for Israel and Palestine, but in the current situation, there is no chance of the two sides coming to a solution on their own. The United States is the only player capable of facilitating negotiation, but can the US commit to what it takes to reach a solution? The Palestinian issue is simply not in the White House’s top priorities. The Arabs would need to be convinced once again that the peace process is serious and not heavily weighted against them. The past decade of negotiations is analogous to “two sides arguing over a slice of pizza while one side is eating it.”
What is needed to move forward is an incentive for political leaders to act. Al-Omari suggested possible political repercussions if neither side is willing to join negotiations. The process also needs a boost of credibility. Failures on a large scale not only damage the leaders involved, but the credibility of the entire process. The Americans need to prove to the Palestinians that they can deliver Israel and put forth parameters that are specific enough to allow for quick progress.
Gilead Sher, former policy coordinator for Prime Minister Ehud Barak, emphasized the necessity of negotiations. From the Israeli perspective, a two-state solution is the only way to ensure a lasting democracy for the Jewish people. Negotiations are the right tool to achieve lasting peace, but they are currently in need of greater sophistication. Internally, Israel needs to have a dialogue on what they want the character of their state to be for coming generations. Internally, Palestine needs to make serious steps toward reform and strengthening state institutions. The old negotiating paradigm allowed for nothing to be agreed upon until everything was agreed upon. The new paradigm must function where anything that is agreed upon should be implemented.
RSS - Posts
