Month: January 2014
History lessons
My colleagues over at TransConflict have posted my reflection, prepared some months ago, on one chapter of the Scholarly Initiative, led by Charlie Ingrao:
Rereading the Scholarly Initiative’s Confronting Yugoslav Controversies in its second edition on TransConflict is déjà vu all over again. The sections on “Kosovo Under Autonomy” remind us of the growing demographic predominance of Albanians, the province’s declining economy, heightened demands for political equality and republic status, deteriorating interethnic relations, the 1986 Serbian Academy memorandum claiming genocide, Serb migration from and political agitation within Kosovo. In Momcilo Pavlovic’s well-crafted narrative, impeccably written to achieve acceptance on both sides of the ethnic divide, the evolution is clear and the outcome seems all too logical and inevitable – a violent confrontation leading eventually to Kosovo independence.
That is not, however, the Scholarly Initiative’s point. Nor would it be a valid one. It is not difficult to imagine many junctures at which wise politicians in a less stressed environment might have intervened to stop the spiral towards violence and dissolution of the former Yugoslavia. But the anti-nationalists in power who might have been so inclined were also, for the most part, Communists. Their autocratic methods were ill-suited to the requirements. Once the Soviet Union came apart, the nationalists—some like Milosevic recent converts from Communism—were unleashed. They were far more likely to aggravate the situation than ameliorate it. What happened in Moscow in 1990 and 1991 was the trigger that enabled what happened in former Yugoslavia in the next decade. Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Pakistan’s strategic threats and responses
Thursday morning at the Carnegie Center, two scholars discussed Pakistan’s security and nuclear weapons development. Mansoor Ahmed is a lecturer and Muhammad Tehsin is a tenure-track assistant professor in the Department of Defense and Strategic Studies at Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad. Toby Dalton, deputy director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, moderated.
Muhammad Tehsin: Pakistan has an internal security problem. At the same time, the government is in a grip of confusion and demonstrating a lack of resolve. Pakistan is becoming a weak state. Government response has been ritualistic, rhetorical, and conventional. In this situation we are compelled to turn our attention to Pakistani strategic culture. Can it remain oblivious to the grave internal security problem? Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Egypt’s restoration referendum
I observed the Egyptian constitutional referendum yesterday and the day before in Minya governorate, whose provincial capital lies about 245 kilometers south of Cairo. The referendum was essentially a plebiscite on the July 3 removal of President Morsi by General Abdel Fattah al Sisi and the subsequent effort to restore the military to power behind the fig leaf of a civilian government.
My partner, translator and I visited about 30 polling stations in perhaps 15 polling centers as far south as Malawi and as far north as Bani Mazar. This is a poor, mostly agricultural part of Egypt that largely supported the Mubarak regime and has suffered hard times since. Many apartments lie unfinished or vacant. Churches as well as mosques dot the landscape. The rutted roads swirl with three-wheeled “took took” taxis driven by pre-adolescents, minibuses packed to the gills, donkeys hauling great mounds of greens, children playing in the dust as well as an abundance of cars and trucks, motocycles and bicycles. Officially, Egypt drives on the right, like the US. But that only applies when it is convenient–if you feel you need to be on the left, no one is going to stop you from driving there in Minya governorate. The only moving thing that does what you expect is the Nile, which flows calmly through the turmoil, its banks heaped with trash. Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Sectarian politics in the Gulf
Tuesday Frederic Wehrey, senior associate at the Carnegie Middle East Program, presented his new book, Sectarian Politics in the Gulf: From the Iraq War to the Arab Uprisings (Columbia University Press, January 2014). Marc Lynch, professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University, moderated.
Wehrey has a sense of déjà vu looking at the resurgence of sectarianism in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Reading the Middle East this way is not new. The sectarianism lens is an appealing way to look at a very complex region, but it plays into the hands of sectarian leaders. They use sectarianism to justify their iron grip. Sectarianism is important, but along with other identities such as social class or nationality. It is important to look at these other explanations for conflict. The antidote to sectarianism isn’t a greater US presence in the region or good relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Ultimately, it is local institutions. Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
What do election observers do?
I am in Egypt as an election observer for the constitutional referendum. The Egyptians are calling our role mutaaba’, or witness, rather than muraaqib, observer, to emphasize the passive nature of the role.
So what do election observers do? What do they see? What do they report?
I am talking here about short-term observers. The role of long-term observers, who are deployed months before an election, is different. They are concerned not only with the electoral design and technical preparations but also with the overall context: Is there freedom of speech and association? Is there intimidation of particular groups of voters? Are all candidates given equal time on TV and radio? Are government resources used to influence the outcome? It really isn’t possible to offer a judgment on whether an election (or referendum) has been free and fair without these broader considerations. There are no official long-term observers of this Egyptian referendum, though some of those preparing for our current mission have been here since Christmas. Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace picks, January 13-17
A bit late, but as good as ever:
1. Battlefield Earth: Reassessing U.S. Responses to Terrorist Threats
Monday, January 13 | 12:15 – 1:45pm
New America Foundation, 1899 L Street NW Suite 400
In 2001, the U.S. Congress authorized the president to use “all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.” This Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) set no limits on time, location, or target.
In just the last 12 months, the AUMF was invoked in support of the war in Afghanistan, but also unconventional operations in Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, Somalia and possibly elsewhere — operations such as targeted killings using drones, raids and captures by U.S. Special Forces, and, in all probability, cyber warfare.
As Heather Hurlburt writes in “Battlefield Earth” in Democracy: A Journal of Ideas’ Winter 2014 issue, out this month: “public debate over the use of force in Syria and the revelations concerning National Security Agency surveillance suggest that Americans are increasingly uncomfortable with actions being undertaken in their name. President Obama appeared to acknowledge this reality in May [2013] when he said he looked forward ‘to engaging Congress and the American people in efforts to refine, and ultimately repeal, the AUMF’s mandate.’”
With combat in Afghanistan winding down at the end of the year, does the AUMF continue to authorize force against any terror suspect linked to al-Qaeda, anywhere? Will Congress or the Administration move to “refine” or “repeal” it, and if so, how?
Join the New America Foundation’s National Security Program and Democracy for a panel discussion assessing the politics, legal alternatives, and policy implications of a 13-year-old piece of legislation that makes the planet an open-ended battlefield.
RSS - Posts
