Month: June 2014
What will beat al Qaeda
My piece was published today on The Hill:
The trade of five Taliban leaders held at Guantanamo Bay for American Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl has again underlined the fraught question of how to end the war on terror. Afghanistan was a main theater for that war, but American troops will be drawn down to fewer than 10,000 by the end of this year and completely withdrawn by the end of 2016. Al Qaeda, the organization that attacked the United States on Sept. 11, 2001, is mostly gone from there already.
You have to go here for the rest.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
A good election, now work to be done
It seems safe to say now that Prime Minister Hashim Thaci’s PDK has won Kosovo’s Sunday parliamentary election, with close to 31% of the vote. Second place LDK was closer than some anticipated at almost 26%, but the big news was that the “Self-Determination” movement led by Albin Kurti beat out Ramush Haradinaj’s AAK, 13.5% to 9.6%. Overall turnout was low at about 42%. The Serb List garnered 4.2%, after a Belgrade push for Serbs in Kosovo to vote.
My friends who wished for a major shift in political power will be disappointed. My friends in the PDK are celebrating, even if the margin was narrower than some imagined.
My fondest wish was apparently realized: under the watchful eyes of a lot of Kosovo observers, the election appears to have been clean. I am told the biggest problems were attempts to influence voters within the restricted area near polling stations, problems with the voters’ list, and family-influenced voting. I have not heard complaints of ballot-box stuffing, intimidation or other wholesale cheating. Complaints were similar in Serb and Albanian areas.
There are lots of mathematical possibilities for Thaci to gain a majority. With minorities, any of the top Albanian parties might do as a partner. While Thaci has told many people he would prefer to retire from the prime ministry, I and a lot of other people will be surprised if he actually does it. His party has found him to be the absolutely necessary glue to hold things together. They won’t want him throwing in the towel after a respectable, if narrower than hoped for, victory.
The big issues facing Thaci or any other prime minister for the next four years will be economic. Kosovo needs much more investment (foreign and domestic) to create jobs for its still rapidly growing and young population. Some would like to focus on government-controlled investment, using funds held so far abroad. A wise course would be to improve conditions for private investment, both domestic and international. This will not be easy: Kosovo holds an unenviable 86th position in the World Bank’s ease of doing business ranking, admittedly ahead of Serbia and Albania but well behind neighboring Macedonia and Montenegro. The perception of corruption is a big hindrance to investment. Kosovo manages only 111th in the Transparency International ranking.
But whatever Kosovo’s problems, a decent election is a good foundation. Kosovo knows its ultimate goals: membership in NATO and the EU. Now it has to decide how to make tangible progress in that direction during the next four years. The country is a long way from where it was at independence six years ago, but it is still much farther than that from its ultimate goals.
PS: a late thought: all that NGO energy that went into election monitoring needs now to turn to accountaility and transparency of government actions. There is work to be done for everyone.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace picks June 9-13
1. Shaping the Future? The Role of Regional Powers in Afghanistan and Pakistan Monday, June 9 | 9:00 am – 10:00 am Woodrow Wilson Center, Fifth Floor; 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND The withdrawal of international troops from Afghanistan and the presidential election there are taking place in a context of growing internal political and economic instability. Roberto Toscano, former Public Policy Scholar of the Wilson Center and former Ambassador to Iran and India, as well as Emma Hooper and Eduard Soler i Lecha, Barcelona Centre for International Affairs, will discuss the reasons why the regional perspective on Afghanistan and Pakistan is relevant, and particularly so at this point in time.
2. Youth and Violence: Engaging the Lost Generation Monday, June 9 | 9:00 am – 11:00 am US Institute of Peace; 2301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND This talk explores the factors that are pushing young people towards participation in various forms of violence, including participation in extremism or political violence. It will challenge pre-existing assumptions about youth peace building work and discuss policy changes necessary for new interventions that steer youth away from violence. SPEAKERS Anne Richard, Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Department of State, Maryanne Yerkes, Senior Civil Society and Youth Advisor, US Agency for International Development, Rebecca Wolfe, Director, Conflict Management & Peacebuilding Program, Mercy Corps, Marc Sommers, Consultant & Visiting Researcher, African Studies Center, Boston University, and Steven Heydemann, Vice President, Applied Research on Conflict, USIP.
3. Re-Thinking Democracy Promotion Amid Rising Authoritarianism Monday, June 9 | 9:30 am – 5:00 Kenney Auditorium, Paul H. Nitze Building; 1740 Massachusetts Ave, NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND The crisis caused by Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has highlighted the threat to freedom posed by kleptocratic autocracies. The world is watching how the democratic community of nations responds to Putin’s brazen attack not only against Ukraine, but against the very concept of freedom and the ability of people to choose their own political destiny. Much is at stake, for authoritarian regimes pose a danger not only to their own populations through suppression of human rights but to others as well. This requires a re-examination of democracy promotion, the threats it faces, and how best to advance it. SPEAKERS Charles Davidson, Francis Fukuyama, Walter Russell Mead, Elliott Abrams, Michael Mandelbaum, Richard Haass, and more.
4. Nuclear Flashpoints: US-Iran Tensions Over Terms and Timetables Tuesday, June 10 | 9:30 am – 11:00 am Woodrow Wilson Center; 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND This event will explore key conflicts and possible trade-offs with Iran as the third round discussion hosted by a coalition of eight Washington think tanks and organizations. It will assess how many years an agreement could last, the breakout time, and when and how the U.S. will act. SPEAKERS Stephen J. Hadley, Chairman of the Board, USIP, Jon Wolfsthal, Deputy Director, Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Daryl Kimball, Executive Director, Arms Control Association, and Robert S. Litwak, Vice President for Scholars and Academic relations, Director for International Security Studies.
5. Rhythms at the Intersection of Peace and Conflict: The Music of Nonviolent Action Tuesday, June 10 | 9:30 am – 1:00 pm United States Institute of Peace; 2301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND This event brings together three individuals whose work meets at the nexus of music and nonviolent action: Arash Sobhani, an underground musician from Iran, Timothy O’Keefe, a music producer and co-founder of Freedom Beat Recordings, and Dr. Maria Stephan, one of the world’s leading scholars on strategic nonviolent action and Senior Policy Fellow at USIP. These three individuals will guide us through an exploration of nonviolent action, both past and present, through a musical lens.
6. WWI and the Lessons for Today Tuesday, June 10 | 12:30 pm – 1:30 pm Allison Auditorium, Heritage Foundation; 214 Massachusetts Ave., NE, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND Victor Davis Hanson, Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow in Residence at Stanford University, will explore the lessons that the U.S. has learned since World War I and how the lead-up to the Great War has affected our government’s policies over the past 100 years. This event will be hosted by James Jay Carafano, Vice President for the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy, and E. W. Richardson Fellow.
7. Researching the Middle East Tuesday, June 10 | 2:00 pm – 4:00 pm Woodrow Wilson Center; 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND This panel will discuss the challenges of researching and writing on recent international Middle East history and U.S. policy in the region. Trudy Huskamp Peterson, Consulting Archivist, David Palkki, Council on Foreign Relations, Gregory D. Koblentz, Associate Professor at George Mason University, Michael Eisenstadt, Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and Kevin M. Woods, Institute for Defense Analyses, will all discuss their own experiences and substantive findings studying conflicts such as the Iran-Iraq War, Iraq War, and the War in Afghanistan.
8. After Snowden: The Road Ahead for Cybersecurity Thursday, June 12 | 8:45 am – 1:15 pm American Enterprise Institute, Twelfth Floor; 1150 17th Street, NW, Washington D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND The Internet has been a remarkable force for freedom and prosperity, but it has faced challenges from individuals and governments intent on abusing its openness and interconnectivity. This conference will kick-start a national debate on America’s role in protecting and promoting free enterprise, personal security, and individual liberty in cyberspace. Jeffrey Eisenach, AEI, Michael Hayden, Chertoff Group, and Mike Rogers, Chairman of the US House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, will share their insights into the future of cybersecurity policy, and will be moderated by Mike Daniels.
9. The Many Faces of Tyranny: Why Democracy Isn’t Always Possible Thursday, June 12 | 12:00 pm – 1:00 pm Heritage Foundation, Lehrman Auditorium; 214 Massachusetts Ave., NE, Washington, D.C. History has not ended. Across the world today, we are witnessing both a heroic struggle for democracy and reform and the disturbing strength of tyrannical regimes and movements. Whether it be the Arab Spring, the Syrian civil war, the aggressiveness of Putin’s Russia or the increasing bellicosity of China, the forces of democracy and the forces of tyranny are in a dead heat. Waller R. Newell, Carleton University, examines how the West should respond and how we should make the difficult choice between better and worse kinds of non-democratic authority when overthrowing today’s dictatorship may only bring about a much worse totalitarian alternative tomorrow.
10. Restraint: A New Foundation for U.S. Grand Strategy Thursday, June 12 | 12:00 pm Hayek Auditorium, Cato Institute; 1000 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND In his new book, Barry R. Posen, Ford International Professor of Political Science and Director of Security Studies Program at MIT, explains why the dominant view among the nation’s foreign policy elites, what he calls “liberal hegemony,” has proved unnecessary, counterproductive, costly, and wasteful. His alternative – restraint – would resist the impulse to use U.S. military power, and focus the military’s and the nation’s attention on the most urgent challenges to national security. This discussion features comments by Justin Logan, Director of Foreign Policy Studies, Cato Institute, Blake Hounshell, Deputy Editor of POLITICO Magazine, and is moderated by Christopher Preble, Vice President for Defense and Foreign Policy Studies, Cato Institute.
11. Center for a New American Security Debate: War with Iran? Friday, June 13 | 9:00 am – 12:00 pm Willard Intercontinental Hotel; 1401 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND The Center for a New American Security and the Civis Institute invite you to attend a public debate featuring two of the country’s top collegiate debate programs – Georgetown University and the University of Michigan. The teams will discuss whether or not the United States should use military force against Iran if nuclear diplomacy fails. The debate will be followed by comments from Dr. Colin Kahl, senior fellow and director of the Middle East Security Program at CNAS, and a moderated Q&A with the debate teams.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Responses to Al Qaeda 3.0
The American Security Project Tuesday discussed “Al Qaeda 3.0: Three Responses to the Changing Nature of Al Qaeda” on the current terrorist threats in the Middle East and North Africa and how several countries have responded to these concerns. Speakers Said Temsamani, Zack Gold and Timothy Fairbank detailed the principal terrorist threats in Morocco, Egypt, and Yemen, and whether each country’s approach has been successful in combatting these threats in recent years.
The previous Senior Political Advisor of the US Embassy in Rabat, Said Temsamani, said the primary terrorist threat in Morocco is the rising number of Moroccans participating in the Syrian civil war. Approximately 3,000 have voluntarily left to fight in Syria over the past several years, largely due to the ideological appeal of participating in the war. It has become logistically easy and inexpensive for these young Moroccan men to get to Syria—a visa is not required and they receive immediate combat training upon arrival.
While many combatants have been drawn to organizations such as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Sham (ISIS), it is now an increasing concern to the government that young Moroccans have established their own group, known as Harakat Sham, to engage in this ideological–and some would even say jihadist–war.
The foremost issue lies in the reentry of these fighters who are now choosing to return to Morocco after participating in the Syrian civil war. In response to this influx of combatants, Morocco has focused on an approach centered on “spiritual diplomacy,” specifically providing training to both men and women to become scholars and imams. This counter Salafist-jihadist strategy centers on a revival of Moroccan Islam and has largely been successful—so much so that other countries throughout the region, such as Libya and Tunisia, have begun to request this teaching for their own religious leaders and scholars.
Zack Gold, researcher and writer on US-Middle East policy, analyzed the major terrorist threats in Egypt after the revolution in January 2011. Terrorist activity over the past several years has risen both in the Sinai and along the Libyan border due to the disappearance of security forces from these areas. As a result of past crackdowns and repression in the Sinai, the tribal Bedouin population responded to this void in authority by destroying police stations and producing weapons intended for Gaza. The Egyptian government has responded to these threats with brute force and repression. While somewhat effective in deterring the Sinai threats, it is merely a short-term measure.
Timothy Fairbank examined the current terrorist activity in Yemen and the challenges the government faces. He highlighted the weaknesses of the Yemeni cabinet in combatting the significant threats of Al Qaeda of the Arab Peninsula (AQAP), specifically due to the lack of elected officials with a true mandate. AQAP has become the number one terrorist challenge in the country over the past several years. It has continued to gain supporters both from Yemen as well as Saudi Arabia.
While AQAP is always in a state of flux, Fairbank emphasized that the increase in counterterrorism and drone strikes has in fact coincided with an increase in the size and presence of AQAP in Yemen. A state is weakened when the people do not support local government leaders and suffer from violence and poverty. In the case of Yemen, he concluded, “the weaker the state, the greater the chance for AQAP to infiltrate.”
Morocco is doing better than Egypt and Yemen, where revolution and war have sapped the strength of the state.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Keep it clean
It’s unusual that I post three days in a row on the Balkans, but on reflection yesterday I did not emphasize enough how important it is that Kosovo’s elections be transparently clean. The 2010 parliamentary election had serious problems. There were fewer problems in last November’s municipal elections, but they were not perfect. I am told the issues often arise within political parties, with candidates trying to falsify preference votes. I have no way of independently judging that.
But I do know that it is vital to Kosovo’s most important ambitions–NATO and eventual EU membership–that this election go well. A democratic state has to be able to conduct an election well. It isn’t easy–we’ve still got problems in parts of the US more than 220 years after independence.
I am told the EU is sending some observers, and the Kosovo government is recruiting some in the US. But international observers are not nearly as important to a good election as local people, who can much more readily detect fraud and abuse, both at polling stations and away from them. I am told there will be a nongovernment telephone hotline for citizens to call to report problems. That strikes me as a fine idea.
What really counts in the end is the attitude of those who might try to abuse the electoral system. If they are convinced that not only the country’s best interests but also their own will be served by a good election, they will align their behavior accordingly. If they think their competitors will be able to cheat, they will respond in kind. Potential malefactors need to fear the consequences. A big turnout helps to ensure that polilticians know they are being watched, but it also strains the electoral mechanism.
The country’s best interests are clear. If this election goes badly, Pristina will have a harder time convincing Brussels that it merits goodies like the visa waiver program and a Stabilization and Association Agreement, which I am told should be ready for signature in January. A bad election would also give Serbs and other non-Albanians pause, raising once again the archetypal Balkans question: why should I live as a minority in your country when you can live as a minority in mine?
If the election goes well, whoever gains the largest share of seats will have a much easier road ahead. As always in Kosovo, gaining a majority will require a coalition, one that includes Serb and other non-Albanian participation. The capacity to form the government depends in part on everyone accepting the validity of the election results. If I think you may have cheated your way to victory, I’m far less likely to want to negotiate a pact with you to govern.
So yes, the Kosovo election may be dull. But it is important to those who live there. The good functioning of the electoral mechanism would itself be a key result.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Dull
Kosovo’s election this coming Sunday has garnered virtually no ink (or electrons) in the United States. This is mainly due to the many other issues Americans are wrestling with. There is a long list of international issues before we even get close to the Balkans: withdrawal from Afghanistan, nuclear negotiations with Iran, failure of Middle East peace talks, Chinese naval challenges to US allies, the Syrian war and its spillover, Libya’s implosion, restoration of military autocracy in Egypt. Even within the Balkans, Bosnia’s stagnation would outrank any problem Kosovo is currently posing.
But inattention to Kosovo’s election is also merited: Kosovo is becoming a normal country. Why should Americans care who gets elected? Four major Albanian parties are contesting the election. Serbs and other minorities will participate, running for 10 guaranteed seats and hoping for a few more. The electoral mechanism, whose integrity was compromised in a number of places during the last poll, is thought to be in better shape. At their municipal elections last fall, the citizens turned out a lot of incumbents. It is unclear whether that will happen again. To me, not knowing the outcome of an election in advance is a good sign.
The big issue these days in Kosovo is creation of its armed forces, which will require a two-thirds majority in parliament. This gives the Serbs, who generally oppose Kosovo acquiring an army, a strong incentive to vote. They are unlikely to be able to block the constitutional changes required, but they could influence them. So could Belgrade: if it were to recognize Kosovo, or at least allow it to become a UN member, Pristina could settle for a smaller force less focused on the threat from Serbia, which has to be taken seriously so long as Belgrade has not recognized Kosovo’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
I don’t mean to say everything is hunky dory in Kosovo, or likely to become so any time soon. The economy is far from generating enough jobs for its young and growing population. Poverty and youth unemployment are high. Corruption is widely thought to be rife. Nepotism and cronyism are common. Inter-ethnic relations, though much improved since the war ended in 1999, are far from warm. Many Kosovo Serbs still do not accept the fact of Kosovo’s independence. Many Albanians see Serbs as disloyal to the now six-year-old state. Implementation of the agreements intended to reintegrate the four northern, Serb-controlled municipalities with the rest of Kosovo is lagging.
This is what relative success looks like in international interventions and statebuilding. Perfection is far off. Differences are settled by political rather than military means. Responding to the needs of citizens becomes a priority, even if one observed more in the breach. To see relative failure, you need only look as far as Bosnia and Herzegovina, where its multiple governments have failed utterly to meet the serious challenge of its recent floods. Serbia, whose governments are well-established if not well-resourced, has also had difficulty with the response and relief effort. Kosovo was fortunate. The rains didn’t hit as hard there.
The question Kosovo citizens should be asking themselves as they go to the polls is who can ensure that their state will respond well if catastrophic floods, or a big earthquake, or an epidemic, were to strike? Who will increase accountability and transparency? Who will crack down on corruption and nepotism? Who will enable the economy to generate more jobs? Those are not a heroic questions. Some might even consider them dull ones. They won’t much interest Americans, but I hope they still interest Kosovo’s electorate. They are what governance should now be about.
RSS - Posts
