Month: March 2016
The Islamic State is the easy problem
While the Obama Administration is leaking profusely plans for military intervention in Libya against the Islamic State, I spent a good part of yesterday with people worrying about what to do there beyond killing extremists. It is all too obvious that an air war without a political solution that mobilizes Libyans against the extremists could leave the country even more destabilized than it already is.
It is not so clear what to do about that. A political solution is on the table, but its implementation is stalled, perhaps permanently. Even if the diplomats succeed in their current efforts to get the Government of National Accord (GNA) sworn in, its move to Tripoli poses big security problems, as the capital is in the hands of 15 or more militias loyal to one of the country’s two separate legislative bodies.
Planning for a peacekeeping/stabilization mission is ongoing with the Europeans, including the British, French and Italians. The Americans won’t contribute ground troops but rather “enablers” like ISR (intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance to the civilians among us) as well as whatever is needed (drones, aircraft, special forces) to attack ISIS.
There is a wide range of views on what kind of stabilization mission is desirable or possible. Some think a light footprint limited to Tripoli, or even limited to protecting the GNA and foreign embassies, will suffice and arouse little Libyan xenophobia, provided the strategic communications are adequate. Others note that experience elsewhere would require upwards of 70,000 international peacekeepers in a country the size of Libya requiring peace enforcement. A small force unable or unwilling to protect the Libyan population might arouse more resentment and resistance, not less. At the very least, major routes, cantonments of weapons, borders and oil facilities will need protection, either by internationals or Libyans.
Any stabilization force will require a GNA request, Arab League endorsement and a United Nations Security Council mandate. It will need to be able to supply and defend itself, including from Islamic State and other extremist and criminal attacks. Those are tall orders.
But Libya also has some characteristics that make peacekeeping relatively easy: it is close to Europe, has good ports and a long coastline, it is mostly flat and desert, with few places for spoilers to hide, other than urban areas. The population is mostly Arab (there are Berbers as well–remember the Barbary pirates) and overwhelmingly Sunni. The country’s immediate neighbors–Tunisia, Egypt and Algeria–are all anxious to end the instability and block the Islamic State from establishing a safe haven in Libya, though they don’t necessarily agree on how to do that.
Beyond getting the GNA up and running, what to do about the militias in Libya is the most difficult governance problem. The Finance Ministry, which still functions, has been paying many of them. Others, especially in the south and west, have already gone into private sector, running smuggling and other illicit businesses. Past efforts to build a united Libyan security force by training people outside the country failed miserably. Next time around it will have to be done in Libya. Many of the militiamen will need to be disarmed and demobilized, but there is little in the way of an economy to integrate them into. It is vital to remember that the militias are linked to local patronage networks, which need to be mobilized in favor of stabilization, not against it.
While the US and others have the tools needed to kill extremists, it is not at all clear that we have what is needed to help the Libyans sort out their differences and begin to govern in ways that will deny safe haven to the Islamic State, which already controls the central coastal town of Sirte. We suffer from PDD: paradigm deficit disorder. A hundred T.E. Lawrences prepared to deploy with the militias and help sort out their differences might suffice. But where would we get the 100 Arabic speakers with deep knowledge of the Libyan human terrain? We have all but forgotten whatever we learned about such things in Iraq and Afghanistan, erased because the administration was determined not to get involved again in statebuilding in the Middle East.
The Islamic State is the easy part of the problem. The hard part is figuring out how Libya will be stabilized and governed once it is gone.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Women in the Syria peace process
In the writing my master’s thesis, advisers have always asked, “What’s at stake?” My answer has varied throughout the past two years, going from a better way to understand a particular moment in history to including voices that have been left out. My answer now includes both, and also adds a new way to analyze contemporary affairs.
My thesis, “Nazik al-‘Abid’s Nur al-Fayha: A Kurdish Woman’s Magazine in 1920 Damascus,” discusses how ‘Abid, as a minority woman, editor, and columnist of a women’s magazine, interpreted Arab nationalism and inserted herself in the political discourse in 1920 Syria. ‘Abid was from an elite Kurdish family living in the Kurdish quarter of Damascus, Hayy al-Akrad. In her publication, she adopted an Arab consciousness, believed that women should be equal citizens in the Arab nation, and thought all citizens’ participation on an equal footing would lead to a modern, successful state. By looking at the intersection of gender, ethnicity, and nation in her writing, I explore how al-‘Abid understood Arab nationalist issues, how she called on women to participate in the political and social spheres, and how she defined the rights women should demand from the nationalist project.
‘Abid chose not to point out her own difference from the majority Sunni Arab population. She held the Arab nationalist movement’s unity above all else. In the June 1920 issue of Nur al-Fayha, this question is posed: “What is the most wholesome means by which to eradicate sectarian hatred in our country?” Ethnicity was not a fully developed concept at the time. The sectarian hatred referred to was more religious than ethnic. This question remains pertinent to the present conflict, in which both sectarian and ethnic conflict is proving intractable.
One of the major themes that comes across in ‘Abid’s publication is the question of the state. Her concerns about what the new state will encompass and whom the new state will include resonate strongly in Syria today. Those are also issues in the Syria peace talks scheduled to resume on March 9. The last peace talks ended as the Assad regime, backed by Russian air power, began its attack on Aleppo. The delegation was not representative of all major players in the conflict. The Kurdish PYD and Islamist Ahrar al-Sham, in addition to the terrorist groups ISIS and al Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra, will again not have delegates present this month. The representation problem will continue in this next round of talks.
Inclusion of women is also an issue. Nearly a century ago, ‘Abid called for the complete inclusion of women in the political process of creating a state. Today, the Syrian High Negotiations Committee appears to want to implement that idea with the establishment of the Women’s Consultative Committee. In their February 1 press release, the HNC stated “that actual and active representation for all components of the Syrian society to be the corner stone of the successful political transition in Syria.” Yet, only 3 out of the 17 official delegates are women.
In ‘Abid’s time, the Syrian population was split on whether to include women in the official political process. Educated male nationalists began the post-World War I era garnering female support, but ended up turning their backs on women when they negotiated with the popular Islamic radicals in the 1930s. The HNC appears to want to include women in the 2016 peace talks, especially by bringing women from civil society into the consultative positions. But what will happen as negotiations become more complicated?
Women’s participation in the peace process is necessary if they want to gain inclusion in the new state. But it is not sufficient. It is possible that there will be a choice between peace and women’s equal participation now, just as there was a choice 80 years ago between a unified state and women’s rights. Women were pushed to the side during the state-making project. If peace and women’s rights become too much for leaders to deal with at the same time, women’s issues will come second to peace, even with participation.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace picks March 7-11
- Women in the Peace Process: Making Peace Last in Colombia | Women have played groundbreaking roles in Colombia’s peace process between the government and the country’s largest rebel group, the FARC. With a peace agreement in sight and on the occasion of International Women’s Day, join the U.S. Institute of Peace on March 8 for a briefing on the status of women in peace processes, with a focus on the Colombia case. The discussion is co-sponsored by USIP’s Colombia Peace Forum and the Conflict Prevention and Resolution Forum. The panelists will discuss the United Nations Security Council Resolutions that have called for engaging women in peace processes as a matter of international security, and the long-term efforts to broaden and support initiatives by women and other sectors of civil society as the key to the sustainability of peace. A 30-minute video, “Women Mediating in Colombia,” will document a USIP-supported project to strengthen the capacities of Colombia’s women as mediators. Participants include Carla Koppell, Vice President, Applied Conflict Transformation, U.S. Institute of Peace, Kathleen Kuehnast, Senior Gender Advisor, U.S. Institute of Peace, and Virginia M. Bouvier, Senior Advisor for Peace Processes, U.S. Institute of Peace.
- How Can Societies Control Corruption? The European Experience | Tuesday, March 8th | 10:00-11:00 | Wilson Center | REGISTER TO ATTEND | In recent years, the EU has made an unprecedented effort to transform its periphery by exporting values such as rule of law, democracy and good governance. The experience is discussed as part of the criticism to the global anticorruption approach in Alina Mungiu-Pippidi‘s book, A Quest for Good Governance: How Societies Develop Control of Corruption. Mungiu-Pippidi, who works as a governance expert for the European Union institutions has also been an active promoter of civil society work in her native Romania, the Balkans and Ukraine. The talk will review the few successes around the world and will compare them with the EU attempt to change old members, new members and neighborhood countries. This event is being organized in cooperation with the Ratiu Family Charitable Foundation.
- Pathways to Resilience: Evidence From Africa on Links Between Conflict Management and Resilience to Food Security Shocks | Tuesday, March 8th | 3:00-5:00 | Wilson Center | REGISTER TO ATTEND | Household food security is gravely affected by economic and climate-related shocks. A series of new research studies conducted by Mercy Corps in the Horn of Africa, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Nigeria argue that strengthening conflict management systems helps build resilience to those shocks. On March 8, Daniel Alemu, Chief of Party for Mercy Corps’ ‘Communities Helping Their Environment and Land by Bridging Interests’ program, and Jon Kurtz, Mercy Corps director of research and learning, will present the findings of the research and what it means for development and humanitarian policy. Following their presentations, experts on conflict, development, food security, and resilience will share their thoughts on the implications for cross-sectoral programming and efforts to bolster resilience in climate-affected areas. Other speakers include Ed Carr, Director of the International Development, Community, and Environment Department at Clark University, Roger-Mark De Souza, Wilson Center Director of Population, Environmental Security, and Resilience, Sharon Morris, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations, and Joan Whelan, U.S. Agency for International Development Senior Policy and Learning Officer.
- Beyond Crimea: The New Russian Empire | Wednesday, March 9th | 3:00-4:30 | Atlantic Council | REGISTER TO ATTEND | Agnia Grigas’s book, Beyond Crimea: The New Russian Empire, examines how—for more than two decades—Moscow has consistently used its compatriots in bordering nations for its territorial ambitions. Demonstrating how this policy has been implemented in Ukraine and Georgia, Grigas provides cutting-edge analysis of the nature of Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy and compatriot protection to warn that Moldova, Kazakhstan, the Baltic States, and others are also at risk.
- Looking Forward: A Conversation with Kazakhstan’s Secretary of State | Thursday, March 10th | 10:30-11:30 | Wilson Center | REGISTER TO ATTEND | Over the past 25 years, Kazakhstan has made hard-earned progress, rising from the poverty and chaos of sudden independence to become a middle-income nation. President Nazarbayev recently introduced a strategic vision for its long-term development, “Kazakhstan 2050,” outlining the key reforms necessary for Kazakhstan to become globally competitive. Please join us for a conversation with Kazakhstan’s Secretary of State Gulshara Abdykalikova and Deputy Foreign Minister Yerzhan Ashikbayev to discuss the road ahead. Secretary Abdykalikova also serves as Chairwoman of the National Commission for Women’s Affairs and Family and Demographics Policy, and will discuss the importance of facilitating women’s empowerment and leadership in order for Kazakhstan to realize its ambitious social and economic goals.
- Japan’s Energy Priorities and Policies in the MENA Region | Thursday, March 10th | 10:30-12:00 | Atlantic Council | REGISTER TO ATTEND | Nearly 90 percent of Japan’s imported oil comes from the Middle East, a region where protracted conflicts cause continued turmoil. Through its private sector, Japan’s extensive financial assistance to the region, and its 2016 role as a nonpermanent member on the UN Security Council, Japan’s strategic interests and resulting policies will continue to be important factors in global energy markets and international relations. On March 10, 2016, the Atlantic Council’s Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East and Global Energy Center will bring together Japanese scholars and practitioners alongside US analysts to discuss Japanese energy priorities and policies in the Middle East. These experts will discuss how the Middle Eastern landscape impacts Japan’s energy policies, and how Japanese policies in turn impact the region. Dr. Ken Koyama specializes in economic and political analysis of the world oil market. Dr. Sara Vakhshouri is the Founder and President of SVB Energy International, a strategic energy consulting firm. Dr. Yasuyuki Matsunaga specializes in politics and democratization in Iran, and is an expert in post-Iran nuclear deal implications. Dr. Kota Suechika is a Professor at the College of International Relations, Ritsumeikan University and specializes in regional security including the global concerns posed by the Syrian crisis. Ambassador Frederic Hof specializes in the conflict in Syria. Mr. Masataka Okano previously served in the Japanese Embassy in Beijing, the Russian Division, and the Korea Division and specializes in political affairs, particularly US relations with Japan, East Asia, South East Asia, and South Asia. He will make opening remarks. Ambassador Richard L. Morningstar is a former Ambassador to the Republic of Azerbaijan and Secretary of State Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy. He will make opening remarks
- Egypt: Sex, Rights, Politics, and US Foreign Policy with Scott Long | Thursday, March 10th | 5:00-7:00 | Johns Hopkins SAIS | Since the 2013 coup, Egypt has seen massive and spreading human rights violations, part of a counterrevolution stretching across the Middle East. LGBTI Egyptians have been among the victims. Egypt today keeps more people imprisoned for their gender expression or for same-sex sexual conduct than any other country in the world. Why? Why has a panic over sexuality and gender become a tool of the counterrevolution, and how do these abuses relate to other state crimes in Sisi’s repressive Egypt? This talk will also examine the role of the Obama administration in supporting the Sisi regime, and the contradictions in its declared support for LGBTI rights globally. Presentations will be followed by a Q&A session.
- The Future of Peacekeeping in Africa: Lessons from Ghana | Peacekeeping missions today face some of the most complex environments in their history. President Obama in September 2015 reaffirmed U.S. support for United Nations peace operations and directed a range of actions to strengthen them for a new era. Ghana, with its long history of contributing to peacekeeping and with soldiers in 12 of 16 U.N. missions, provides lessons in effective training, policymaking and non-violent conflict resolution. Understanding the political, operations and conflict environment is key to successful peacekeeping. That’s a priority for the United States, which provides almost 30 percent of the annual peacekeeping budget and, in 2014, pledged $110 million a year for three to five years to build the capacity of the continent’s militaries for rapidly deploying peacekeepers in response to emerging conflict. Ghana, the eighth-largest contributor to U.N. peacekeeping operations, has significant troops in Mali, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Lebanon, Liberia, South Sudan and Côte d’Ivoire. It also has supported missions of the Economic Community of West African States and the African Union. The panelists include Colonel Emmanuel Kotia, chief instructor and academic programs coordinator at the Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Training Centre in Ghana, and author of the new book, “Ghana Armed Forces in Lebanon and Liberia Peace Operations.” He has more than 28 years of service with the Ghana Armed Forces and served at critical junctures with the peace operations in Lebanon and Liberia.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Superbowl, Academy awards, election debate
I’ve missed all three: I didn’t watch the Superbowl, the Academy awards or last night’s Republican debate. I suppose this makes me downright anti-American, but I’ve got what I regard as good reasons to skip all three.
The Superbowl is the ultimate American sports event. It features sudden rushes of activity and physical collisions so violent that they are maiming and killing the participants at a terrifying rate. I’ve always wondered how the Romans found gladiatorial contests appealing. I know now. It is simply inhumane to continue to play this sport as it is played today. A parent who would encourage a kid to play tackle football is a child abuser.
The Academy awards are easy to skip. They were always boring. The failure this year to nominate any black people makes them more so. Chris Rock, whose monologue I read, did little to convince me this is anything but gross and inexcusable prejudice by people who know better. Hollywood has often been a trailblazer when it comes to responding to prejudice. How could it allow itself to sink to symbolizing it?
I’m sure last night’s Republican presidential debate was more entertaining than the Academy awards. But I’ve had enough, not only of Trump’s vulgarity but also of Cruz and Rubio’s attempts to match him.
That said, Trump represents an important slice of the American public, in particular blue collar whites who have benefitted little from the extraordinary economic recovery of the last seven years, topped off last month with almost 250,000 new jobs created. But unfortunately he has chosen to appeal to them with barely disguised racism and grossness, from within a political party that has blocked many attempts to level the playing field and redistribute some of the benefits of the expansion in their direction.
I’d like to see the end of two great American traditions. The Academy awards are the most likely to go first. They have lost a large part of their audience because they are boring and irrelevant. Unfortunately football is still thriving, but young people are increasingly turning to soccer. I hope that trend continues, with the long-term consequence of removing football from its exalted place as the leading American professional sport.
As for the Republican debate, it suggests the party is imploding. It may well nominate Trump, who as a major party candidate is more or less guaranteed one-third, maybe even 40%, of the vote. But he is a loser with all the voters who are counting for more these days in getting over 50%: independents, women, blacks, Hispanics, gays and lesbians. Most of my Republican friends will prefer to vote for Clinton, but of course that over-intellectualized elite counts for little.
It is also possible the Stop Trump movement will succeed and nominate someone like Senators Cruz or Rubio, or Governor Kasich. But in doing so it will lose Trump’s appeal to white blue collars, who are likely to stay home in droves. In any event, it looks as if the economy will be in good shape for November. If anything, its momentum is on the rise, which is the single most important factor in determining US election outcomes.
This is Hillary Clinton’s election to lose. She might do that. The Benghazi issue is fading, not least because of her own performance in Congressional testimony. There simply is no there there. But the question of her unclassified, private email server is still bubbling. Most Democrats don’t seem to care, but she could be indicted. Even if that doesn’t happen, the poor judgment she showed in following a precedent Republican Secretaries of State Colin Powell and Condi Rice had set will weaken her with some independents.
Foreign policy will be an issue in this election, even if not a primary one. The threat of Islamic extremism, Russia’s misbehavior in Ukraine and Syria, the Chinese economic and military challenge, and US support for its European and Middle Eastern allies (especially Israel) will all figure, one way or another. The Republicans will bash President Obama’s two big (and popular) recent achievements: the Paris climate change agreement and the Iran nuclear deal. They will have a harder time with Trans-Pacific Partnership trade trade agreement, which Clinton opposes but the Republican establishment supports.
What won’t matter in the election or in the world are the Academy awards and the Superbowl. Nor in the end will Trump. He’ll either be nominated and lose or be edged out somehow and some other Republican will have to figure out how to make Clinton lose, which is unlikely but no impossible.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Trumpland, not
If non-Americans want to know about Trump’s foreign policy views, the best thing they can read is this open letter from the cream of the Republican national security establishment announcing their opposition to his candidacy. Trump may be expressing the sentiments of many grassroots supporters when he advocates blocking Muslims from entry into the US and compelling Mexico to build a wall on the border, but he is far beyond the pale of elite opinion.
In my view, he is also likely to go down to a historic defeat in November if nominated. His flirtations with white supremacists will help to bring out minority voters against him. His offensive remarks about Mexicans will ensure the Democratic candidate will get a high percentage of the Hispanic vote. We don’t even have to mention his all too obvious disdain for women, gays and lesbians. Ignoring the electoral college, most recent American elections are won and lost in the 45-55% range, by a margin of less than 10%. It is going to be really hard for Trump to get over the 45% mark without minority and women’s votes.
That could be one of the reasons establishment Republicans are in such high dudgeon. They can live with Hillary Clinton’s views on foreign policy, as they are well within the elite consensus. But they don’t want to. None of the signatories of the letter are likely to get jobs in a Clinton administration. Party loyalty still counts for something in today’s America.
I’d be worried about Trump’s views too if I thought he had a serious chance of being elected. His nomination is now likely, which you can tell by the panic of those who oppose him. Mitt Romney is issuing daily denunciations, which will likely have no effect, or even the opposite of what he intends. But the nomination will be decided by a small fraction of the electorate. So far this year, about 15% of eligible voters have turned out. The primaries are attracting a lot of attention, but their outcome reflects the views of relatively few people on both sides of the aisle.
Getting out of a tuk-tuk in Sri Lanka recently, the driver asked where his passengers were from. We replied America. “Trumpland,” he said. No, more like Obamaland or Clintonland in my view. And I’m glad to welcome Republican colleagues in trying to keep it that way.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Development and reconciliation in Sri Lanka
SAIS student Stephanie Billingham reports:
The tone was optimistic and conciliatory at USIP’s event with Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera last Thursday. Part of the weeklong inaugural “U.S.-Sri Lanka Partnership Dialogue,” the program consisted of Assistant Secretary of State Nisha Biswal‘s introduction and Foreign Minister Samaraweera remarks as well as a question of and answer session moderated by Lisa Curtis of the Heritage Foundation.
Foreign Minister Samaraweera offered a brief history of Sri Lanka. Upon independence in 1948 it had one of the brightest futures among the former colonies, as the oldest Asian democracy with development indicators unparalleled in the developing world. Tragically, all that potential was lost. Devoid of strong enough leadership, Sri Lanka succumbed to inter-communal violence, unable to come to terms with its multi-ethnic, multi-linguistic, multi-religious population. This need to embrace diversity and ensure that it is protected is at the heart of the current “rainbow coalition’s” agenda, which will move forward with constitutional reform and reconciliation processes over the next year.
Samaraweera cited minority grievances as the driving force of extremism and the eventual cause of the war as well as the subsequent necessity of constitutional reform to protect minorities and their interests. There was a golden moment of opportunity for re-integration and welcome to the warring parties, which was “cruelly squandered to serve the dynastic ambitions of the ruling family at the time.” Victory was followed by a “rampage of triumphalism alienating the Tamil people further.”
That era ended with the coalition of the United National Party (UNP) with President Sirisena, which is ushering in a “new culture of consensus… and much needed political stability.” Sri Lankan political parties are moving beyond confrontation for short-term gains to acting for the benefit of the country as a whole. In particular, he mentioned the incredible work of the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) in cooperating with the national coalition government, all parties working to “restore the dignity of our nation, our people, and our military.”
On the constitution, Samaraweera said that reforms are necessary to ensure that violence will never occur again. “All stakeholders [must] feel that their development is being cared for and their lives are improving.” The linkage between development and reconciliation is the issue to which the Foreign Minister pays the greatest attention, as Sri Lanka needs help from the international community to “kick-start the economy and catalyze our development journey.” The government’s strategy depends on encouraging foreign direct investment to make trade more competitive and improve productivity. Accordingly, the new government is “very seriously exploring the possibility of applying to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership.”
Samaraweera hoped in closing that with the aid of the international community, including the US, Sri Lanka will “finally succeed in creating a country where each individual can live and work with dignity, with self-esteem and confidence in the future.”
A question and answer period followed, which brought up multiple issues, the most important of which were demilitarization of the north and land release; international participation in the special tribunals; and devolution of powers.
On demilitarization in the North and East, Samaraweera reiterated the government’s commitment to slow but steady release of land back to civilians as well as reducing the number of soldiers by 37%. Furthermore, over the next few months, businesses owned and run by the military would be put under civilian administration and those soldiers involved in these activities removed from the area (but he did not comment on how those soldiers would then be employed).
Another question focused on the President’s recent statement that international participation is not needed in the special courts, despite the resolution Sri Lanka co-sponsored at the UN Human Rights Council that called for international involvement. Samaraweera responded that there are many ways in which the international community can be involved in the special tribunals, from prosecutors to investigators of war crimes. The government will hold to the resolution, he said.
One question concerned the inclusion of devolution of powers in the new constitution, addressing a key grievance of the Tamil population. Samaraweera stated that the new Constitution would protect minority rights and advance their interests, without responding specifically on devolution.
Samaraweera did not discuss one important aspect of Sri Lankan post-war stabilization: how the government will deal with the rise of Buddhist extremism, though he acknowledged that some religious leaders are fanning the flames of inter-communal distrust.
RSS - Posts
