Day: April 21, 2019
Peace Picks April 22-26
1.The evolution of U.S. trade strategy: causes and consequences for Asia| Tuesday, April 23, 2019 | 11:45 am – 3:15pm| The Wilson Center | 1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20004-3027|Register here|
The Trump administration has taken U.S. foreign economic policy in directions not seen since the establishment of the postwar liberal regime for international trade. The US has been unprecedentedly critical of the WTO, sought to replace NAFTA with a new US-Mexico-Canada agreement, and cast the EU as a foe in trade relations while halting progress on the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. But the most significant trade moves have targeted China and focused on the Asia-Pacific: opting out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, criticizing Chinese policies and practices as unfair on issues ranging across market access, currency manipulation, coerced or illicit intellectual property transfers, industrial policy, import duties, government subsidies, and Chinese firms’ violations of US sanctions on third countries. Initial rounds of tariffs from both sides and threats to escalate portended a possible full-blown US-China trade war as negotiations failed to move expeditiously toward a mutually acceptable deal.
The TPP has moved forward without the US, as the CPTPP with Japan in the leading role. The China-led Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership is emerging, with overlapping membership and less demanding rules. China’s Belt and Road Initiative and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank may further change the regional economic and institutional landscape. Alongside its more confrontational stance on trade, the US has pressed for a “free and open Indo-Pacific.” What have been, and are likely to be, the regional impacts of recent US policy? What are the prospects for multilateral cooperation in the region? Is the current US approach, associated with President Trump but with some roots in earlier periods, likely to change and, if so, with what effects? Join us for a discussion on the challenges ahead in dealing with the new trade realities and what it means for U.S. relations with Asia in particular.
AGENDA
11:45
Registration and lunch
12:10
Introduction and opening remarks
12:15-1:45
Panel I: Regional impact of the “trade war”
David Dollar, Senior Fellow, John L Thornton China Center, Brookings
Meg Lundsager, Public Policy Fellow, Wilson Center
Michael Pillsbury, Senior Fellow and Director for Chinese Strategy, Hudson Institute
Bradford Ward, Partner, King and Spalding
Jacques DeLisle, Director, Center for East Asian Studies and Stephen A Cozen Professor of Law, University of Pennsylvania Law School (moderator)
1:45-2:00
coffee break
2:00-3:15
Panel 2: Trade realities and prospects for cooperation
Taeho Bark, Professor Emeritus, Graduate School of International Studies, Seoul National University
Jacob Schlesinger, Senior Correspondent, Wall Street Journal Washington Bureau
Wayne Morrison, Specialist in Asian Trade and FInance, Congressional Research Service
Shihoko Goto, Deputy Director for Geoeconomics, Asia Program, Wilson Center (moderator)
2. Ukraine´s post-election landscape| Friday, April 26, 2019| 10:00 am – 11:30pm| Carnegie Endowment for International Peace | 1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW Washington, DC 20036-2103|Register here|
Join Carnegie for a timely conversation about the impact of the Ukrainian presidential elections on the country’s politics and society. April 26 also marks the thirty-third anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, an event which played a central role in the formation of Ukrainian national identity, a topic that once again is at the forefront of the country’s extremely dynamic domestic politics.
Serhill Plokhll, Maykhailo S. Hrushevs’kyi, professor of Ukrainian history and director of the Ukrainian Research Institute at Harvard University
Matthew Kaminski, global editor of POLITICO and the founding editor of POLITICO’s European edition.
Balázs Jarábik, nonresident scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Andrew S. Weiss, James Family chair and vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
2. A New Approach to Preventing Extremism in Fragile States| Friday, April 26, 2019 | 10:00 am – 11:30pm| United States Institute of Peace | 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20037 |Register here|
Congress charged the U.S. Institute of Peace, an independent, bipartisan leader in reducing and preventing conflict, with convening The Task Force on Extremism in Fragile States. The Task Force has developed a proposal for a new cost-effective, evidence-based, and coordinated preventive approach. Modest U.S. investments—if they are strategic, coordinated, well-timed, and sustained—can empower communities over time to better resist extremism on their own and motivate international donors to support this cause. Join us as we wrestle with the challenge of supporting fragile states to build resiliency, sustain progress and prevent future threats and instability.
Agenda
9:30am – 10:30am – Recommendations of the Task Force on Extremism in Fragile States
Secretary Madeleine Albright, Chair, Albright Stonebridge Group
Stephen Hadley, Chair of the Board of Directors, U.S. Institute of Peace
Governor Tom Kean, Co-Chair, Task Force on Extremism in Fragile States
Nancy Lindborg, President, U.S. Institute of Peace
Michael Singh, Lane-Swig Senior Fellow and Managing Director, The Washington Institute
David Ignatius, moderator, Columnist and Author, The Washington Post
10:30am – 11:30am – Prioritizing Prevention Across the United States Government
Chris Milligan, Counselor, The U.S. Agency for International Development
Lieutenant General Michael Nagata, Director for Strategic Operational Planning, National Counterterrorism Center
Alina Romanowski, Principal Deputy Coordinator for Counterterrorism, U.S. Department of State
11:30am – 11:45am – Coffee Break
11:45am – 12:45pm – International Prevention Efforts
Ambassador Diane Corner, Counsellor of Foreign and Security Policy, British Embassy in Washington, D.C.
Ambassador Martin Dahinden, Ambassador of Switzerland to the United States of America
Habib Mayar, Deputy General Secretary of the g7+
Ulrika Modéer, UN Assistant Secretary-General and Director of UNDP’s Bureau for External Relations and Advocacy
Sam Worthington, President and CEO, InterAction
Raj Kumar, moderator, Founding President and Editor-in-Chief, Devex
3. Blind Spots: America and the Palestinians, From Balfour to Trump| Wednesday, April 24, 2019 | 9:30 am – 11:00pm| Brooking Institute | 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20037 |Register here|.
In an exciting new book, “Blind Spot: America and the Palestinians, From Balfour to Trump,” Brookings Nonresident Fellow Khaled Elgindy takes a historical view of America’s engagement with the Palestinians and Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking. He argues that while the United States has often presented itself as an honest broker and the one power best suited to mediate peace between Israelis and Palestinians, Washington’s ability to serve as an effective peace broker has been hampered by a “blind spot” in two critical areas: Israeli power and Palestinian politics. The Trump administration’s policies, such as moving the American embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, are only the most extreme manifestations of this age-old, American blind spot, Elgindy writes.
Agenda
Daniel L. Byman, Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for Middle East Policy
4. The Future of Afghanistan: Ongoing Negotiations and the Role of Regional Allies| Monday, April 22,2019 | 11:00 am | The Atlantic Council | 1030 15th St NW, Washington, DC 20005|Register here|
The Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center is pleased to invite you to “The Future of Afghanistan: Ongoing Negotiations and the Role of Regional Partners,” a panel discussion on the progress of ongoing negotiations between the United States and the Taliban, and the role of regional partners.
The status of a future peace settlement between the Afghan government and the Taliban remains uncertain, even as negotiations with the United States move forward. The role of US partners, including coalition allies, Pakistan and India will heavily influence the shape and success of any future political resolution in Afghanistan. This panel discussion will explore the contours of these relationships and the potential roles regional partners may play in supporting, or undermining, an eventual Afghan peace process.
Agenda
Moderated by:
Fatemeh Aman, Nonresident Senior Fellow, South Asia Center, Atlantic Council
A conversation with:
Daud Khattak, Senior Editor, Radio Mashaal, Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty
Ambassador Omar Samad, Nonresident Senior Fellow, South Asia Center, Atlantic Council
Michael Kugelman, Deputy Director and Senior Associate for South Asia, Wilson Center
5. Turning up the Heat: U.S. Designates Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a Terrorist Organization| Wednesday, April 24, 2019 | 11:45 am – 1:30pm| Hudson Institute | 1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 400 Washington, DC 20004|Register here|
Hudson Institute will host a panel to discuss the implications of the State Department’s recent designation of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as foreign terrorist organization (FTO). Panelists will include FDD Senior Fellow Behnam Ben Taleblu; Atlantic Council nonresident Senior Fellow Nader Uskowi; the New Iran’s Alireza Nader; and Hudson Senior Fellow Michael Pregent. The BBC’s Suzanne Kianpour will moderate the discussion.
On April 15, the U.S. formally designated the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as an FTO. The designation groups the IRGC with terrorist organizations like ISIS and al Qaeda, and marks the first time a government entity has been added to the list. The U.S. hopes that given the group’s significant political and economic influence, the designation will ratchet up pressure on Iran and blunt the country’s primary instrument of state-sponsored terrorism. Will international allies and partners abide by the U.S. designation? Will Iran fold to this newfound pressure, or will it end up being more resilient than the U.S. perceives?
Speakers
Suzanne Kianpour Moderator, Foreign Affairs and Political Journalist, BBC
Mike Pregent, Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute,
Behnam Ben Taleblu, Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Nader Uskowi, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, Atlantic Council
Alireza Nader, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, New Iran
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Libyans be damned
Reversing long-standing policy of supporting United Nations efforts in Libya, President Trump last week opted instead to back Khalifa Haftar’s “Libyan National Army” march on Tripoli from his Benghazi stronghold. Haftar is a former Libyan army officer who spent two decades in Virginia and became a US citizen. Trump says he backs Haftar’s counterterrorism efforts. Haftar’s idea of counterterrorism is killing anyone who opposes him. He doesn’t even pretend to be pro-democratic and is seeking to install himself as Qaddafi’s successor.
Few Libya-watchers think Haftar has the firepower to take Tripoli by force. So far militia resistance appears to be slowing his advance, causing him to resort to airpower presumably provided by his Emirati or possibly Saudi backers. Qatar and Turkey will be supporting Islamist forces intent on holding on to Tripoli, where the UN-backed Government of National Accord (GNA) is hunkered down. It is no paragon: it has failed to gain control even of the capital and has precious little sway in the rest of the country.
Trump’s move to back Haftar was a surprise only because the President had previously indicated the US would not get involved in Libya but instead leave it to the UN and the Europeans. That a would-be autocrat would appeal to Trump should be no surprise, especially one the Saudis and Emiratis support. The French and Russians will be pleased, as they too support Haftar, but the Italians were backing the GNA. Once again, Trump has demonstrated that he is prepared to turn US policy 180 degrees on a dime, especially to favor an autocrat, thus ensuring that everyone who deals with Washington–especially those committed to democracy–needs to hedge.
Washington will presumably let the Emiratis and Saudis try to ensure Haftar’s victory. US forces, not previously known to have been in Libya, have supposedly withdrawn, though it is of course possible that they are still clandestinely shifting to help Haftar. The Emiratis and Saudis have proven inept at best, catastrophically incapable at worst, in Yemen, where their intervention against the Houthi rebellion has stretched into a years-long war of attrition, rendering most of the country in desperate need of humanitarian assistance. Something similar could of course happen in Libya.
If instead Haftar is able to conquer the capital and move on to the west, the picture will be different but not likely pretty. Islamist militias will go underground to continue their resistance and Haftar will react with the kind of blunt force used in Benghazi, where he demonstrated little concern for collateral damage to civilians. Even as civil war has raged on and off over the past eight years, Libyans have enjoyed self-government at the municipal level, where they are in the midst of holding elections. It seems unlikely Haftar, if he succeeds in chasing the GNA from Tripoli, will tolerate even that much democracy. He has been actively stacking local governments in areas he already controls.
President Trump certainly won’t be one to press Haftar, who if he wins will be beholden to the absolute monarchies in Abu Dhabi and Riyadh. The President has found another autocrat he likes, in addition to Kim Jong-un, Xi Jinping, Rodrigo Duterte, Vladimir Putin, and others. Libyans be damned. Full steam ahead.
RSS - Posts
