Month: November 2019
Peace Picks November 10-16
Beirut 1958: How America’s Wars in the Middle East Began|November 13, 2019|10:00AM-11:30AM|Brookings Institution|Falk Auditorium, 1775 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington DC, 20036|Register Here
On July 15, 1958, U.S. Marines assaulted the beach in Beirut, Lebanon. The amphibious attack was the first combat operation in the Middle East by American troops. It followed months of intrigue, espionage and conspiracy leading to a bloody coup in Baghdad, Iraq the day before the Marines landed. Now more than 60 years later, the United States is engaged in multiple combat operations across the region — seemingly endless wars.
In his new book, “Beirut 1958,” Senior Fellow Bruce Riedel tells the story of the mission and draws lessons on how to better deal with future challenges in the region. Please join the Center for Middle East Policy on Wednesday, November 13 for the launch of “Beirut 1958,” featuring a discussion with Riedel, moderated by Senior Fellow Suzanne Maloney. Following the discussion, the participants will take questions from the audience.
The Middle East in 2020 – What Are the Pathways to Stability?|November 13, 2019|9:30AM-4:00PM|Middle East Institute|JW Marriott Washington DC|1331 Pennsylvania Ave NW|Washington DC 20004|Register Here
The conference will feature a series of panels, one-on-one conversations, and a debate examining key priorities for reducing threats and building long-term stability in the MENA region given rising tensions and an increasingly unpredictable environment.
9:00-9:30am | Arrival and Registration
9:30-9:35am | Welcome Remarks
Paul Salem
President, MEI
9:40-10:00am | Keynote Address: General (ret.) Joseph Votel on U.S. Middle East Priorities
10:00-11:00am | Panel: Are there Pathways to De-escalation in the Middle East?
H.E. Mohammed Baharoon
Director General, b’huth
LTG. (ret.) Michael Nagata
Former director of Strategic Operational Planning, National Counterterrorism Center; Hanada Bridge, LLC
Randa Slim
Senior fellow and director, conflict resolution and Track II Dialogues, MEI
Gonul Tol
Director, Turkish studies, MEI
Muna Shikaki, moderator
Correspondent, Al Arabiya
11:00am-11:15am | Coffee Break
11:15am-11:45am | Debate: How Will the Next Administration Confront Challenges and Meet Opportunities in the Middle East?
The Honorable Jim Moran
Former member of Congress, Virginia’s 8th Congressional District
Michael Pregent
Senior fellow, Hudson Institute
Randa Slim, moderator
Senior fellow and director, conflict resolution and Track II Dialogues, MEI
11:50am-12:20pm | Panel: How Can MENA Countries Reduce the Threat of Cyber Attacks?
Steph Shample
Senior analyst, Flashpoint
Edwin Wilson
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Security
Richard A. Clarke, moderator
Chairman, Board of Governors, MEI
12:20-1:00pm | Lunch buffet
1:00-1:50pm | Panel: How is the Middle East Engaging with the Broader World?
H.E. David Bakradze
Ambassador of the Republic of Georgia to the United States
Intissar Fakir
Fellow, Middle East program, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Deborah Lehr
Vice Chairman and Executive Director, Paulson Institute
Aparna Pande
Director, Initiative on the Future of India and South Asia, Hudson Institute
David Lawler, moderator
Editor, Axios World Stream
1:55-2:45pm | Panel: What are the Key Economic Challenges Facing the Middle East in 2020?
Jihad Azour
Director, Middle East and Central Asia, International Monetary Fund
Herman Franssen
Scholar, MEI
Habib Kairouz
Managing partner, Rho Partners
Delila Khaled
Senior advisor, Laurel Strategies
Adva Saldinger, moderator
Associate editor, Devex
2:45-3:00pm | Coffee Break
3:00pm-3:50pm | Panel: How are Arab Youth Innovating and Mobilizing for Change?
Sami Hourani
Founder and CEO, Forsa for Education
Joyce Karam
Corresponent, The National UAE
Shady Khalil
Managing partner, Greenish
Yasmeen Mjalli
Founder, BabyFist
Dina Sherif, moderator
Founder and CEO, Ahead of the Curve
4:00pm | Closing Remarks
2019 Czech and Slovak Freedom Lecture: 30 Years of Czech and Slovak Freedom|November 13, 2019|12:00PM-1:30PM|Woodrow Wilson Center|6th Floor, Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, One Woodrow Wilson Plaza, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington DC 20004|Register Here
This year‘s Freedom Lecture is co-hosted by the Embassy of the Czech Republic and the Embassy of the Slovak Republic. Both a Czech and a Slovak speaker are featured in order to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the Velvet Revolution, which saw the return of freedom and democracy to both countries on November 17, 1989.
Speakers
Introduction
- Ivan Korčok Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Slovak Republic to the United States
- Hynek Kmoníček Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Czech Republic to the United States
Keynote
- Katarína Cséfalvayová Chairwoman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, National Council of the Slovak Republic
- Simon Pánek Former Czech student activist during the Velvet Revolution in 1989; Executive Director and Co-Founder of the largest Czech humanitarian organization, People in Need
Moderator
- Blair A. Ruble Distinguished FellowFormer Wilson Center Vice President for Programs (2014-2017); Director of the Comparative Urban Studies Program/Urban Sustainability Laboratory (1992-2017); Director of the Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies (1989-2012) and Director of the Program on Global Sustainability and Resilience (2012-2014)
Understanding the New Wave of Arab Protests: An Expert Panel|November 14, 2019|10:30AM-12:00PM|Woodrow Wilson Center|6th Floor, Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, One Woodrow Wilson Plaza, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington DC 20004|Register Here
A new series of protests and demonstrations has erupted across the Middle East and North Africa over the past 9 months. In Iraq, Lebanon, Sudan, Algeria, Jordan, and Egypt, these protests were largely triggered by dire socio-economic conditions, corruption and a sense of economic and political disenfranchisement with outright calls for regime change in the case of Algeria, Sudan, and very recently in Lebanon.
Join our discussion with a panel of Wilson and regional experts to analyze these events and understand difference and similarities between the present wave of protests and those that erupted in 2011.
Speakers
Introduction
- Merissa Khurma Project Manager, Middle East Special Initiatives
Moderator
- David Ottaway Middle East FellowMiddle East Specialist and Former Washington Post Correspondent
Panelists
- Rend Al-Rahim Co-founder and President of the Iraq Foundation
- Marina Ottaway Middle East Fellow and Former Senior Research Associate and Head of the Middle East Program, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Hussain Abdul-Hussain Washington Bureau Chief, Al Rai Newspaper
Protests in Chile: The Path Forward|November 14, 2019|12:00PM-1:00PM|Woodrow Wilson Center|6th Floor, Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, One Woodrow Wilson Plaza, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington DC 20004|Register Here
Since mid-October, Chile has been rocked by massive protests—some marked by extreme violence, but the vast majority of them peaceful and historic in numbers. Triggered by an increase in subway fares, the protests have laid bare deep inequalities and frustration over unmet needs in one of Latin America’s most prosperous countries. The government of President Sebastián Piñera has called for a dialogue with opposition parties over measures to address the crisis. Talks are ongoing.
Please join us for a discussion with noted Chilean experts over the underlying causes of unrest and, just as important, the path forward. Will the dialogue between the government and the opposition parties be successful? What reforms are on the table? Are there grounds for consensus, and if so, over what? How quickly will the legislature respond to measures introduced by the government or the opposition? How best can constitutional issues be addressed? How will the government address future challenges to public order in the midst of widespread criticism over human rights abuses committed by government forces?
Speakers
Moderator
- Cynthia J. Arnson Director, Latin American Program
Speakers
- Felipe Agüero FellowAssociate Professor, Department of International Studies, University of Miami
- Lucía Dammert Global FellowAssociate Professor, Universidad de Santiago de Chile; Expert on public security issues in Latin America
A Conversation with First Lady of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan Rula Ghani: How to Protect Afghan Women’s Rights and Build Consensus for Peace|November 14, 2019|10:00AM-11:30AM|United States Institute of Peace|2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington DC 20037|Register Here
To explore the importance of Afghan women in building a sustainable peace process, H.E. First Lady Rula Ghani will join USIP for a timely discussion on her role in the Afghan Women’s National Consensus for Peace (Ejma-e-Mili), as well as other current events on peace, security, and governance in Afghanistan. Following a keynote address by the First Lady, there will be a moderated question and answer session.
Speakers
H.E Rula Ghani
First Lady of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan
Nancy Lindborg, moderator
President and CEO, U.S Institute of Peace
Ending Endless War: Lessons from the Counter-ISIS War|November 15, 2019|12:15PM-1:45PM|New America|740 15th St NW #900, Washington DC 20005|Register Here
In December 2011, the last American combat troops left Iraq. The Obama administration celebrated the withdrawal as the completion of a campaign promise to end the Iraq war. Fewer than three years later, the same administration returned the U.S. to war in Iraq to fight ISIS and then extended the war into Syria. In his new report, Decisionmaking in the Counter-ISIS War, New America Senior Policy Analyst David Sterman examines how the United States returned to war in Iraq, the role of preventive war logic in that decision, and what lessons the counter-ISIS war holds for efforts to end America’s seemingly endless counter-terrorism wars.
To discuss the report, New America welcomes Dr. Joshua Geltzer, a New America International Security program fellow and former senior director for counter-terrorism at the National Security Council, and Dr. Alexandra Stark, senior researcher with New America’s Political Reform program. Dr. Stark holds a PhD from the government department at Georgetown University. She was previously a research fellow at the Middle East Initiative of the Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, and Minerva/Jennings Randolph Peace Scholar at the United States Institute of Peace.
Participants:
David Sterman, @Dsterms
Author, Decisionmaking in the Counter-ISIS War
Senior Policy Analyst, New America International Security program
Dr. Joshua Geltzer, @jgeltzer
Fellow, New America International Security program
Former Senior Director for Counter-Terrorism, National Security Council
Dr. Alexandra Stark
Senior Researcher, New America Political Reform program
Moderator:
Melissa Salyk-Virk
Senior Policy Analyst, New America International Security program
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Friday stock taking
It’s Friday, so let’s take a look at how effectively the Trump Administration has dealt with world and domestic events this week while it obsesses over impeachment:
- The North Koreans continue to launch increasingly capable ballistic missiles.
- While suffering from reimposed sanctions, Iran is defying the US and increasing uranium enrichment beyond the limits specified the nuclear deal the US withdrew from.
- The Iranian attack on Saudi Arabia’s oil production facilities has elicited no visible response from the US or Saudi Arabia, which is joining the United Arab Emirates in playing footsie with Iran.
- While failing to remove from Syria all the troops Trump said would be withdrawn, the US has allowed Turkey to take over a buffer zone along its border with Syria, leading to large-scale displacement of people there. Russia has also gained a foothold in northeastern Syria, as has the Assad regime.
- The trade war with China drags on, with the US trade deficit ballooning and Asian partners and allies doubting US commitments in the region.
- Venezuelan autocrat Maduro has survived despite American pressure, as has the Communist regime in Cuba and Evo Morales’ rule in Bolivia.
- In Europe, French President Macron is describing NATO as “brain dead” because of Trump’s lack of commitment to it and Trump’s pal UK Prime Minister Johnson is being forced into an election to try to confirm his Brexit plan, which Trump has supported.
- In the Balkans, the Administration has confused everyone with the appointment of two special envoys whose relationship to each other and to US policy is opaque.
- That’s all without even mentioning Ukraine, where State Department officials have confirmed that President Trump tried to extort an investigation of his political rivals from newly elected President Zelensky in exchange for Congressionally approved military aid.
The home front is even worse:
- A New York State Court has forced Trump into a $2 million settlement in which he has admitted improper and fraudulent use of his family foundation.
- Republicans lost the governorship in Kentucky and control of both houses of the Virginia assembly in off-year elections earlier this week. Congressional Republicans are nervous.
- President Trump’s personal lawyer affirmed that everything he did in Ukraine was to serve his client’s personal interests, a statement that confirms public assets were used for private purposes.
- The Attorney General, a stalwart defender of his boss, has declined to make a public statement supporting Trump’s claim that he did nothing wrong in his infamous phone call with President Zelensky.
- The House Democrats are piling up subpoenas that the White House is ignoring, heightening the likelihood that obstruction of Congressional oversight will be added to the impeachment charges and limiting the news to the sharp critiques of non-White House officials.
- The economy is slowing, especially in some “swing” districts vital to Trump’s hopes for a win in the electoral college in 2020, when he is sure to lose the popular vote once again, likely by a wider margin than in 2016.
I suppose it could get worse, and likely will. But it has been a long time since we’ve seen an American Administration in worse shape than this.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, November 8
– The Guardian has a good piece explaining the election rules in the various states.
– I’d also draw your attention to the small number of states that still allow straight-ticket voting. It’s surprising that so few do in this era of hyperpartisanship.
– NYT suggests the US-China trade war is ending, but WSJ and Peter Navarro don’t agree.
– Excellent article in Atlantic explaining how isolated Trump is in his presidency.
– There is some movement on budget reform.
– Here’s the devastating memo criticizing the green light to Turkey to invade Syria.
– Here’s the NYT review of the Anonymous author’s critique of Trump.
I’d add: the President has been fined $2 million for blatant misuse of his family-controlled charitable foundation.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. If you want to get it directly, To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army November 7
– VP Pence’s staff worked to shift US aid to Christian groups.
– Boris Johnson backs away from Trump.
– His own parliamentary seat is in jeopardy.
– SecDef Esper pleads with president not to interfere in military justice cases.
– DOD is working out rules to protect Syrian oil.
– China has a solution: limit gamers to 90 minutes per day.
– NYT describes 2 schools of thought on political polarization.
– To sort out conflicting polls, 538 has ratings on various pollsters.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. If you want to get it directly, To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Toast
In an apparent attempt to strengthen the claim he should not have to testify in Congress, Rudy Giuliani tweeted yesterday:
The investigation I conducted concerning 2016 Ukrainian collusion and corruption, was done solely as a defense attorney to defend my client against false charges, that kept changing as one after another were disproven.
He is essentially here claiming attorney-client privilege as the President’s personal, even if unpaid, lawyer.
Unfortunately for Trump, this tweet also confirms that Giuliani was using US government assets as leverage to encourage the Ukrainians to do something that was entirely in the personal interest of his client.
Boom. That is an impeachable offense if there ever was one. No US government employee would be allowed to stay in her or his job if they tried to use government assets as leverage for personal gain. This is the very definition of corruption.
Now the Republicans will argue that even if Trump did it, and is impeached for doing it, it doesn’t merit his removal from office. After all, it didn’t work: the Ukrainians never undertook the investigation demanded and nevertheless got the assistance the Congress had appropriated. How anyone can imagine that a corrupt attempt at extortion for personal gain is not sufficient cause for removal from office, when some of the same people thought lying about an affair with an intern was, is beyond me.
All this will become clearer in the next few weeks as the impeachment process goes public, with testimony that will tag Trump unequivocally as a corrupt extortionist. The Administration is planning to respond by sullying the reputations of those who testify against the President. It will be hard with a boy scout like Bill Taylor, but Lt. Col. Vindman is in the crosshairs. After all, he was born in the Soviet Union and is Jewish to boot.
Here, for those who need a reminder, is the relevant legal provision on election contributions, 52 U.S. Code § 30121 (with thanks to Joe Foley for providing it):
(a) Prohibition It shall be unlawful for—
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make—
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or
(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.
I don’t think the election law violation per se would necessarily be sufficient for removal from office, but the extortion is.
More important: the off-cycle elections Tuesday show Trump weakening significantly, particularly in suburban areas and with women. Congressional Republicans joined the President yesterday in celebrating his success in packing the Federal courts with often unqualified nominees who are reliable “conservatives,” meaning that they will favor business interests, oppose abortion, and give Christian evangelicals the benefit of the doubt. The Republicans in the Senate are still wedded to Trump, but if ever they conclude they will lose both White House and Senate majority if he heads the ticket next year, he is toast.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The nonproliferation regime is tottering
Pantelis Ikonomou, a former IAEA inspector, writes:
Turkish President Erdogan plainly stated on September 24 at the UNGA: “Nuclear power should be either free for all or banned.” He had already declared in Turkey that he “cannot accept” that a few powerful states have nuclear weapons on missiles while the rest of the world is denied the right to have them.
Erdogan’s words raised worries internationally. But to assess the fate of such statements two sets of facts need to be taken into account. First, the NPT’s limitations and secondly, political defects in the nonproliferation regime.
As for the NPT limitations, they are:
- Breakout: any peaceful nuclear program with advanced fuel cycle facilities automatically includes a possible military dimension. It would only take a decision to “breakout,” as done by North Korea in 2003, to turn a peaceful program into a military one. Turkey does have an ambitious nuclear plan, yet the country is far away from having the critical nuclear installations and their peripherals, specifically uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing facilities, which would make meaningful a ‘‘breakout.’’
- Sneaking out: an NPT signatory could attempt to develop nuclear technology clandestinely. The IAEA inspectors have intrusive means of monitoring and verifying such equipment.
- Buying the bomb: a nuclear weapons state could conceivably sell nuclear weapons, not only to Turkey but conceivably also to other states in the region. Turkey has reputedly already bought nuclear technology through the A.Q. Khan network.
The political defects that could inspire Erdogan include:
- The international community failure to terminate the North Korean nuclear program, which demonstrates serious weakness.
- The reactivation of Iran’s nuclear program, precipitated by US withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action without any peaceful planning.
- The risky call of President Trump to allied countries to develop their own nuclear deterrents, which jeopardizes the NPT regimae and the IAEA’s mandate.
- The existing legal and political disparity that derives from non-universal adherence to the NPT. As long as some countries manage to stay outside the NPT and yet possess nuclear weapons, as India, Pakistan, and allegedly Israel have done, others might use the logical/ethical excuse to develop their own nuclear weapon programs.
- The continuing failure of the five nuclear powers inside the NPT to fulfill their commitment towards nuclear disarmament expands the gap of confidence between the few nuclear “haves” and the many “non-haves”. This gap provides support to future “nuclear weapon dreamers”.
- The possibility that the US might remove from Turkey the nuclear weapons stationed there for over six decades in Turkey.
All the above limitations and defects in the global nuclear non-proliferation architecture have shaped a fertile global climate for growing proliferation ambitions. Erdogan is not alone. There are others in the Middle East and Northeast Asia who would like to join the nuclear club.
RSS - Posts
