Month: September 2020
Violence won, debate lost, election at risk
Yesterday I wrote about the Trumpians’ inclination toward violence. Last night the President himself confirmed that inclination and threatened its use. Here is the relevant portion from the transcript:
Chris Wallace: (41:33)
You have repeatedly criticized the vice president for not specifically calling out Antifa and other left wing extremist groups. But are you willing tonight to condemn white supremacists and militia group and to say that they need to stand down and not add to the violence in a number of these cities as we saw in Kenosha and as we’ve seen in Portland.President Donald J. Trump: (41:57)
Sure, I’m will to do that.Chris Wallace: (41:59)
Are you prepared specifically to do it.President Donald J. Trump: (42:00)
I would say almost everything I see is from the left wing not from the right wing.Chris Wallace: (42:04)
But what are you saying?President Donald J. Trump: (42:06)
I’m willing to do anything. I want to see peace.Chris Wallace: (42:08)
Well, do it, sir.Vice President Joe Biden: (42:09)
Say it, do it say it.President Donald J. Trump: (42:10)
What do you want to call them? Give me a name, give me a name, go ahead who do you want me to condemn.Chris Wallace: (42:14)
White supremacist and right-wing militia.President Donald J. Trump: (42:18)
Proud Boys, stand back and stand by. But I’ll tell you what somebody’s got to do something about Antifa and the left because this is not a right wing problem this is a left wing.
This of course is a non-denunciation, since he not only asked them to stand back (not down) but also stand by, in case he needs them. Trump is clearly threatening violence if he loses this election, using right-wing armed groups.
Who are the Proud Boys? Here is the Southern Poverty Law Center’s description:
Their disavowals of bigotry are belied by their actions: rank-and-file Proud Boys and leaders regularly spout white nationalist memes and maintain affiliations with known extremists. They are known for anti-Muslim and misogynistic rhetoric. Proud Boys have appeared alongside other hate groups at extremist gatherings like the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville. Indeed, former Proud Boys member Jason Kessler helped to organize the event, which brought together Klansmen, antisemites, Southern racists, and militias. Kessler was only “expelled” from the group after the violence and near-universal condemnation of the Charlottesville rally-goers.
These are the racists Trump regards as “fine people.” He wants them ready for action.
Apart from this presidential endorsement of rightwing perpetrators of racist violence, there is little to be said about last night’s debate. It was less a verbal brawl than an inarticulate tangle. Chris Wallace, one of the few Fox News people who has maintained some shreds of dignity, was ineffective in separating the contenders. He needed control of their microphones. He didn’t have it.
No one should care much about the debate, but the risk to the election is serious. I expect to see armed right-wing groups trying to intimidate voters, bully election commissions, and even incite rioting. Trump has no intention of leaving office if there is the slightest doubt about the outcome. He will seek to prolong the process with court cases, all the while complaining that it is taking too long and suggesting ways in which his supporters can cause further delay and confusion.
There is only one remedy for this: an overwhelming majority for Biden. I’ve already voted. If you are a US citizen, I hope you have too.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, September 30
After last night’s dispiriting display of socially-distanced mud wrestling, let’s turn to something completely different.
Two bipartisan congressional reports on important national security matters: a House panel on future defense and a task force report on arms control.
WSJ reports how China is taking control of various international organizations.
A retired Navy captain writes about Chinese actions in the Taiwan strait.
US Navy has moved ship to help Greece against Turkey.
SAIS profs Barno and Bensahel preview their new book about military adaptation.
Russian Duma goes remote because of Covid infections.
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. 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:
Trumpworld is preparing for violence
Quinta Jurecic at The Atlantic nails my malaise: President Trump creates a lot of daily brouhaha but there is little to be said about him other than the obvious. He is a four-flushing misogynist and white supremacist grifter. We already knew he hadn’t paid income taxes for many years, but the details grab headlines: $70k in deductions for his hairdresser and more than that for consulting by his daughter-in-law when she was already on the payroll as an employee.
Those details are trivial, however tantalizing. Jurecic urges us not to get caught up in them but rather to think and write about the world that made Trump possible. I see and hear little of that world. In my corner of DC, where I walk more than 7 miles per day, I haven’t seen a single Trump lawn sign in six months. So I was struck when this epistle crossed my desk yesterday:
If you are a liberal who can’t stand Trump, and cannot possibly fathom why conservatives would ever vote for him, let me finally fill you in. It’s not that we love Donald Trump so much. It’s that we can’t stand you! And we will do whatever it takes — even if that means electing a rude, obnoxious, unpredictable narcissist (your words, not ours) to the office of President of the United States — because the biggest threat to this nation is you.
How is that possible you might ask? Well, you have done everything in your power to destroy our country; from tearing down the police, tearing down our history, to tearing down our borders, and systematically destroying our schools while brainwashing our kids into believing socialism is the answer to anything (despite being an unmitigated failure everywhere). You have demonized religion and faith, while glorifying abortion, violence, and thug culture.
You call us racists because we expect everyone, of any skin color, to follow our laws equally. You tell us that our tolerance and acceptance of lifestyles we don’t agree with isn’t nearly enough. No, we must “celebrate” any lifestyle choice or scienceless gender option you throw our direction, or you think it’s fine to calls us homophobic or some other degrading slur you decide is okay to call us. Ironically all while lecturing us on hate speech. While you gaslight us about 52 genders, polyamory, grown men in dresses sharing public locker rooms with little girls, and normalize the sexualization of young children, you simultaneously ridicule us for having the audacity to wish someone a “Merry Christmas” or hang a flag on the 4th of July, stand for the national anthem, or (horror of horrors) don a MAGA hat in public. So much for your “tolerance.” (See why we think you are just hypocrites??)
We are not interested in the fact that you want to abolish free speech, unless we only agree with you. You can’t get the violence in the cities you manage under control, and yet you think you can unilaterally decide that 250 years of the right-to-bear-arms against a tyrannical or ineffective government should be abolished .
The screed goes on in that vein, making claims of victimhood and devotion to America values that can best be described as invented, if not entirely hallucinatory. I’m a political liberal and a Jew, the epitome of the people accused here, but I say Merry Christmas to those I think are Christian and hang an American flag on my house from Memorial Day to July 4.
Why does the right-wing invent this nonsense? Because that is how you justify denunciation of others: it’s really all self-defense. They feel accused, and they know that at least some of the accusations are on the mark, so they try to project back on the accusers all the criticisms, and then some.
Trump is a master of this stratagem. My correspondent cited above is a pale imitator. There is no effort at all in this language to appeal to someone on the other side of the political equation, or even the uncommitted. It is in the first instance intended to rouse the already faithful and get them to the polls. The longer term objective is to justify violence, as that line about bearing arms against the government suggests. There is no reference at all to the constitutionally required “well-ordered militia.” This is a threat of violence against the coming Biden administration and its supporters.
So when I do as Quinta suggests, I find at least part of the world that made Trump possible is one that is armed and regards itself as ready and willing to do violence against “ineffective” government if Trump is not re-elected. It pays no attention whatsoever to the long decline in violent crime in most American cities and pretends it knows far better how to govern them than the people elected to do so. Some of those arms will be used to try to intimidate voters who show up at the polls, which has already happened with early voting in Virginia. Does anyone doubt that they will also be used in the wake of an election defeat for Donald Trump? Trumpworld is preparing for violence.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Ecological threats to peace
A Look at the 2020 Ecological Threat Register and the Connection Between Conflict and Climate Change
Raging wildfires in Australia and the United States, locust plagues in the Horn of Africa and Mediterranean cyclones are only some of the natural disasters that set 2020 apart as an unusually severe year for environmental catastrophes. It is becoming increasingly important to understand how the effects of climate change can and will affect state and regional stability. The Ecological Threat Register (ETR), produced by the Institute for Economics and Peace, shows the relationship between ecological threats and state institutional resilience in remarkable detail. USIP hosted a panel of experts to discuss the report’s findings.
Sagal Abshir: Non-Resident Fellow, Center on International Cooperation, New York University
Michael Collins: Executive Director, Institute for Economics & Peace
Dr. Joseph Hewitt: Vice President for Policy, Learning and Strategy, U.S. Institute of Peace
Dr. Catherine-Lune Grayson: Policy Advisor, International Committee of the Red Cross
Tyler Beckelman, (moderator): Director, International Partnerships, U.S. Institute of Peace
Natural Disasters Not the Primary Risk
The report’s findings were grim. As reported by Michael Collins, by 2050 it is predicted that 6.5 billion people will be exposed to high-intensity ecological threats. The 19 most exposed countries are home to 2.1 billion people. It is also estimated that 1.2 billion (an astounding one out of five) people risk displacement due to ecological disasters by that same year. The regions most at risk include the Sahel region, Southern Africa and the Middle East/Central Asia.
Ecological threats were grouped into the following categories: resource scarcity, food security, water stress, and natural disasters. Of these categories, water stress was found to be the most impactful, potentially affecting up to 2.6 billion people. How will these stresses affect global stability?
State Fragility and Climate Change: the Perfect Storm?
The unfortunate reality, as Collins describes, is that many of the states most at risk are also the least capable of addressing these threats. Lack of robust government institutions, financial resources, and conflict-free environments mean that these states are more prone to collapse, even if ecological threats are not as severe as those of more developed countries. To make matters worse, many of the least peaceful states are also the most prone to ecological threats.
Abshir corroborated these findings with her own experience in the Horn of Africa. She reports that climate change is causing regional instability. Unpredictable precipitation causes many farmers to lose their livelihoods, making them more susceptible to radicalization. In addition, she reports that conflict and climate change are self-reinforcing. For instance, the conflict in Yemen inhibits locust-control measures usually present in peacetime. The resulting swell in locust swarms causes economic devastation on both sides of the Persian Gulf, fueling further conflict.
State Resilience: Embracing Complexity
Grayson suggests that part of the problem lies in many of these states’ inability to take preventive measures. Instead, they are locked in reactive policies that do not address the heart of climate change issues. She advocates for a human security-styled approach, involving academics, politicians, the private sector, economic development specialists, and more. All three of the speakers agreed that well-functioning governments are absolutely essential, in addition to diversifying strategies of state resilience. Abshir noted that, as part of an effective plan for state resilience, more attention must be devoted to addressing climate change on a regional level, not just state-by-state. Grayson aptly concludes that tackling state resilience to climate change requires complex solutions and that embracing complexity may mitigate the chaos caused by ecological threats.
To watch the event in full, click here.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks | September 28 – October 2, 2020
Notice: Due to recent public health concerns, upcoming events are only available via live stream.
1. Political, Security, and Public Health Dimensions in the Horn of Africa | September 28, 2020 | 3:00 – 4:30 PM EDT | Brookings | Register Here
The Horn of Africa continues to face multiple challenges from persistent terrorism and militancy threats to significant global warming repercussions. A country of significant U.S. and international state-building and counterterrorism investments, Somalia continues to struggle with increasing al-Shabaab militancy, a security situation in which Ethiopia, Kenya, and other members of the African Union Mission in Somalia play important counterinsurgency roles. Yet Somalia and Ethiopia are also undergoing large and challenging political transitions. Ethiopia, too, faces the rise of escalating intra-ethnic tensions and political violence. The entire region has become a place of difficult competition among regional and great powers. Layered over these issues, the coronavirus pandemic has devastated local economies, exacerbating already high levels of poverty. Moreover, it has further destabilized fragile, fractious, and explosive political processes.
On September 28, the Africa Security Initiative at Brookings will hold a panel discussion to explore these complex and overlapping issues. The panel will feature Director of Programmes of the United Nations University’s Centre for Policy Research Adam Day, Brookings Senior Fellow Vanda Felbab-Brown, United States Institute of Peace Senior Advisor Payton Knopf, Institute for Security Studies Senior Researcher Allan Ngari, and Brookings Nonresident Fellow Zach Vertin. Brookings Senior Fellow Michael O’Hanlon will moderate the discussion.
Speakers:
Adam Day: Director of Programmes – Centre for Policy Research, United Nations University
Vanda Felbab-Brown: Co-Director – Africa Security InitiativeSenior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for 21st Century Security and Intelligence
Payton Knopf: Senior Advisor – United States Institute of Peace
Allan Ngari: Senior Researcher, Complex Threats in Africa Programme – Institute for Security Studies
Zach Vertin: Nonresident Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for 21st Century Security and Intelligence
Michael E. O’Hanlon (moderator): Director of Research – Foreign PolicyCo-Director, Security and StrategySenior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for 21st Century Security and IntelligenceThe Sydney Stein, Jr. Chair
2. 2020 Election Integrity and Foreign Interference | September 29, 2020 | 3:00 PM EDT | Atlantic Council | Register Here
As part of our Interference 2020 effort, please join the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab) on September 29 from 3:00 – 4:00 pm ET for a timely discussion of recent allegations of foreign interference in the 2020 election. The event will be opened by Craig Newmark, who has worked to uplift journalism in the face of disinformation, as well as connect efforts working to counter destabilizing foreign interference. The discussion will feature POLITICO’s Natasha Bertrand and David Sanger of the New York Times on their experience covering foreign interference ahead of the election and their process when assessing credibility of interference claims and attribution.
The DFRLab will also launch the Foreign Interference Attribution Tracker, an open-source database that captures allegations of foreign interference in U.S. elections. This event will offer a first look at the tool which is intended to build public attribution standards, provide an independent and reliable record of foreign interference in the 2020 election, serve as a resource for stakeholders about the evolving threat, and help to build public resilience against future efforts of foreign influence and disinformation.
Disinformation poses an existential threat to the future of American democracy. Nowhere is this more evident than in the question of foreign interference: a phenomenon which is heavily dependent on the spread of disinformation, yet which is also increasingly the subject of it. Over the past nine months, numerous U.S. officials, agencies, technology companies, and civil society organizations have identified instances of foreign disinformation campaigns and social media manipulation—often using drastically different standards of evidence to make their case.
We hope you will join us online and in the effort ahead of U.S. elections.
Speakers:
Craig Newmark: Founder: Craigslist, Craig Newmark Philanthropies
David Sanger: National Security Correspondent, New York Times
Natasha Bertrand: National Security Correspondent, POLITICO
Emerson Brooking: Resident Fellow, Digital Forensics Research Lab
Graham Brookie: Director and Managing Editor, Digital Forensics Research Lab
3. Domestic Terrorism and the U.S. Presidential Election | September 30, 2020 | 1:30 – 2:30 PM EDT | CSIS | Register Here
Please join the CSIS Transnational Threats Project and Defending Democratic Institutions Project on Wednesday, September 30, 2020 at 1:30pm to discuss the domestic terrorism threat in the United States before, during, and after the 2020 presidential election. The panel will examine the domestic terrorism threat landscape; the role of security and law enforcement; the use and misuse of military force, including legal provisions governing violence mitigation; the spread of extremism on digital platforms; and the role of foreign actors.
Seth Jones, CSIS Harold Brown Chair and Director of the Transnational Threats Project and Suzanne Spaulding, Senior Adviser for Homeland Security to the International Security Program will be joined by Brian Michael Jenkins, Senior Adviser to the RAND President, RAND as well as Cathy Lanier, Senior Vice President, Chief Security Officer, National Football League (NFL), and former Chief of Police, Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia.
Speakers:
Brian Michael Jenkins: Senior Adviser to the RAND President, RAND
Cathy Lanier: Senior Vice President, Chief Security Officer, National Football League (NFL); and former Chief of Police, Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia
4. Envisioning COVID-19’s Legacy on Global Stability and Security | September 30, 2020 | 2:00 – 3:00 PM EDT | American Enterprise Institute | Register Here
The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has taken lives, devastated the world economy, and threatened the fabric of politics around the world. As Henry Kissinger warned, “The coronavirus epidemic will forever alter the world order.” So what will a post-COVID-19 world order look like? In their new book, “COVID-19 and World Order” (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2020), AEI’s Hal Brands and Francis Gavin of Johns Hopkins University convened leading experts in policy, economics, governance, international security, medicine, and technology to consider the international aftermath of the pandemic.
Please join AEI’s Hal Brands, Kori Schake, and Colin Dueck for a panel discussion with Elizabeth Economy and Francis Gavin to examine COVID-19’s legacy on global stability and security.
Speakers:
Hal Brands: Resident Scholar, AEI
Elizabeth C. Economy: Senior Fellow for China Studies, Council on Foreign Relations
Francis J. Gavin: Director of Henry A. Kissinger Center for Global Affairs, Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies
Kori Schake: Director of Foreign and Defense Policy Studies, AEI
Colin Dueck: Visiting Scholar, AEI
5. The Future of US Policy in Afghanistan | September 30, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | Brookings | Register Here
Over the course of the past 19 years of war in Afghanistan, successive American presidents and presidential candidates have promised to make ending the war and bringing troops home a priority. While the U.S.-Taliban deal signed in February and the intra-Afghan peace talks that began earlier this month in Doha offer a path toward complete U.S. withdrawal, the talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government will be long and difficult and a successful deal between the two parties is far from guaranteed. Questions also remain regarding whether the Taliban did indeed cut off ties with al-Qaida, as outlined in the U.S.-Taliban deal.
On September 30, Foreign Policy at Brookings will host a virtual event to assess political and security developments in Afghanistan, U.S. interests in the country, and foreign policy options for the next administration to pursue.
Viewers can submit questions via email to events@brookings.edu or via Twitter at #Policy2020.
Policy 2020 events aim to empower voters with fact-based, data-driven, non-partisan information so they can better understand the policy matters discussed in the 2020 election.
Speakers:
Madiha Afzal: Assistant Professor, School of Public Policy – David M. Rubenstein Fellow: Foreign Policy, Center for 21st Century Security and Intelligence, Center for Middle East Policy
Vanda Felbab-Brown: Co-Director – Africa Security InitiativeSenior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for 21st Century Security and Intelligence
Michael O’Hanlon: Director of Research – Foreign PolicyCo-Director, Security and StrategySenior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for 21st Century Security and IntelligenceThe Sydney Stein, Jr. Chair
6. Turning Black to Green | September 30, 2020 | 17:00—18:00 EEST (UTC+3) | Carnegie Endowment for Peace | Register Here
While September 2020 marks 100 years since the Proclamation of the State of Greater Lebanon, the country today is plagued by a myriad of crises. This may prove a critical inflection point for Lebanon as a whole. The Carnegie Middle East Center and Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung are hosting a four-part series of panel discussions, which will look at where Lebanon stands on its Centennial, as well as the opportunities and challenges for the new century.
Lebanon is endowed with a rich and diverse national ecosystem, and has the potential and responsibility to fight pollution and deforestation, while investing in green spaces and clean energy. Moving forward, how can Lebanon ensure that the environment does not take a back seat in its national priorities, given the many other pressing issues facing the country today?
Join us on Tuesday, September 29 from 5:00-6:00 p.m. Beirut (GMT+3) for this fourth panel discussion on Lebanon’s environmental concerns and potential. The event will be held in English. Viewers may submit their questions via the Live Chat feature on YouTube during the livestream.
Speakers:
Ziad Abi Chaker: CEO of Cedar Environmental.
Marc Ayoub: research assistant with the Energy Policy and Security department at the American University of Beirut.
Nada Ghorayeb Zarour: former president of the Lebanese Green Party and the current head of its Arbitration Council.
Dalal Mawad: award-winning journalist and senior MENA video producer and correspondent with the Associated Press.
7. Regional Expansionism: Iran’s Militias in the Levant | October 1, 2020 | 1:00 PM EDT | Atlantic Council| Register Here
The United States’ policy towards Iran is one of the most contentious foreign policy issues currently dividing Democrats and Republicans in the 2020 election season. While containing Iran’s nuclear activity is a priority for both parties, it remains unclear how either one plans to deal with Iranian-backed militias, which remain a threat to lasting stability in the Middle East and a danger to America and its allies’ national security interests.
Speakers:
Joel Rayburn:Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Levant and Special Envoy for Syria, US Department of State
Michael B. Herzog: Milton Fine International Fellow, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Ariane Tabatabai: Middle East Fellow, Alliance for Securing Democracy, The German Marshall Fund of the United States
Hamdi Malik: Middle East Analyst; Contributor, Iran International TV; Al-Monitor
Navvar Saban: Conflict Analyst and Expert; Nonresident Researcher, Omran Center for Strategic Studies; Orsam Center
8. Election 2020 U.S. Foreign Policy Forum | October 1, 2020 | 3:00 PM EDT | Council on Foreign Relations | Register Here
Between the first and second presidential debates, please join us for a discussion of the foreign policy challenges awaiting the winner of the 2020 election and the critical issues for Americans to consider as they cast their vote this November.
This event is free and open to all. To register, please sign up on the Eventbrite page. Zoom access instructions will be emailed to registrants on the evening of Wednesday, September 30.
Speakers:
Reuben E. Brigety II: Vice-Chancellor and President, University of the South; Former U.S. Representative to the African Union and U.S. Permanent Representative to the UN Economic Commission for Africa (2013–2015)
Richard N. Haass: President, Council on Foreign Relations; Former Special Assistant to President George H.W. Bush (1989–1993)
Jami Miscik: CEO and Vice Chairman, Kissinger Associates, Inc.; Former Co-Chair, President’s Intelligence Advisory Board (2014–2017); Former Deputy Director of Intelligence, CIA (2002–2005)
Frances Fragos Townsend: Vice Chairman, General Counsel, and Chief Administration Officer, MacAndrews & Forbes Incorporated; Former Assistant to President George W. Bush for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and Chair, Homeland Security Council (2004–2008)
Juju Chang: Co-anchor, Nightline, ABC News
9. Overcoming Polarization in Ukraine | October 2, 2020 | 10:00 AM EDT | Atlantic Council| Register Here
Since Ukraine first gained independence in 1991, historical memory and national identity have been a point of contention and subject for manipulation. Thanks in good part to Kremlin aggression, a real sense of Ukrainian identity has emerged in the center and east of the country, too. Yet, the memory war that has characterized Ukraine for the past three decades has not disappeared. And it has been exacerbated by Kremlin disinformation campaigns. The Kremlin has inflamed controversy over historical narratives, weaponizing history in the unsuccessful effort to undermine Ukrainian statehood. A groundbreaking recent report by the London School of Economics and Political Science’s (LSE) Arena program, From ‘Memory Wars’ to a Common Future: Overcoming Polarisation in Ukraine, outlines the scope of challenges facing Ukraine’s information environment along with comprehensive recommendations for reducing societal polarization.
Speakers:
Anne Applebaum: Director, Arena, LSE
Natalia Gumenyuk: Co-founder, Public Interest Journalism Lab
Peter Pomerantsev: Visiting Senior Fellow, Institute of Global Affairs, LSE
Yevhen Hlibovytsky: Founder, ProMova
Ambassador John Herbst: Director, Eurasia Center, Atlantic Council
10. Disinformed Democracy: The Past, Present, and Future of Information Warfare | October 2, 2020 | 9:15 AM – 1:0 PM EDT | Brookings | Register Here
In 2016, Russian operatives waged an information war, including cyberattacks and inauthentic social media campaigns, designed to stoke political divisions and undermine the U.S. presidential election. Before they became front-page news, Russian influence operations had existed for decades. But in recent years, a range of domestic and international factors — in the United States, Europe, and elsewhere — have spotlighted the dangers of information manipulation campaigns, which now threaten the 2020 election. These drivers, alongside a rapidly evolving information technology and communications landscape, necessitate innovative policy ideas and a whole-of-society approach to protect democratic societies.
On October 2, Foreign Policy at Brookings will host a virtual conference to examine the past, present, and future of disinformation and efforts to combat it. Following welcome remarks by Brookings President John R. Allen, Brookings Senior Fellow Fiona Hill and former National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster will frame the event with a conversation on McMaster’s new book, “Battlegrounds: The Fight to Defend the Free World.” Then, Hill and Brookings Fellow and Deputy Director of the Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Technology Initiative Chris Meserole will moderate three panel discussions on the history of Russian influence operations leading up to 2016, the domestic factors that contribute to disinformation and other threats to democracy, and novel strategies for combatting information warfare in the future.
Speakers and Schedule:
Welcome remarks
John Allen: President – The Brookings Institution
Opening conversation: How disinformation threatens world order
H.R. McMaster: Former U.S. National Security Advisor, Fouad and Michelle Ajami Senior Fellow – Hoover Institution, Stanford University
Fiona Hill: Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center on the United States and Europe
Panel 1: The road to Russian interference in 2016
Catherine Belton: Special Correspondent – Reuters
Arkady Ostrovsky: Russia and Eastern Europe Editor – The Economist
Thomas Rid: Professor of Strategic Studies – Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies
David Shimer: Global Fellow – Woodrow Wilson International Center for ScholarsAssociate Fellow – Yale University
Fiona Hill: Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center on the United States and
Panel 2: Domestic drivers of disinformation
Renee DiResta: Research Manager – Stanford Internet Observatory
Elaine Kamarck: Founding Director – Center for Effective Public ManagementSenior Fellow – Governance Studies
Kate Starbird: Associate Professor, Human Centered Design & Engineering – University of Washington
Chris Meserole: Deputy Director – Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Technology Initiative, Fellow – Foreign Policy
Panel 3: Novel strategies for countering information warfare
Eileen Donahoe: Executive Director – Global Digital Policy Incubator, Stanford University; Former U.S. Ambassador – United Nations Human Rights Council
Thomas Kent: Adjunct Associate Professor of International and Public Affairs – Columbia University
Daniel Kimmage: Principal Deputy Coordinator, Global Engagement Center – U.S. Department of State
Teija Tiilikainen: Director – European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats (Hybrid CoE)
Fiona Hill: Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center on the United States and Europe
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, September 28
Politico excerpts a chapter from the new biography of Jim Baker, with a clever “7 rules for running Washington.”
WaPo says US has threatened to leave the embassy in Baghdad.
WaPo also reports on the Turkish navy’s new “Blue Homeland” plans.
Lawfare piece argues Iran has a clever gray zone strategy.
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. 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).
RSS - Posts
