Month: October 2020
Stevenson’s army, October 20
– Gideon Rachman warns China may move against Taiwan during post election confusion or interregnum. What would Trump do? What would Biden do?
– FP has analysis of Taiwan’s military situation.
– Vox says Democrats are divided on how to rebuild State Department.
– WaPo details how Scott Atlas took over pandemic policy, overcoming a “den of dissent.”
-Khalilzad says Afghan peace is in trouble.
– I said you didn’t have to understand budget reconciliation process, but Hill staffers see it as the way for a Democratic administration to make big changes.
– Meanwhile, Senate Democrats are using obstruction tools against Barrett nomination.
– WSJ says farmers are still for Trump, despite problems.
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:
Stevenson’s army, October 19
Nobody knows what Joe Biden might actually do if elected in terms of choosing senior officials. But these stories are appearing and will appear. They’re interesting; just don’t believe them.
Who will be Secretary of State?
How will Biden change Intelligence?
Can Biden unite Asian allies against China?
On the other hand, here’s some news: ISIS is surging in Africa.
O’Brien talks about Taiwan.
China threatens Taiwan.
China’s economy is growing again.
And what’s wrong with this picture?
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:
Peace Picks | October 19 – 23
Notice: Due to public health concerns, upcoming events are only available via live stream.
1. New START and the Future of US-Russia Arms Control | October 19, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | Wilson Center | Register Here
The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) is the last strategic nuclear arms control agreement still in force between the United States and Russia. It will expire in less than 4 months unless extended, and negotiations to that end are now underway. On October 19, Lynn Rusten and Feodor Voitolovsky will join us for a conversation on the American and Russian perspectives on the future of New START and the changing technological and security landscape that will shape the next five years of arms control.
Speakers:
Lynn Rusten: Vice President, Global Nuclear Policy Program, Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI)
Feodor Voitolovsky: Head of Section, Senior Research Fellow, Institute of World Economy and International Relations of Russian Academy of Sciences
Matthew Rojansky, moderator: Director, Kennan Institute
2. RESOLVE Network 2020 Global Forum: Violent Extremism in 2020 and Beyond | October 19, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:15 AM EDT | United States Institute for Peace | Register Here
The year 2020 has ushered in rapid and significant shifts in existing threats to global security. From the COVID-19 pandemic to climate change and longstanding violent conflict, the pressures facing our current global system are increasingly complex and all-encompassing. Among these, violent extremism remains a significant challenge—shifting as actors adapt and take advantage of ongoing and emerging global shocks and sources of instability.
How has the violent extremism landscape changed in the five years since the “fall” of ISIS? How has rising global instability, populism, and disinformation altered violent extremist operations and ideologies, and vice versa? What challenges do we face in addressing violent extremism in the new threat landscape? Can we apply any lessons from past experiences to address emerging threats and dynamics in 2020 and beyond?
Please join the RESOLVE Network and USIP for a discussion about these challenges and more during part one of RESOLVE’s fifth annual Global Forum series. Convened virtually, the forum will bring together leading experts and researchers for thought-provoking conversations on evolving trends and dynamics in the violent extremist landscape.
Speakers:
Dr. Mary Beth Altier: Clinical Associate Professor, Center for Global Affairs, New York University
Dr. Amarnath Amarasingam: Assistant Professor, School of Religion, Queen’s University, member of the RESOLVE Research Advisory Council
Dr. Colin P. Clarke: Senior Research Fellow, The Soufan Center, member of the RESOLVE Research Advisory Council
3. Amid Multiple Crises, a Divided Nation | October 19, 2020 | 1:00 – 2:30 PM EDT | Brookings Institute | Register Here
In the wake of over 210,000 deaths from the coronavirus, massive unemployment, protests over racial justice, the death of a U.S. Supreme Court justice, and unprecedented wildfires in multiple western states, questions remain about who will turn out to vote and what will drive them to the polls. Now, a new and extensive national survey of more than 2,500 Americans reveals a great deal about the public’s views of the presidential candidates and their attitudes toward pressing issues such as health care, the economy, racial justice, immigration, the changing demographics of the nation, climate change, and the fairness and reliability of the elections themselves.
On October 19, Governance Studies at Brookings and PRRI will host the release of PRRI’s eleventh annual American Values Survey (AVS). A panel of experts will discuss the survey results and what they reveal about Americans’ attitudes toward a variety of issues that are sure to shape the outcome of this presidential election. The survey also highlights the impact of media consumption on attitudes, long-term trends in partisan and religious affiliation, and how these changes have produced two starkly contrasting visions for the nation.
Speakers:
E.J. Dionne, Jr., moderator: W. Averell Harriman Chair and Senior Fellow – Governance Studies
William A. Galston, moderator: Ezra K. Zilkha Chair and Senior Fellow – Governance Studies
Karlyn Bowman: Senior Fellow – American Enterprise Institute
Andra Gillespie: Associate Professor of Political Science; Director, James Weldon Johnson Institute – Emory University
Robert P. Jones: CEO and Founder – PRRI (Public Religion Research Institute)
4. Cross-Strait Seminar Series: Taiwan and the future of US-China strategic competition | October 19, 2020 | 1:00 PM EDT | The Atlantic Council | Register Here
As US-China relations continue to deteriorate in the era of COVID-19, the role of Taiwan has received increasing attention from both Washington and Beijing. Chinese leader Xi Jinping has made reunification with Taiwan, peaceful or otherwise, a key objective of his extended tenure, and has overseen a ratcheting up of military exercises, influence operations, and other pressures across the Taiwan Strait in recent years. Meanwhile, the United States has taken a series of concrete steps to demonstrate renewed commitment to its relationship with Taiwan, including recently issuing a joint declaration on 5G security, launching a new bilateral economic dialogue, and sending Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex M. Azar II and Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment Keith Krach – the two highest-profile visits from US officials to Taiwan since 1979.
These major developments raise a number of key questions about Taiwan’s role in the future of US-China strategic competition. What is the long-term vision and strategic goals of the US-Taiwan relations? Where does Taiwan fit into the US Indo-Pacific strategy? Likewise, how do US relations fit into the second Tsai administration’s vision for foreign and economic policy? How are recent developments in US-Taiwan relations shaping cross-strait geopolitics, and how the US and Taiwan can work with other US allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific approaching engagement with Taiwan in light of ongoing developments? What should be Taiwan’s role in a broader network of global democracies on key strategic issues such as 5G, global supply chains, maritime security, defense technology, and countering influence operations? Ultimately, what will the decade ahead hold for the Taiwan Strait as one of greatest geopolitical flashpoints in US-China relations?
Please join the Atlantic Council’s Asia Security Initiative, housed within the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, for a public panel discussion on the changing role of Taiwan amid US-China strategic competition.
Speakers:
Mr. Michael Mazza: Visiting Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
Mr. Dexter Tiff Roberts: Nonresident Senior Fellow, Asia Security Initiative, Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, Atlantic Council
Mr. Randall G. Schriver: Former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Affairs; Chairman, Project 2049
Ms. Bethany Allen-Ebrahimian, moderator: China Reporter, Axios
5. A Fragmented Society: the Internal Dynamics of Libya’s Conflict | October 19, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:30 AM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
While most discussions about the Libyan crisis revolve around geopolitics and international interference, internal divisions within Libya’s civil society and political institutions have also played a fundamental role in destabilizing the country since the fall of Moamar Gaddafi in 2012. Governance in Libya is fragmented with very few truly national actors. It also continues to lack political institutions that are seen by all Libyans as legitimate. The ongoing conflict consists of many contending local and tribal players, including spoilers who have demonstrated opposition to either peace or reconciliation except on the basis of total victory by their group.
What are the major obstacles to stabilization? How can Libya approach the establishment of political institutions? In what ways can the international community support a Libyan-led peace process? The Middle East Institute, the Regional Program Political Dialogue South Mediterranean of the Konrad Adenauer Foundation, and the Policy Center for the New South are pleased to jointly host a group of experts to discuss these questions and more in a closed roundtable format.
Speakers:
Youness Abouyoub: Director, Governance and State-Building Division for the MENA Region, United Nations; former senior political advisor to the Special Representative of the UN Secretary General to Libya
Emadeddin Badi: Nonresident senior fellow, Atlantic Council
Virginie Collombier: Research fellow, European University Institute
Mohamed Dorda: Co-Founder, Libya Desk
Mohamed Eljarh: Co-Founder, Libya Outlook for Research and Consulting
Mary Fitzgerald: Independent researcher
Amanda Kadlec: Founder and director, Evolve Governance
Karim Mezran: Resident senior fellow, Atlantic Council
Tarik Mgerisi: Policy fellow, North Africa and Middle East Programme, European Council on Foreign Relations
Amal Obeidi: Associate professor of Comparative Politics, Department of Political Science; faculty of Economics, University of Benghazi, Libya
Jason Pack: Nonresident scholar, Middle East Institute; founder, Libya-Analysis LLC
Jonathan Winer: Nonresident scholar, Middle East Institute; former United States Special Envoy for Libya
Len Ishmael, moderator: Senior Fellow, Policy Center for the New South
6. Iran and North Korea: Proliferation and Regional Challenges for the Next Administration | October 20, 2020 | 3:00 – 4:00 PM EDT | Brookings Institute | Register Here
Among the numerous and varied foreign policy challenges facing the next administration will be the nuclear proliferation and regional security threats posed by Iran and North Korea. The next administration will need to consider how to build international and domestic support for addressing those threats, whether and when to engage those regimes diplomatically, and the balance between pressure and diplomacy in pursuing U.S. policy objectives.
On Tuesday, October 20, the Foreign Policy program at Brookings will host an online discussion with experts who previously served as Defense and State Department officials, nuclear negotiators, and intelligence community officers.
Speakers:
Suzanne Maloney, moderator: Vice President and Director – Foreign Policy
Jung H. Pak: SK-Korea Foundation Chair in Korea StudiesSenior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for East Asia Policy Studies
Robert Einhorn: Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for Security, Strategy, and Technology, Arms Control and Non-Proliferation Initiative
Matthew Kroenig: Professor – Georgetown UniversityDeputy Director of The Scowcroft Center – Atlantic Council
Eric Edelman: Roger Hertog Distinguished Practitioner-in-Residence – School of Advanced International Studies
7. Women Transforming Peace: Celebrating 20 Years of UNSCR 1325 and Beyond | October 20, 2020 | 9:30 – 11:00 AM EDT | United States Institute for Peace | Register Here
Twenty years ago, the U.N. Security Council sparked a global policy revolution when it recognized, for the first time, the unique experiences of women and girls in violent conflict. Resolution 1325, otherwise known as the Women, Peace, and Security agenda, laid a foundation for governments and civil society to place women at the center of peace processes—not only as victims, but as essential builders of peace. However, despite national action plans and legislation in 84 countries, women remain undervalued in peacebuilding and underrepresented in peace processes. Policymakers and practitioners must look beyond this policy framework first established two decades ago to achieve women’s meaningful participation in peace and security moving forward.
Join USIP and the U.S. Civil Society Working Group on Women, Peace and Security to mark the 20th anniversary of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1325. The discussion will look at how countries are expanding on the Women, Peace and Security agenda by adopting feminist foreign and development policies—and how civil society organizations have invested in masculinities programming as a complementary approach. These and other frameworks may prove more effective in advancing gender equality in peace and security, especially in light of the challenges posed by the coronavirus pandemic.
Ambassador Jacqueline O’Neill: Ambassador for Women, Peace and Security, Government of Canada
Ambassador Bonnie Jenkins: Founder and President, Women of Color Advancing Peace, Security and Conflict Transformation & Member of U.S. CSWG
Rita M. Lopidia: 2020 USIP Women Building Peace Award Recipient & Executive Director and Co-Founder, Eve Organization for Women Development, South Sudan and Uganda
Sanam Naraghi Anderlini, MBE: Founder and CEO, International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN) & U.S. CSWG Member
Anthony Keedi: Masculinities Technical Advisor, ABAAD: Resource Center for Gender Equality, Lebanon
Kathleen Kuehnast, moderator: Director, Gender Policy and Strategy, U.S. Institute of Peace
8. How Crimea’s Tatars are Fighting Occupation and Displacement | October 20, 2020 | 10:00 AM EDT | Atlantic Council | Register Here
Crimea’s indigenous Tatar population has faced persecution and adversity for generations. Today, as Crimea is held under Russian occupation, new hardships have forced Crimean Tatars to make their voices heard. When Kremlin forces illegally seized the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine in 2014, Moscow began rapidly moving hundreds of thousands of Russians to the territory, instituted discriminatory laws that targeted the predominately Muslim Tatars, and displaced approximately one-sixth of the almost 300,000 Tatars in Ukraine.
One of the biggest challenges for Crimean Tatars now is the documentation of violence and rights violations against those living under Russian occupation—a police state, where affiliation with religious groups and the reporting of abuse leads to numerous Tatars being imprisoned by authorities. Crimean Tatars are fighting to be heard—is anyone listening? How can Kyiv and the international community step in to support this marginalized and targeted ethnic minority? How are Crimean Tatars standing against their occupiers?
Speakers:
Ayla Bakkalli: US representative, executive member, World Congress of Crimean Tatars. representative of the Crimean Tatars at the United Nations
Rustem Umerov: member of parliament in the Verkhovna Rada
Terrell Jermaine Starr (moderator): Eurasia Center fellow; senior reporter at The Root
9. Conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia: Scope and Implications | October 21, 2020 | 9:30 – 10:30 AM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
The military conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan has entered its fourth week. The scope of the war has not been limited to the boundaries of the combat zone, resulting in human loss and destruction of civil infrastructure. The region’s important network of energy infrastructure, including oil and gas pipelines, are not immune to this latest round of fighting. The military confrontation is taking place in proximity to the critical energy infrastructure that connects the Caspian basin with the European markets. Can the fighting cause disruption to oil and gas flows to the West? What could potential disruption mean for global markets? Can the Southern Gas Corridor be prevented from being launched by the end of this year as had been planned? What are the interests of regional stakeholders such as Turkey, Georgia, Russia, Iran and others that are either energy exporters, consumers or transit nations for Caspian hydrocarbons. And finally, what are the interests of the United States in this conflict and its impact on the energy markets?
Speakers:
Rauf Mammadov: Scholar, MEI
Mamuka Tsereteli: Nonresident scholar, Frontier Europe Initiative, MEI
Alex Vatanka: Senior fellow and director, Iran program, MEI
10. Tackling the Pandemic in Situations of Fragility, Conflict, and Violence | October 23, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | CSIS | Register Here
Fragility, conflict, and violence (FCV) pose critical development challenges. By 2030, up to two-thirds of the world’s extreme poor will live in fragile and conflict-affected countries, threatening efforts to end extreme poverty and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In recent years we have seen more violent conflicts globally than at any time in the past 30 years, and 79.5 million people have been forcibly displaced by conflict and violence worldwide. FCV therefore has a significant destabilizing impact, and takes a huge toll on human capital, creating vicious cycles that reduce people’s lifetime productivity, earnings and socioeconomic mobility. The Covid-19 crisis has exacerbated these challenges and caused significant health and economic harm to those living in FCV settings, threatening to further hinder stability and progress over the longer-term. This event will address how the international community can work together to (1) mitigate the impact of the pandemic on existing drivers of fragility and conflict through enhanced stabilization efforts, (2) support the most vulnerable, (3) better coordinate bilateral and multilateral responses to Covid-19 in fragile contexts, and (4) rebuild societies and economies post pandemic.
Speakers:
Stephanie Hammond: Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Stability and Humanitarian Affairs
Franck Bousquet: Senior Director of the World Bank’s Fragility, Conflict, & Violence Group
James (Jim) A. Schear: Adjunct Senior Political Scientist at the RAND Corporation
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, October 18
All politics is local. Sen. Ernst looked out of touch.
Pew has a new survey of US attitudes toward China.
China may retaliate with detentions of US academics.
WaPo historical piece says naming Star Spangled Banner as national anthem was Confederate victory.
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:
Desperation and even panic in Trumplandia
This election is by no means over, but Joe Biden leads in the polls. The two best forecasts (The Economist and 538) give him a better than 85% chance of winning in the Electoral College. The popular vote has long been a foregone conclusion. Biden will beat Trump by more than the 2.8 million votes that Hillary Clinton beat him by. If Trump wins, it would be the third Republican victory since 2000 with a minority of the popular vote, due mainly to the overweighting in the Electoral College of relatively unpopulated states. Both Trump and Biden are campaigning in states like Iowa, North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, all of which Trump won easily in 2016. The states that put him over the top last time–Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin–all seem to be Biden’s this time around, if people vote they way they poll.
Americans are ready to vote overwhelmingly against Trump because of his failure to respond appropriately to Covid19 and the damage this failure has wrought on the economy. His racism, misogyny, egotism, coarse lack of empathy, defiance of laws and tradition, blatant nepotism, mistreatment of asylum seekers, corrupt exploitation of public office for private gain, and encouragement of right-wing violence are factors as well. But it is mainly incompetence that has made him the underdog against an even older establishment Democrat who once seemed out of the running in a crowded primary field. Biden exudes precisely what Trump lacks: competence, fairness, empathy, and commitment to orderly and legal governance. Nebraska Republican Senator Sasse put it well:
Republicans are beginning to perceive the dismal election outcome that awaits them. They are determined to blunt its impact. First and foremost they want to make sure the Supreme Court is heavily loaded in their direction with the Senate confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett. While lauding her “originalist” judicial philosophy, what they are really looking for is her loyalty to Trump in election-related cases, her willingness to strike down the Supreme Court’s decision to allow abortion, her antipathy to President Obama’s health care law, and her religious fervor. She never explained in her hearing last week how she squares originalism with her charismatic Catholicism, which definitely was not to be found among America’s founders. I’d bet originalism will play second fiddle to her political and religious commitments.
Next in the Republican playbook is to prevent as many people from voting as possible, knowing that the surge of interest in this election is vastly stronger among those who will vote for Biden. Republicans are in state and Federal courts all over the country trying to tighten restrictions on voting, on the demonstrably false premise that there is a lot of voting fraud. Next will come an inundation of court challenges to the polling, counting and tabulation of votes, focused in part on ballots mailed in since the Republicans are convinced most of them come from Democrats who take Covid 19 seriously and therefore hesitate to come to polls on election day.
If they are successful in casting doubt on the results in some battleground states, Trump’s minions will then try to get state legislatures to intervene and decide for whom the state’s electoral votes should be cast. This is something that hasn’t really happened in a century or so, but in at least some states it is still legally possible. If that fails, I won’t be surprised to see right-wing “militias”–armed groups with political purposes–show up to interfere with the casting of electoral votes on December 14, so that no one gets a majority in the Electoral College. That would force the decision on who gets to be the next president into the House of Representatives, where each state would have a single vote. In the current House, most states have majority-Republican delegations, but it is not the current House that decides. It would be the one elected on November 3, which will sit in early January.
Trump himself said Friday:
“Could you imagine if I lose? I’m not going to feel so good. Maybe I’ll have to leave the country, I don’t know.”
He and his supporters know they cannot win this election by getting more votes. But if the margins are close in a relatively few battleground states, they can hope to steer the outcome through the courts and state legislatures to their desired outcome in the Electoral College or to no outcome at all. I hope this anti-electoral putsch will turn even more Americans, Republican and Democratic, in Biden’s direction. It’s a strategy reflecting desperation and even panic more than confidence.
RSS - Posts
