Tag: Arab Spring
Peace Picks | October 5 – October 9, 2020
Notice: Due to recent public health concerns, upcoming events are only available via live stream.
1. Oil, Arms, Drones, and Regional Tensions: The Second Berlin Conference on Libya and Crafting a New Interim Government | October 5, 2020 | 2:00 – 3:00 PM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
With the War for Tripoli won in the late Spring by the defenders and a new mutually hurting stalemate taking hold around Jufra and Sirte over the course of the summer, the arena of Libya’s Wars of Post-Gaddafi Succession have shifted to cyberspace and the negotiating table. Amid a flurry of influence operations, attempts to manipulate media optics, and the Prime Minister pledging to go into retirement if a suitable successor is found, the last weeks of September witnessed a flurry of internationally-hosted mediation dialogues on Libya taking place in Morocco, Egypt, Geneva, and Russia. On October 5, a second virtual Berlin Conference is slated to tackle the interlocking issues of oil production, distribution of revenues, the arms embargo, mercenaries and the increasingly polarization among NATO allies with France and Greece on one side and Turkey on the other.
What are the possible trajectories of Libya’s conflict from here? What sort of entity might replace the GNA? What is the future of Libya’s economic system as new mechanisms for the distribution of oil revenues now being debated? How can international actors cooperate to prevent spoilers from scuppering progress?
Speakers:
Deborah Jones: Former US Ambassador to Libya
Wolfgang Pusztai: Former Austrian Military attache to Libya
Jason Pack: Founder, Libya-Analysis LLC; non-resident scholar, MEI
Jonathan Winer, moderator: Non-resident scholar, MEI; former US Special Envoy to Libya
2. Foreign Policy and the 2020 Election: Implications for Europe | October 5, 2020 | 9:00 – 10:15 AM EDT | Brookings Institute| Register Here
With the 2020 election looming amidst a trend of U.S. disengagement with Europe, both the American presidency and the future of Europe are on the ballot in November. What are the implications of the presidential election for the trans-Atlantic relationship and for U.S. foreign policy toward Europe? Would a second Trump administration follow through on threats to abandon the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), leaving Europeans to their own devices on matters of security and defense? Would a Biden administration seek to rebuild bridges with its European partners, reverting even partially to a pre-Trump conception of America’s role in the world? And how would a geo-political Europe react to these changes?
On October 5, the Center on the United States and Europe (CUSE) at Brookings will convene a panel discussion on the implications of the 2020 election for U.S. foreign policy, in particular toward Europe.
Speakers:
Célia Belin: Visiting Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center on the United States and Europe
William A. Galston: Ezra K. Zilkha Chair and Senior Fellow – Governance Studies
Fiona Hill: Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center on the United States and Europe
Thomas Wright, moderator: Director – Center on the United States and EuropeSenior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Project on International Order and Strategy
3. Has Trumpian populism succeeded? | October 5, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | American Enterprise Institute | Register Here
The election of Donald Trump in 2016 brought a populist into the White House. With the president’s first term nearing completion, what is the verdict? Has populism been a force for good in economic policy during the Trump years? Will populism be a force for good in economic policy going forward? And what about populism on the political left?
University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan sees success, as described in his new book, “You’re Hired!: Untold Successes and Failures of a Populist President” (Republic Book Publishers, 2020). AEI economist Michael R. Strain has a different view, presented in his new book, “The American Dream Is Not Dead: (But Populism Could Kill It)” (Templeton Press, 2020). Join them to discuss.
Speakers:
Casey Mulligan: Professor in Economics, University of Chicago
James Pethokoukis: DeWitt Wallace Fellow, AEI
Michael R. Strain: Director of Economic Policy Studies, AEI
4. What Does the Taliban Want? | October 6, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:30 AM EDT | Wilson Center | Register Here
Peace talks have begun between the Afghan government and the Taliban. One major question is how the Taliban, which is often vague about its goals beyond getting foreign troops out of Afghanistan, views key issues related to the peace process. This online-only event, organized by the Wilson Center’s Asia Program in partnership with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, will assess what we know–and don’t know–about the Taliban’s position on political systems, women’s rights, international terrorism, and its relationship with Pakistan; what this all may tell us about the Taliban’s future decisions and actions; and what the implications are for the peace process..
Speakers:
Ibraheem Bahiss: Independent Analyst
Malalai Bashir: Senior Journalist, Radio Azadi, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s Afghan Service
Dr. Orzala Nemat: Director, Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit
Rahimullah Yusufzai: Resident Editor, The News International
Abraham Denmark: Director, Asia Program
Michael Kugelman, moderator: Deputy Director and Senior Associate for South Asia
5. Online Event: Supporting Marginalized Groups amid Lebanon’s Cascading Crises | October 6, 2020 | 9:00 – 10:00 AM EDT | CSIS | Register Here
Lebanon has been home to vulnerable communities for centuries, most recently becoming home to perhaps a million refugees fleeing the Syrian conflict. Now, as the country reels amid compounding economic, public health, and political crises, refugees join expatriate domestic workers and others among Lebanon’s most marginalized communities in facing heightened risk.
Sahar Atrache, Yasmin Kayali, and Banchi Yimer will join us for a discussion of the threats facing Lebanon’s most vulnerable communities, and what stakeholders can do to support and empower them. Throughout the event, participants are encouraged to submit questions to the guests and host, Jon B. Alterman, via the provided link.
Sahar Atrache is the senior advocate for the Middle East at Refugees International. Prior to joining Refugees International, Sahar was the senior advocacy officer at the Syrian American Medical Society (SAMS) and a senior analyst on the Middle East and North Africa at International Crisis Group.
Yasmin Kayali is the co-founder and CCO of Basmeh & Zeitooneh, a non-profit organization launched in 2012 that seeks to empower Syrians in exile to live lives of dignity. Basmeh & Zeitooneh designs and delivers effective relief, education, and livelihood and protection services to marginalized communities from six centers across Lebanon.
Banchi Yimer is a former domestic worker who lived in Lebanon for nearly a decade. Alongside fellow Ethiopian migrant workers, she founded Egna Legna (“Us for Ourselves”), a community-based organization working on migrant domestic workers’ issues and women’s issues in Lebanon and Ethiopia.
Speakers:
Sahar Atrache: Senior Advocate for the Middle East, Refugees International
Yasmin Kayali: Co-founder and CCO, Basmeh and Zeitooneh
Banchi Yimer: Founder and Director, Egna Legna
6. Public Opinion, Annexation, and Normalization: A 2020 Zogby Research Poll | October 7, 2020 | 12:00 – 1:00 PM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
In 2019 and 2020, Zogby Research Services polled in several Arab countries and Israel to assess attitudes on a number of topics related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Arab Peace Initiative, and the desirability of normalization before a final resolution of the conflict. The findings collected were surprising and instructive of a nuanced change in attitudes.
The Middle East Institute (MEI) is pleased to host a panel of experts to discuss the polling data and the potential implications they have on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Speakers:
Khaled Elgindy: Director, Program on Palestine and Palestinian-Israeli Affairs, MEI
Lara Friedman: President, Foundation for Middle East Peace
James Zogby: Managing director, Zogby Research Services; founder and president, Arab American Institute
Paul Salem, moderator: President, MEI
7. Ten Years of Pan-Arab Protests: Understanding the New Dynamics of Change | October 7, 2020 | 2:00 – 3:15 PM EDT | Wilson Center | Register Here
In 2019 and early 2020, the Middle East and North Africa witnessed widespread protest movements in Algeria, Sudan, Lebanon, and Iraq marking a decade since the Arab uprisings started in 2010. As the COVID-19 pandemic spread, these movements largely subsided under strict, temporary lockdowns. However, the coronavirus exacerbated socioeconomic conditions and inequalities, thus provoking renewed street demonstrations in Lebanon and Iraq as well as other countries across the region such as Tunisia, Morocco and Jordan. As MENA governments grapple with the adverse economic impact of the pandemic and the deterioration of public services, more popular unrest is likely to erupt. In this timely discussion, former Wilson Fellow, analyst and journalist Rami Khouri, offers an in-depth comparative analysis of the 2019 protest movements in Algeria, Sudan, Lebanon and Iraq in dialogue with Middle East Program fellow Marina Ottaway and Bard College professor and Jadaliyya co-editor Ziad Abu Rish.
Speakers:
Rami Khouri: Former Public Policy Scholar; Director of Global Engagement, American University of Beirut, columnist, Agence Global Syndicate, USA, and The New Arab, London and Nonresident Senior Fellow, Harvard Kennedy School
Marina Ottaway: Middle East Fellow, Former Senior Research Associate and Head of the Middle East Program, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Ziad Abu-Rish: Co-Director, MA Program in Human Rights and the Arts, Bard College; Co-Editor, Jadaliyya
Merissa Khurma, moderator: Program Manager, Middle East Program
8. From the Sidelines of Nagorno-Karabakh: Georgia, Russia, and Turkey | October 7, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:30 AM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan has faced its largest eruption of fighting since a 1994 ceasefire partially brokered by the United States. Previous escalations between Armenian and Azerbaijani forces have been smothered within a few days. However, the current hostilities continue to escalate and the possibility of a large scale war between the two states is becoming more likely. Russia has historically supported Armenia while maintaining close relations with both former Soviet republics. On the other hand, Turkey has announced its unconditional support of Azerbaijan and appears to be ready to provide military capabilities to the Azeris. Georgia has always maintained close neighborly relations with both Armenia and Azerbaijan and now has expressed its willingness to facilitate a peaceful resolution.
What are the regional consequences of a full out war between Armenia and Azerbaijan? What role do Turkey, Russia, and Georgia play in the conflict? What are the factors that inhibit long-standing peace? Why does the conflict concern the United States?
Speakers:
Neil Hauer: Non-resident scholar, Frontier Europe Initiative, MEI
Victor Kipiani: Chair, Geocase
Maxim A. Suchkov: Non-resident scholar, Conflict Resolution and Track II Dialogues Program, MEI
Gonul Tol, moderator: Director of Turkey Program; senior fellow, Frontier Europe Initiative, MEI
9. Lessons from Africa: Building Resilience through Community-Based Health Systems | October 8, 2020 | 9:30 – 11:00 AM EDT | Wilson Center | Register Here
COVID-19 has revealed shortcomings in the health systems of countries all over the world. In sub-Saharan Africa, the health crisis threatens to severely curtail already limited public health services and exacerbate fragility. Yet, despite immense hurdles, past crises have shown that innovative decision-making and locally-led interventions can go a long way in improving the resilience and responsiveness of health systems. Please join the Wilson Center, in partnership with the Population Institute, for a discussion with experts on the role of trust in enabling crisis response and how a more holistic approach to access to services in addition to healthcare, like girls’ education and maternal health, ultimately increases the resilience of at-risk communities.
Speakers:
Mohammed Abdulaziz: Head of Division, Disease Control and Prevention, Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention
Uzma Alam, PhD: Researcher, Africa Institute for Health Policy Foundation; Senior Program Officer, Africa Academy of Sciences
Juliet Nabyonga-Orem, PhD: Team Lead, Health Financing and Investment, Universal Health Coverage/Life Course Cluster, World Health Organization
Dr. Raj Panjabi: CEO, Last Mile Health; Assistant Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School and the Division of Global Health Equity at Brigham & Women’s Hospital
Ambassador Deborah R. Malac: Former U.S. Ambassador to Uganda and former U.S. Ambassador to Liberia; Career Foreign Service Officer, U.S. Department of State; Senior Fellow, Population Institute
Sarah B. Barnes, moderator:Project Director, Maternal Health Initiative
10. Can Teaching Students Real Debate Reduce Political Polarization? | October 9, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | Brookings Institute | Register Here
In the midst of a highly polarized election, with an already polarized electorate, it may seem there is little hope for bridging the deep divisions in American society.
Brookings Nonresident Senior Fellow Robert Litan argues that teaching middle school and high school students the principles of competitive debate will make for more informed citizens and voters. Litan’s new book, “Resolved: How Debate Can Revolutionize Education and Help Save our Democracy,” makes the case for teaching middle school and high school students how to have reasoned debates where the participants use evidence and reason to constructively engage in civil discourse.
On October 9, Litan will be joined by Darrell West, vice president and director of Governance Studies at Brookings, and Norman Ornstein, AEI resident scholar, to explore how the principles of competitive debate can improve students’ lifelong work skills while making them more informed and demanding voters, and whether an engaged electorate will in turn change the way political candidates campaign for the better, improving–and maybe even saving–our democracy.
Speakers:
Robert E. Litan: Nonresident Senior Fellow – Economic Studies
Norm Ornstein: Resident Scholar – American Enterprise Institute
Darrell M. West: Vice President and Director – Governance Studies, Senior Fellow – Center for Technology Innovation
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Tunisia looks for a government
Nine years after the revolution, although the Tunisian government brought effective democratic change, little economic or social progress has been made. In October, Kais Said, a political newcomer, won the presidential election with 73% of the vote, beating Nabil Karoui, who was previously jailed for corruption. Ennahda won the parliamentary election and selected Habib Jemli to be prime minister-designated. However, on January 10, Habib Jemli stepped down as he failed to win a vote of confidence.
On January 14, Carnegie Endowment for International Studies hosted a discussion on the topic of what Tunisians are expecting from their new leaders and what will happen if those expectations are not met. The discussion included three young Tunisians: Amir Ben Ameur, a social activist who advocates for youth development and democracy, Aymen Abderrahmen, a program coordinator in the Leadership Division at IREX, and Oumayma Ben Abdallah, a human rights research and Tunisia analyst. The discussion was moderated by Sarah Yerkes, a fellow in the Carnegie Middle East Program.
Why the government failed to form
Abderrahmen explained the political system in Tunisia and emphasized that Tunisians are sick of the replication of political phases. They lack trust towards the previous government because it failed to fulfill its reform and anti-corruption promises. They also believed that the government was too weak to deliver economic reforms.
Abdallah attributed the failure to the lack of administrative transparency, parliamentary consensus and participation, and detailed reform guidelines. Ameur blamed lack of transparency and the lack of common ground between Jemli and rival parties. He pointed out the government’s failure to tackle real problems. Corruption galvanized doubts among Tunisians.
Remedies
Ameur thinks Tunisia needs a government with greater accountability. The government should bring out detailed, grassroot reforms in a long-term vision. Tunisians need more confidence in government despite current hardships . Abdallah wants more transparency and conviction. She also noted that since the current parliament is fragmented, the new/proposed government should result from political consensus.
To fix unemployment, the government needs a clear strategy for social and economic reform. Abderrahmen noted that the government has recently publicized some plans, but further work in this direction is needed.
Enthusiasm for the transition
All three guests indicated that Tunisians feel deprived of dignity because revolutionary demands were not met. Ameur claimed that young people still have some hope for the government because launching another revolution would be a devastating move. He and Abdallah acknowledged that Tunisia is overall a free country, but economic challenges are still severe. Politicians need to fulfill their promises.
Why the President won
Abderrahmen noted that President Said didn’t try to cater to young people. People were not voting for Said, but against Karoui. Ameur underlined that the younger generation likes Said because he made no promises. Although other candidates had more political and government experience, people were not confident in them as they previously failed to deliver. Abdallah is concerned that since the president ran as an independent, he has no parties backing him, which will make it hard to tackle corruption problems.
The next government
Abderahmen hoped to see another election so that different parties may come up with a consensus. Ameur expressed a desire to have more young people lead the government. Abdallah was not enthusiastic about a new election, which can generate political risks. Instead of presenting a new election, it is urgent to find solutions to economic and social problems.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Good election, big challenges
On October 29 the Middle East Institute (MEI) and Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) hosted an event entitled “Observations from the Tunisian Election.” Tunisian Ambassador Fayçal Gouia delivered the opening remarks and participated in the panel discussion. Georgetown Professor and North Africa specialist William Lawrence moderated the discussion. Panelists included Jeffrey England, deputy director of the Middle East and North Africa program at the National Democratic Institute (NDI), Patricia Karam, Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa division of the International Republican Institute (IRI), Sarah Yerkes, Middle East Fellow at the Carnegie Institute for International Peace, and Thomas Hill, senior program officer for North Africa at the United States Institute of Peace (USIP).
England emphasized that the joint election observation undertaken by NDI and IRI demonstrated several positive aspects of the Tunisian election. Despite the fact that the July 25 death of former President Essebsi required the election to be held sooner than originally planned, it was peaceful and administered professionally. England also highlighted that the Parliamentary and Presidential debates that were held for the first time are evidence that the democratic system continues to mature. He noted that while there are lingering questions about turnout in the election, there was a larger pool of voters in both rounds than expected. England felt that because President Kais Saied does not belong to a political party he may be better able to hold the parties in Parliament to account.
Karam agreed that the election observation demonstrated several positive developments but noted that Tunisia should amend several aspects of its electoral framework prior to the next election, including campaign finance regulations, media rules, and the interaction between the judicial and electoral systems. Polling shows a crisis of confidence in politicians, growing dissatisfaction with the democratic experiment, and the sense that Tunisian political parties lack a clear vision for economic reform. This dissatisfaction is particularly deep among Tunisian youth, with preliminary data showing that youth turnout in the election may have been as low as 16%. Karam believes Tunisians voted for Saied because they prioritized stability in government, even if it comes with older, more conservative ideas.
Yerkes argued that while Saied received 70% of the votes, giving him a strong mandate, the incarceration of his opponent Karoui during the election was a significant flaw in the democratic process. She believes the election was unquestionably free but does not think it was fair. Karoui’s incarceration highlighted the need for Tunisia to implement a system for absentee voting. The electoral law allows prisoners to vote but there is currently no mechanism for them to do so, meaning that Karoui was unable to vote for himself.
Several panelists agreed that Tunisia’s economy was the key issue in this election and will play a key role in the future of its democracy. Gouia stated that job creation and delivering economic reform will be the first priority of the new administration. England asserted that while the electorate’s main concern was revolution in 2011 and identity in 2014, now people want to see results, particularly on economic issues. Hill argued that the Tunisian social contract has shifted so that graduates expect the government to create jobs for them rather than being entrepreneurial. England agreed, stating that the economic problems cannot be solved before the next election. He felt that the government should focus on developing a long-term plan to reform the economy and attempt to reframe the people’s expectations so that they understand that economic change will take time.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The Middle East wants reform
On Tuesday the Middle East Institute (MEI) hosted the presentation of the latest Middle East Public Opinion poll by James Zogby. Polling was conducted in 10 countries: Tunisia, Egypt, Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Turkey and Iran. Zogby, Co-founder and President of the Arab American Institute and Director of Zogby Research Services, presented a summary of the data and key points before a panel discussion that featured Paul Salem, President of MEI, Kate Seelye, Vice President of MEI, Alex Vatanka, an MEI Senior Fellow, and Steven Cook, Eni Enrico Mattei Senior Fellow for Middle East and Africa Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. Throughout the Middle East citizens expressed discontent with the policies of their governments. Only in the UAE did a majority of respondents indicate that their country was on the right track. This discontent spanned the rough divide opened by the Arab spring. Egypt and Tunisia both followed the “democratic track” after successful revolutions in 2011, but a majority of respondents there believe their countries to be on the wrong track, joining Iraq and Palestine as states with majority disapproval. In Egypt the drop included the military, whose confidence levels have fallen 50 points since 2013. Government reform was ranked 3rd overall in the list of political priorities, topping extremism, foreign enemies, health care, and personal rights. This contradicts a common narrative, which justified the failure of the Arab Spring by claiming that the people desired only improved economic and security conditions and cared little for political reform as long as those conditions were met. Downplaying the desire for reform may have been simply wishful thinking by authoritarian leaders in the region. The survey conveyed a sense of foreign policy pragmatism. Regarding Syria there was growing support for a national unity government with participation of Bashar al Assad. Regarding Iran, while majorities supported the Trump administration’s move to pull out of the nuclear deal, in every country except Tunisia and Egypt the majority believe that peace between Iran and the Arab world is “very possible” or “somewhat possible.” Eight out of ten countries, including Iran, held the majority view that it is important to bring Iran into a regional security arrangement with the Arab countries to help bring peace to the region. One exception to this pragmatism is the the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A growing majority in 5 out of 7 Arab states were opposed to a partnership with Israel, even if Israel returns occupied Palestinian lands and fulfills the terms of the Arab Peace Initiative. Palestinians themselves remained overwhelmingly prepared for peace with Israel if the refugee issue is solved and Israel returns to its pre-1967 borders, but a growing number believe the Israelis would never agree to those terms. Given the growing struggle between Saudi Arabia and Turkey for regional influence, the polling reflected just how close the competition is. Turkey surpasses the Saudis for favorability in Tunisia, Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan and Iraq, and tightened the gap in Egypt. A majority of Arab countries view Turkey as playing a more positive role than Saudi Arabia in both Iraq and Syria. Public opinion of America has fallen in the region. The EU, Russia and China all fared better than America. The panel believed that this drop in opinion was largely due to the perception of the American government as inept. The polling indicates a continued sense of unrest in the region. With little faith in their own institutions, the people of the Middle East remain largely uninspired by the jingoistic foreign policies of their governments and continue to seek an end to costly civil wars, in order to focus on domestic reforms and economic improvement.Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Tunisia needs to keep trying
Since the overthrow of the regime of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in 2011, Tunisia has been on a long journey of reform and change. However, as panelists at the Atlantic Council’s “Tunisia’s Road to Reform” last Thursday pointed out, the destination does not always appear to be democratization and economic improvement, two of the revolution’s goals. The event included former Tunisian communications minister Oussama Romdhani of the Arab Weekly, Sarah Yerkes of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and Fadil Aliriza, an independent journalist based in Tunis. The discussion was moderated by Karim Mezran introduced by Fred Hof of the Atlantic Council.
Tunisia’s path to democratization began with a national dialogue and the election of a new president, and according to Romdhani will continue with the upcoming municipal elections of 2018 and the general elections of 2019. There are several obstacles to democratization, including lack of participation in elections and failure of political parties to gain respect and credibility. Tunisia’s political parties, the most significant of which are Ennahda and Nidaa Tounes, are largely disconnected from the reality faced by their constituents and are inefficient due to the continuous feuding that occurs between them. Aliriza criticized the current parties saying that they are based on personality rather than politics and that their categorization (liberal, secular, Islamist, etc) and ideologies are outdated and based on the old, pre-revolution model.
Romdhani also referred to social unrest, which he considered to be in part a result of the desire for “instant gratification” by Tunisia’s youth. This has put pressure on a government that, in his view, does not have the means to provide reform in a short period of time. Economic pressures, the instability in neighboring Libya, and lack of support from the West are all additional obstacles to democratization and reform listed.
Yerkes and Aliriza both went a step further to say that Tunisia has actually taken steps towards authoritarianism, a claim that they supported using several recent events, including a cabinet reshuffle, the postponement of municipal elections, and the adoption of a reconciliation law. It was the reconciliation law that seemed to be the most worrying to Aliriza, because it pardons civil servants accused of contributing to corruption under the old regime. This he said is a violation of the constitution and an effort to create a separate justice system for those associated with the old regime. The law is only beneficial to a minority of the population and has caused protests and unrest in the country.
Most importantly, the debate around the law is distracting the government as well as civil society organizations from focusing on reform. The government does have the means, Aliriza argued, but is misusing them. The law threatens the country’s stability, the disconnect between the regime and the people is growing, and the government’s legitimacy is under question. The government seems to be engaging in revolution-denial by repeating “old regime practices.”
Aliriza’s focus on the government’s shortcomings led Mezran to inquire what the panelists thought should be done about the flawed operations of the parliament and political parties. Aliriza responded by emphasizing the importance of employing staff for parliament in order to allow parliamentarians to connect with their constituencies, bridging the existing divide. He also proposed the creation of new parties and the greater inclusion of youth in formal politics. Yerkes agreed on the need for parliamentary staff to allow parliamentarians to travel and meet with the population.
She also thinks the time has come to move past Tunisia’s consensus model. The requirement that political parties agree with each other on policy issues may have previously provided stability, Yerkes admitted, but is currently undermining the legitimacy of each party in the eyes of its followers. The lack of debate has led to stagnation.
More defensively, Romdhani called for a change in perspective when viewing Tunisia’s government. Credibility, for example, should not be viewed as an isolated issue, but should rather in a regional context: the Tunisian people, in comparison with other countries that witnessed revolutions as part of the Arab spring, are still committed to freedom and democracy, making the Tunisian case “less worrisome” than others. Furthermore, in what can be interpreted as a response to Aliriza’s firm opposition to the reconciliation law, Romdhani said that those opposed to the law must pursue an already existing legal process and better explain their concerns instead of resorting to protests and filibusters.
While the panel revolved mostly around challenges and obstacles to reform in Tunisia, Yerkes took some time to remind the audience of promising aspects of the country’s development. These include the potential that the 2019 election brings and the role that civil society plays in holding the government accountable. Despite a large number of challenges, Tunisia remains, in the eyes of many, an example of a successful Arab revolution. As long is it continues to take steps towards fulfilling such a vision, that image will persist.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace picks June 13 – June 17
- Authoritarian Resilience and Revision after the Arab Uprisings. Monday, June 13. 3:30 PM – 5:00 PM. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Register to attend. Five years after the 2011 uprisings, authoritarianism remains a deeply embedded feature of the Arab state system. Countries in the region are caught between the competing impulses of fragmentation and two equally unsustainable authoritarian visions—that of the self-proclaimed Islamic State, or classic autocratic regimes. Robert Worth and Joseph Sassoon will discuss these dynamics, sharing from their recent books. Carnegie’s Frederic Wehrey will moderate. Following the discussion, copies of the book will be available for sale with signing by the authors. Joseph Sassoon is an associate professor at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service and is the author of Anatomy of Authoritarianism in the Arab Republics. Robert Worth writes for the New York Times Magazine and is the author of A Rage for Order: The Middle East in Turmoil from Tahrir Square to ISIS. Frederic Wehrey is a senior associate in the Middle East Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
- Cascading Conflicts: U.S. Policy on Turkey, Syria, and the Kurds. Tuesday, June 14. 10:00 AM – 11:30 AM. Bipartisan Policy Center. Register to attend. In the fight against ISIS, U.S. policymakers have been increasingly confounded by the fact that two crucial allies, Turkey and the Kurds, are locked in a violent conflict on both sides of the Turkish-Syrian border. While Washington’s plans for defeating ISIS rely on airbases in Turkey and Kurdish troops in Syria, the Turkish government continues to insist that Washington’s Syrian Kurdish partners are no different from the Kurdish terrorists against which it is fighting at home. In the absence of a more effective U.S. plan for addressing the situation, Turkey’s domestic conflict now threatens to not only undermine the war against ISIS but also destabilize Turkey, damage U.S.-Turkish relations, and prolong the Syrian conflict. Join the Bipartisan Policy Center for an expert panel discussion that will address the evolving relationship among Turkey, Syria and the Kurds, with a focus on the implications for U.S.-Turkish relations and U.S. policy in Syria. As an already complicated situation risks causing a major crisis between Washington and its allies, understanding the dynamics has become more important than ever. Panelists: Eric Edelman, Co-Chair, BPC’s Turkey Initiative, Former U.S. Ambassador to Turkey. Aliza Marcus, Author, Blood and Belief. Ceng Sagnic, Junior Researcher, Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies. Amberin Zaman, Public Policy Fellow, Wilson Institute. Moderated by:Ishaan Tharoor, Reporter, The Washington Post.
- Youth, Peace and Security: New Global Perspectives. Tuesday, June 14. 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM. U.S. Institute of Peace. Register to attend. Today’s generation of youth, at 1.8 billion, is the largest the world has ever known. Many of these youth are living in countries plagued by violent conflict and extremism, such as Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Nigeria. The goal of SCR 2250 is to recognize youth as partners for peace rather than solely viewing young people as perpetrators of violence—a shift in mindset that responds to the call to action of 11,000 young peacebuilders in the Amman Youth Declaration. The resolution, sponsored by the Government of Jordan, is a direct follow-up to the Global Forum on Youth, Peace and Security held in August 2015, as well as the Security Council’s Open Debate on the Role of Youth in Countering Violent Extremism and Promoting Peace held in April 2015. Join USIP and the Interagency Working Group on Youth and Peacebuilding for a discussion on SCR 2250 with the U.N. Secretary-General’s Envoy for Youth H.E. Ahmad Alhendawi of Jordan, young leaders from countries affected by violent extremism and armed conflict, and other experts. Speakers Include: Manal Omar, Associate Vice President, Center for Middle East and Africa , U.S. Institute of Peace; H.E. Dina Kawar, Permanent Representative of Jordan to the United Nations; H.E. Ahmad Alhendawi, United Nations Secretary-General’s Envoy on Youth; Saji Prelis, Co-chair of the Inter-agency Working Group on Youth and Peacebuilding, Search for Common Ground; Soukaina Hamia, Youth Peacebuilder, Deputy Director of Sidi Moumen Cultural Center of Casablanca, Morocco; Saba Ismail, Youth Peacebuilder, Executive Director of Aware Girls, Representative of the United Network of Young Peacebuilders (UNOYP); Victoria Ibiwoye, Youth Peacebuilder, Founder of One African Child of Lagos, Nigeria; and Oscar Fernandez-Taranco, United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support.
- The Economic Decline of Egypt after the 2011 Uprising. Wednesday, June 15. 1:00 PM. The Atlantic Council. Register to attend. Five years after the 2011 revolution, Egypt’s economy is floundering and remains far from recovery. Successive Egyptian governments since 2011 have struggled to develop a vision for a new economic model for Egypt, while simultaneously implementing populist policies to appease the immediate demand of the public. This lecture is also the launch of the Rafik Hariri Center’s Mohsin Khan and Elissa Miller’s new report, “The Economic Decline of Egypt after the 2011 Uprising,” and a discussion on the trajectory of Egypt’s economy since 2011 and what the current Egyptian government should do to arrest the economy’s downward slide. A discussion with: Prime Minister Hazem Beblawi, Former Prime Minister, Arab Republic of Egypt; Executive Director, International Monetary Fund; Caroline Freund, Senior Fellow, Peterson Institute for International Economics; Mohsin Khan, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East, Atlantic Council; and Mirette F. Mabrouk, Deputy Director & Director of Research and Programs, Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East, Atlantic Council. Introduction by: The Hon. Frederic C. Hof, Director, Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East, Atlantic Council.
- Desert Storm after 25 years: Confronting the exposures of modern warfare. Wednesday, June 16. 3:00 PM – 5:00 PM. SEIU Building. Register to attend. By most metrics, the 1991 Gulf War, also known as Operation Desert Storm, was a huge and rapid success for the United States and its allies. The mission of defeating Iraq’s army, which invaded Kuwait the year prior, was done swiftly and decisively. However, the war’s impact on soldiers who fought in it was lasting. Over 650,000 American men and women served in the conflict, and many came home with symptoms including insomnia, respiratory disorders, memory issues and others attributed to a variety of exposures – “Gulf War Illness.” On June 16, the Center for 21st Century Security and Intelligence at Brookings and Georgetown University Medical Center will co-host a discussion on Desert Storm, its veterans, and how they are faring today. Representative Mike Coffman (R-Col.), the only member of Congress to serve in both Gulf wars, will deliver an opening address before joining Michael O’Hanlon, senior fellow at Brookings, for a moderated discussion. Joel Kupersmith, former head of the Office of Research and Development of the Department of Veterans Affairs, will convene a follow-on panel with Carolyn Clancy, deputy under secretary for health for organizational excellence at the Department of Veterans Affairs; Adrian Atizado, deputy national legislative director at Disabled American Veterans; and James Baraniuk, professor of medicine at Georgetown University Medical Center. Following discussion, the panelists will take audience questions.
- Can the US Work with Iran: Challenges and Opportunities. Thursday, June 16. 9:00 AM. The Atlantic Council. Register to attend. Nearly a year after the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany signed a landmark nuclear deal with Iran and nearly six months after the agreement was implemented, the nuclear aspects of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) appear to working smoothly. But other challenges potentially imperil the agreement. There are questions about whether the JCPOA can serve as a template for additional regional and international cooperation or whether domestic politics in the US and Iran and Iran’s continuing difficulties re-entering the global financial system will put those opportunities out of reach for the foreseeable future. To discuss these vital issues, the Atlantic Council’s Future of Iran Initiative and the Iran Project invite you to a half-day symposium.
9:00 a.m. – The progress and problems of sanctions relief
Featuring: Christopher Backemeyer, principal deputy coordinator for sanctions policy at the Department of State, Teresa Archer Pratas, deputy head of the sanctions divisions at the European External Action Service, andGeorge Kleinfeld, a sanctions expert at the law firm Clifford Chance, and moderated by Elizabeth Rosenberg, director of the Energy, Economics, and Security Program at the Center for a New American Security.
10:15 a.m. – The JCPOA’s effects on US-Iran relations
Featuring: Suzanne DiMaggio, director of the US-Iran Initiative at New America, Suzanne Maloney, deputy director of the Foreign Policy program at the Brookings Institution and a senior fellow in the Brookings Center for Middle East Policy and Energy Security and Climate Initiative, and Negar Mortazavi, an Iranian-American journalist and analyst, and moderated by William Luers, director of the Iran Project.
11:30 a.m. – The impact of the JCPOA on Iran’s role in regional conflicts
Featuring: Ellen Laipson, a senior fellow and president emeritus of the Stimson Center and former deputy chair of the National Intelligence Council, J. Matthew McInnis, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a former senior analyst in the US Department of Defense and Intelligence Community, and Bruce Riedel, director of the Intelligence Project at the Brookings Institution and a former senior director for the Near East and South Asia on the National Security Council. Barbara Slavin, acting director of the Future of Iran Initiative, will moderate.
12:30 p.m.– Keynote by Ben Rhodes, deputy national security advisor for strategic communications, on the legacy of the JCPOA. Stephen Heintz , president of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, will introduce and moderate.
RSS - Posts
