Tag: Bahrain

Countering the counter-revolution

It all seemed elegantly simple 10 months ago:  peaceful demonstrators took to the streets and threw out autocrats who had ruled for decades in Tunisia and Egypt.

Now it is far more complicated.  In Egypt the army that helped to remove Hosni Mubarak is holding on to power and engaging in pitched urban battles with both Islamist and secular protesters.  In Syria, Bashar al Assad is killing dozens a day to preserve his regime.  In Yemen, Ali Abdullah Saleh continues to defy both protesters and army rebels.  The UN envoy’s claim today that an agreement has been reached is at best prelude to a negotiation over getting it signed, which has failed several times.  In Libya, militias that once fought Muammar Qaddafi have begun to fight each other, defying the leadership of the National Transitional Council and its recently appointed interim prime minister.

The forces of counter-revolution are alive and well.  They should not be underestimated.  Many Egyptians crave stability and will support the army.  Minorities and businesspeople in Syria continue to support the regime, fearing loss of privilege and protection if it falls.  The young men with guns in Yemen and Libya, wanting their slice of power and money, won’t hesitate to defy unelected leadership that is largely unarmed.  Things can still go awry in all these places, as they have already in Bahrain, where the monarchy has managed to consolidate its power (with help from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates) even as it admits that some of the security forces have used excessive force in dealing with protesters.

What is needed to keep these revolutions on track towards democratic outcomes?  It certainly helps to have, as in Tunisia and Libya, a clear roadmap for when parliamentary (or constituent assembly) elections are to held as well as how and when a new constitution is prepared and presidential elections held.  Egypt has changed its plans several times.  Now even the first round of parliamentary elections scheduled for November 28 is in doubt.  Yemen has never had a clear plan, and the opposition Syrian National Council is just now elaborating a program.

But even more critical than a plan is an authority recognized as legitimate by most people who support the revolution.  The Egyptian Supreme Council of the Armed Forces lost it legitimacy with many of those who supported the revolution months ago.  The Libyan National Transitional Council seems still to have it.  The Syrian National Council is still trying to acquire it.  Yemen has intended to rely on the existing, constitutional order, with power turned over to the vice president in preparation for elections three months later.

International recognition of an interim authority can help, as it did in Libya, but it cannot substitute for strong roots within the country.  This is what makes Bahrain so difficult:  the Sunni monarchy there will want to manage a controlled transition to a slightly more constitutional system on its own, without serious input from the country’s Shiite majority.  Tomorrow’s publication of an independent commission of inquiry report on the February/March protests there will mark a new phase–the protesters will need to decide quickly whether to restart their efforts in the street or look instead to the negotiating table.

Most important in Bahrain and elsewhere is that protesters need to be certain that they have truly broad popular backing as they press for faster and more complete change.  It is not enough to claim to represent the 99%, as Occupy Wall Street does in the U.S.  They have to be truly in tune with the 99%, which is difficult when the 99% is split in many different ways, foreign powers are tugging in different directions and autocrats are warning of public disorder.  There is no substitute for wise, indigenous leadership that can decide when to go to the streets and when to go to the ballot box.

PS, November 23:  Here is the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry report.

 

 

Tags : , , , , , , ,

Context matters, and so does U.S. support

I gave a talk yesterday at West Virginia University’s Law School on U.S. policy towards democracy-seeking rebellions.  The star attraction at the conference was Erica Chenoweth, co-author of Why Civil Resistance Works:  The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict.  Some of you will have seen my tweets summarizing her talk, which I won’t try to reproduce here.  Suffice it to say that she provides hard statistical evidence that nonviolent civil resistance really does work, even against the most repressive regimes, and she gives a coherent rationale for why.  She also notes that foreign monetary assistance does not appear to work well.

I was asked to address the U.S. policy response, in particular to the Arab Spring.  Here are my speaking notes, which of course do not represent exactly what I said:

West Virginia University

 November 10, 2011

1.  While I am an admirer of Dr. Chenoweth’s quantitative methodology, I am going to rely today on the much less impressive techniques of the historian and diplomat:  stories, I would call them, rather than “cases.”

2.  Arab spring is far from over yet, but I’ll try to focus on the transition phase:  that is, the phase after a regime falls and before a new one has yet emerged.

3.  I am thoroughly convinced of the efficacy of what Dr. Chenoweth calls civic resistance in the earlier phase.

4.  But things get much more complicated when that resistance has to turn into something more constructive.

5.  There are three cases already in the transition phase, more or less:  Tunisia, Egypt and Libya.  Each is quite different.

6.  In Tunisia, the autocrat left the scene quickly and the regime was pushed aside fairly easily.  First elections have already been held and there is a clear roadmap ahead.  A classic, fairly smooth case, with no sign of counter-revolution on the horizon.  Good chance of consolidating a democratic regime.

7.  In Egypt, the autocrat also left pretty quickly, but the regime was not pushed aside easily and the protesters called on the army to manage the transition.  It is doing so, but in a way that consolidates its control over some aspects of governance (security, foreign policy) and a big piece of the economy.  I’d say much less likelihood of success in the transition.  Might be rather like Serbia, where a similar deal was made with the security forces and the transition has been slow and halting as a result.

8.  In Libya, there was a violent revolution that has the advantage of having swept the old regime away completely, with foreign help.  There has been good leadership, decent planning and ample resources.  I give the Libyans a decent chance at success in consolidating a democracy, albeit less probability than Tunisia.

9.  What of Yemen, Syria and Bahrain, all of which are still in progress?

10.  Yemen has turned violent, even if the protesters themselves have stuck with nonviolence.  The odds of successful transition to democracy seem to be small, because the opposition to Saleh most likely to take power is the violent one, which is no more inclined to democracy than he is.

11.  Syria could be headed in the same direction, though there is still some hope of keeping it on a nonviolent course.  That’s vital for success.  Violence will lead to sectarian and ethnic breakdown (similar to Iraq) that will be difficult to overcome.

12.  Bahrain is an odd case.  The protesters have been nonviolent, but the crackdown was effective, unlike Syria and Yemen.  A lot depends on the Bassiouni commission report:  will it revive nonviolent resistance, or will the regime be able to keep the lid on?

13.  What of the other monarchies:  Morocco and Jordan?  Saudi Arabia and Oman?

14.  These four, each in its own way, is attempting to preempt resistance with reform, albeit minimal reform in the case of Riyadh.  So far, they are largely succeeding.

15.  I do think the monarchies have some advantage in this respect:  not because they are somehow nicer, but because their legitimacy is understood not to derive from elections but rather from heredity.

16.  It is much harder for a republic to claim that there is no need to change who is in power in order to reform the system.

17.  But that does not mean the monarchies will succeed forever.  The fact that all Saudi Arabia experts agree that it can’t happen there, that the succession is ensured, is a clear earlier indicator that it may well happen there.

18.  If I were advising the Saudis and the other monarchies, I would suggest they get ahead of the curve and stay ahead, by taking truly meaningful steps to redistribute power and ensure that their security services are shifting from protecting the rulers to protecting the ruled.

19.  If there is one mistake common to all the Arab Spring successes so far—and also to those places where rebellion is still in progress—it is the use of regime violence against the population.

20.  These guys need to learn that legitimacy comes from the people, who will be much more inclined to confer it on those who protect them than on those who attack them.

21.  We should also be thinking about how we can encourage security sector reform in advance of rebellion and revolution—it would be far cheaper and more effective than doing it after the fact.

22.  America should certainly be supporting those who demonstrate nonviolently for their rights, but I confess to doubts that it should be done through embassies.

23.  Robert Ford, our ambassador in Syria who has bravely gone to “observe” demonstrations, is the exception that proves the rule.

24.  The rule is that embassies need to stay on good terms with the host government, even if it is an autocracy.  They cannot be implicated in support to revolutionaries.

25.  Assistance to democracy and human rights advocates should flow not through embassies but through nongovernmental organizations, including the National Endowment for Democracy, the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute as well as non-American counterparts.

26.  The more these can be made distinct from our official representation, the better.

27.  America is condemned to spreading democracy.  If you really believe that all people are created equal, you have no choice but to sympathize with those who claim their rights.  But the specific modalities for when and how to do it depend a great deal on context.

PS:  In answer to a question, I said yes it can happen in Iran, but American efforts to support it there are problematic because of our fraught relationship with Tehran, which includes both concern about nuclear weapons and attempts to foment ethnic strife inside Iran.  In the end, I think Obama got the reaction to the Green Movement about right in the end:  rhetorical support without repainting it red, white and blue.

Chenoweth and Serwer at West Virgina University Law School November 10
Serwer at West Virginia University Law School November 10
Tags : , , , , , , , , ,

Best freebie next week

Game Changer: Policy and Politics  

For a New Middle East

  The Grand Hyatt Hotel 

1000 H Street NW

Washington, DC 20001

Thursday, November 17, 2011

8:45am-5:30pm     

Tickets: FREE. Register HERE.

Conference Schedule

8:45am-9:00am – Opening remarks

Ambassador (ret.) Wendy Chamberlin, Middle East Institute President

9:00am-10:30am – After the Arab Spring: Assessing US Policy in the Middle East

Steve Clemons, New America Foundation, The Atlantic

Ambassador (ret.) Daniel Kurtzer, Princeton University

Ambassador (ret.) Ron Schlicher, Former US Department of State

Tamara Cofman Wittes, Deputy Assist. Secretary of State-NEA

10:45am-12:15pm – The Road Ahead for Emerging Arab Democracies

Esraa Abdel Fattah, Egyptian Democratic Academy

Michele Dunne, Atlantic Council

Larry Diamond, Stanford University

Radwan Masmoudi, Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy

2:15pm-3:45 pm – Shifting Regional Power Dynamics in an Era of Change

Abdelkhaleq Abdalla, UAE University

Jamal Khashoggi, Al-Arab TV
Haim Malka, Center for Strategic and International Studies

Mohsen Milani, South Florida University

Paul Salem, Carnegie Middle East Center

4:00pm-5:30pm- Economic and Development Strategies for a Middle East in Transition

Adel Abdellatif, UN Development Programme

Odeh Aburdene, OAI Advisors

Iman Bibars, Ashoka/MENA

Ambassador William B. Taylor, US Department of State

Tags : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This week’s “peace picks”

Very busy calendar the first part of the week.  Remember there may be registration and RSVP requirements not cited here.  Best to check on the respective web pages.

1.  The EU-brokered Negotiations between Kosovo and Serbia:  Challenges and Prospects, Woodrow Wilson Center, November 7, 12-1 pm

Nearly three and a half years after Kosovo unilaterally declared independence from Serbia, the EU is bringing both sides back to the negotiation table. This meeting will address: why Serbian and Kosovar governments are negotiating now?; what is the nature, format and context of these negotiations, and what are the goals that the EU hopes to achieve?

Jovan Teokarevic, associate professor of political science at the University of Belgrade will compare the current negotiations with those that had been unsuccessfully brokered by the UN and describe the strategies; and tactics used by both sides; and the role of international actors – the EU, the US, NATO, EULEX–in this process. A number of possible outcomes will be presented and discussed, including the types of negotiations that might be developed in the future. Most importantly, Teokarevic will address the need for a sustainable solution for the Serbian enclave in northern Kosovo, which would be part of a general reconciliation between Serbians and Kosovar Albanians.

2.  Economic Development in Bosnia-Herzegovina: Absence of Government and Its Consequences, SAIS, Bernstein-Offit 500, November 7, 2-4 pm

Hosted By: SAIS Center for Transatlantic Relations (CTR)
Summary: Svetlana Cenic, an independent analyst in Bosnia-Herzegovina; Mujo Selimovic, CEO of MIMS Group; Edin Saracevic, executive director of Personal Inc.; Marco Mantovanelli, country operations adviser of the International Finance Corporation; and Michael Haltzel (moderator), CTR senior fellow, will discuss this topic. For more information and to RSVP, visit http://www.eventbrite.com/event/2454347018/mcivte.
3. Cyber Defense:  International Cooperation and Deterrence, CSIS, November 7, 9 am-2pm
As cybersecurity grows in importance for the international community, individual states and international organizations struggle to adapt existing legal norms and military doctrines to this ongoing change in the global security environment.  In recent years, the transatlantic community began to address these issues by making cybersecurity a critical pillar of the NATO security agenda.  Yet many questions still surround the concepts of cyber defense, deterrence, and collective defense in cyberspace.  Please join us to discuss the challenges and opportunities posed by the ideas of cyber deterrence and international cyber defense cooperation, their implications for the transatlantic security relationship, and their possible impact on relations between the alliance and non-NATO powers.

We hope you will be able to join us for this timely and informative discussion.  Please RSVP to ktimlin@csis.org.

Keynote Address:

Dr. Mart Laar,
Minister of Defense, Estonia

Mr. William J. Lynn III
Former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense

Panel Presentations by:

Dr. Martin Libicki,
Senior Management Scientist, RAND Corporation

Col. Ilmar Tamm,
Director, Collective Cyber Defense Centre of Excellence

Mr. Dmitri Alperovitch,
President, Asymmetric Cyber Operations, LLC

Ms. Michele Markoff,
Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of the Coordinator for Cyber Issues, U.S. Department of State

Dr. Stephen Flanagan,
Henry A. Kissinger Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies

Mr. Frank Kramer,
Member of the Board, the Atlantic Council

Closing Remarks:

Dr. James Miller,
Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, U.S. Department of Defense

4. What’s Next for the Arab Spring?  Pavilion Room International Trade Center Ronald Reagan Building 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, November 7, 2011 5-6:15 pm
Inspiring, confusing, tumultuous and sometimes violent, there is little doubt that the Arab Spring signifies growing demand for dignity and democracy by the people of the Middle East and North Africa. Please join former Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright and author, journalist and Aspen Institute President and CEO Walter Isaacson for a discussion on these momentous developments. A panel of experts from Bahrain, Egypt, Libya, Syria and Yemen will discuss the reform movement and prospects for further political change.
Panelists are:
Atia Lawgali (Libya) joined the National Transitional Council in Libya as Minister of Culture in May 2011. He previously served as a private consultant for development and management in Tripoli and Benghazi and was manager of the Health Department Information Center in the Ministry of Health in Benghazi from 1988 to 2000.
Sheikh Mohammed Abu Luhoum (Yemen) is a prominent founding member of the recently formed Justice and Building Party. He served as a member of parliament in Yemen’s first legislature after North and South Yemen were unified in 1990 and joined the ruling party in 2004. He served as chairman of various party committees focusing on the economy and development, and was director of bilateral relations at the Ministry of Development.
Dr. Amal Habib Al Yusuf (Bahrain) is an activist and ophthalmic surgeon focusing on defending the rights of Bahraini patients and healthcare workers. She was one of the doctors trapped in the main hospital in Bahrain during the siege by military forces last March.
Mohammad Al Abdallah (Syria) is a lawyer, human rights activist and writer who formed the Committee for Families of Political Prisoners after his father and brother were arrested. Abdallah faced military trials and was imprisoned twice for his writing and lobbying. Abdallah worked for Human Rights Watch in Lebanon, and now writes for several English and Arabic newspapers and blogs.
Rafat Al Akhali (Yemen) is a youth activist who returned to Yemen from Canada to participate in the protests. Akhali is a leader in Resonate! Yemen, an organization that promotes youth engagement on policy initiatives.
Dr. Muneera Fakhro (Bahrain) was a candidate in Bahrain’s November 2006 and October 2010 parliamentary elections. Fakhro earned her doctoral degree in social policy, planning and administration from Columbia University and served as an associate professor at the University of Bahrain until 2006. She has published three books and authored studies focusing on gender and democracy.
Dr. Azza Kamel (Egypt) is the director of Appropriate Communication Techniques for Development and the founder of the Women Research Centre. As a civic activist, Kamel has published numerous studies on gender equality, the impact of violence against women, the portrayal of women and men in the media, and voter education.
5.  Tail Wags the Dog: U.S.-Pakistan Relations and the Internal Dynamics of Pakistan, SAIS, Rome Building Auditorium, November 6, 5-6:30 pm
Summary: Najam Sethi, editor-in-chief of The Friday Times in Pakistan, and Touqir Hussain (moderator), senior Pakistan fellow in the SAIS South Asia Studies Program and former Pakistani ambassador to Brazil, Japan and Spain, will discuss this topic. For more information and to RSVP, contact southasia@jhu.edu.
6.  NDU National Security Symposium – Forging an American Grand Strategy:  Securing a Path Through a Complex Future, November 8-9
Far too elaborate and complex to reproduce the whole program here.  Check out the Agenda.
7.  Book Discussion:  Counterstrike, CSIS, November 8, 5-6:30 pm

Eric Schmitt
Terrorism Correspondent, The New York Times

and

Thom Shanker
Pentagon Correspondent, The New York Times

Introductory Remarks by

H. Andrew Schwartz
Senior Vice President, CSIS External Relations

Moderated by

Thomas M. Sanderson
Deputy Director and Senior Fellow, CSIS Transnational Threats Project

Tuesday, November 8, 5:00 p.m. – 6:30 p.m.
1800 K Street, NW, CSIS B1 Conference Center

A reception will begin at 5:00 p.m. with light refreshments and snacks. The event will begin at 5:30 p.m. Books will be available for purchase. RSVP required for admission.

8.  Ripples Across the Sands:  The Impact of the Fall of Gaddafi ion Security in the Maghreb and Sahel, Atlantic Council, November 9, 2-4:30 pm
Please join the Michael S. Ansari Africa Center on November 9 for a panel discussion on the impact of the fall of Muammar Gaddafi on security in the Maghreb and Sahel. The panel will begin with a briefing on the current situation and will then proceed to a discussion of these questions from a variety of angles, including that the new Libyan government and the US military’s efforts at building regional counterterrorism capabilities and encouraging cooperation between local partners. It will conclude with a sobering analysis of the potential threat for even greater insecurity in the event that the current challenges are not addressed.

While the death of Muammar Gaddafi and the virtual collapse of his regime forces have freed Libyans from more than four decades of tyranny, it has also complicated the security situation for their neighbors in the Maghreb and Sahel. Fighters loyal to the deposed dictator have taken refuge abroad and, as cross-border attacks they have carried out from Algeria show, still pose a threat, not only to the new government in Tripoli, but to regional stability. Moreover, there is the question of the impact that the arrival of mercenaries and others who fought for Gaddafi as well as copious quantities of arms will have in a region already beset by various armed movements from Taureg tribesmen to al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb to the Nigerian group Boko Haram to the Polisario Front separatists as well as penetrated by narco-traffickers and other criminals.

Panel Discussion with

Geoffrey D. Porter
President
North Africa Risk Consulting, Inc.

Fadel Lamen
President
American Libyan Council

Roger Peña
Senior Legislative Assistant for Defense and Foreign Affairs
Office of Senator Kay Hagan

Edward M. Gabriel
Former US Ambassador to Morocco

Moderated by

J. Peter Pham
Director, Michael S. Ansari Africa Center
Atlantic Council

DATE: Wednesday, November 9, 2011
TIME: 2:00 PM – 4:30 PM
LOCATION: Atlantic Council
1101 15th Street NW, 11th Floor
Washington, DC 20005

RSVP with your name and affiliation to ksmith@acus.org.

Religion has been a source of conflict throughout human history, but religion can also be a tremendous force for peacebuilding.

9. Religion and Peacemaking:  Reflections on Current Challenges and Future Prospects, USIP, November 9, 9 am-1 pm

For ten years, USIP’s Religion and Peacemaking program has helped lead an evolution of the field. There has been a demonstrated interest in engaging religious leaders in efforts to advance conflict management and peacebuilding. Religious peacebuilding is now integrated into U.S. government policies.

To mark the program’s anniversary, USIP will host a workshop to reflect on what the wider field of religious peacebuilding has achieved and how best to move forward over the next decade. On November 9, a panel of practitioners, policymakers and academics will address the challenges and opportunities of religious peacebuilding and how outside actors, including the U.S. government, can support such opportunities.

Speakers:

  • Richard Solomon, Introductory comments
    U.S. Institute of Peace
  • Joshua Dubois
    White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships
  • Suzan Johnson Cook
    Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom
  • Scott Appleby
    Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies
  • Rabbi Michael Melchior
    Mosaica Center for Inter-Religious Cooperation
  • Jackie Ogega
    Religions for Peace
  • Qamar-ul Huda
    U.S. Institute of Peace
  • Mohammed Abu-Nimer
    American University
  • David Smock, Moderator
    U.S. Institute of Peace
10.  New Silk Road Strategy: Views From the Region, SAIS , Rome Auditorium, November 9, 5:30-7 pm

Fall 2011 Rumsfeld Fellows Samiullah Mahdi (Afghanistan); Ramid Namazov (Azerbaijan); Khatuna Mshvidobadze (Georgia); Uluk Kydyrbaev (Kyrgystan); Bayasgalan Naranzul (Mongolia); Kakhorjon Aminov (Tajikistan); Jamshed Rahmonberdiev (Tajikistan); Dadebay Kazakov (Turkmenistan); Hikmat Abdurahmanov (Uzbekistan), and Frederick Starr (moderator), CACI chairman, will discuss this topic. A reception will precede the forum at 5 p.m. For more information and to RSVP, contact saiscaciforums@jhu.edu or 202.663.7721.

Tags : , , , , , , ,

Game changer

Politics and Policy in the New Middle East:  that’s what they are calling the Middle East Institute 2011 Annual Conference at the Grand Hyatt, 1000 H Street:

Wednesday, Nov. 16th

6:00pm:  Kickoff Banquet:  Keynote by Bill Burns, DepSecState; awardees Lakhdar Brahimi and Esraa Abdel Fattah

Thursday, Nov. 17th

Conference

8:45 – 9:00am: Opening Remarks: Ambassador Wendy Chamberlin, President MEI

9:00-10:30am: After the Arab Spring: Assessing US Policy In the Middle East

10:45am-12:15pm: The Road Ahead for Emerging Arab Democracies

12:30-2:10pm: Keynote Luncheon:  Samih al-Abed and Yossi Beilin

2:15-3:45pm: Shifting Regional Power Dynamics in an Era of Change

4:00-5:30pm: Economic and Development Strategies for a Middle East in Transition

Tags : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

There are worse fates

The annual EU Forum, a confab sponsored by the Paris-based European Union Institute for Strategic Studies and SAIS’s Center for Transatlantic Relations, convened Thursday and Friday in Washington to focus American and European luminaries on the thing we all call the Arab Spring, even though we know it started last winter, varies from country to country and may not have results as upbeat as the appellation implies.  Almost entirely missing from the day and a half conference were Arab voices.  This was an opportunity for the “the West” to put its heads together, not for the revolutionaries or the oppressive regimes to offer their narrative.

They were nevertheless much present in the minds of the participants, who leaned towards enthusiasm for the values of the protesters, as well as their energy and determination, while worrying about the impact on Western interests. The three big areas of worry arise from

  • the Islamists:  what do they really mean by sharia law?  will they really play fair in democracy?
  • increased Arab support for the Palestinians:  will it make the Israel/Palestine equation even more difficult to solve?
  • sectarianism (will it lead to civil wars and possible spillover to other countries, especially in Syria, Lebanon and Yemen?

Underlying all was a sense that the West has precious few resources with which to respond effectively to the revolutions in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya, to the continuing repression in Syria and Yemen, or to the reforms in Jordan and Morocco, never mind the still solid autocratic regimes in the Gulf or the fragmented polity in Palestine. No one seemed to feel Western credibility or influence was strong, especially in light of the long-standing support (and arms) both Europe and the U.S. had given to Arab autocracies in the past (and continue to provide to Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and others even now).  And everyone was aware that the Chinese, Turks, Brazilians, Indians and other emerging powers will play increasing roles in the Middle East, offering contracts and aid on terms far less complex and burdensome than those of the West.

The Europeans nevertheless came with a strong sense that the Middle East is their “southern neighborhood” and they need to up their game in response to changes that will affect their interests directly, whether through immigration, economic interdependence, oil and gas supplies, contracts, investment and myriad other ties.  Precisely what they are going to do about it was not clear, and there was a strong sense that European policy on the Arab Spring has been re-nationalized.  The British and French in particular are carving out their own distinct approaches, taking advantage of their forward role in the NATO military action against Qaddafi, while other countries are lagging and the EU itself is still contemplating the interior walls of the Berlaymont.

The Americans would like to focus more on Asia, not only Afghanistan/Pakistan but also China and North Korea as threats to national security.  It was clear to all that Europe would not share this Asian interest to the same degree, but yesterday’s talk of Chinese financing to back the euro might change a few minds on that score.  The problem for the Americans is that the Asian challenge requires a very different set of policy instruments from the Arab Spring, which apart from Egypt and Yemen Washington might rather leave primarily to the Europeans (no one of course says this quite so bluntly, but if you follow the money that is what they mean).  Everyone expects, though, that NATO will remain somehow important and in the end the only real military instrument capable of effective power projection available to the Europeans.

There were lots of other points made.  Trade and investment are far more important than aid.  We need to be talking not only with secular women but also with Islamist women.  Liberal economic reform, associated in Egypt and other countries with the old regimes, is in trouble, at least for the moment.  Civil society in the Arab Spring countries needs Western support, but it should not be done through governmental channels but rather by nongovernmental organizations like the American National Endowment for Democracy (and the talked about European Endowment for Democracy).  Western conditionality should focus on transparency and accountability rather than specific policy prescriptions.

I could go on, but I trust the sponsors will be doing a far better job of writing up in due course, and tweets are available from EUISS for those really interested.  Bottom line:  the West is fading even as its values spread.  There are worse fates.

 

 

Tags : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Tweet