Tag: Civil War
Stevenson’s army, February 19
– Fred Kaplan has more on Able Archer.
– Strat Prof Paula Thornhill says troops should be taught the Constitution,
-Fletcher prof says US has 3 conditions necessary for civil war.
–US seeks to restart talks with Iran.
-We’re still flying B-52s, but B1s are being retired.
– Army faces a common but painful trade-off: people [end strength] vs modernization.
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 | July 6 – 10
Notice: Due to recent public health concerns, upcoming events are only available via live stream.
- Online Event: CSIS Debate Series: Great Power Competition | July 7, 2020 | 9:00 AM – 10:00 AM EST | Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) | Register Here
Since the start of the Trump Administration, the United States has identified strategic competition with China and Russia as a core objective in sub-Saharan Africa. In the National Security Strategy, National Defense Strategy, and President Trump’s Africa Strategy, the U.S. government committed itself to counter threats posed by its global rivalries. In December 2018, then-National Security Adviser John Bolton claimed Beijing and Moscow’s activities “stunt economic growth in Africa; threaten the financial independence of African nations; inhibit opportunities for U.S. investment; interfere with U.S. military operations; and pose a significant threat to U.S. national security interests.”
In its fifth and final debate, the CSIS Africa Program asks former U.S. policymakers and African leaders if great power competition is the most constructive framework for formulating and implementing U.S. policies in sub-Saharan Africa. Does it promote stability, prosperity, independence, and security on the African continent? What are the opportunities and risks embedded in this concept? Does it effectively incorporate African perspectives and agency? And how does it evolve during a global pandemic?
Speakers:
Dr. Oby Ezekwesili: Public Policy Analyst & Senior Economic Advisor, Africa Economic Development Policy Initiative
Ken Ofori-Atta: Minister for Finance & Economic Planning, Ghana; Co-Founder, Databank Group
Gayle Smith: President & CEO, ONE Campaign
Juan Zarate: Senior Adviser, CSIS; Chairman & Co-Founder, Financial Integrity Network
Judd Devermont: Director, CSIS Africa Program - Israel’s Growing Ties With the Gulf Arab States | July 7, 2020 | 12:00 PM – 1:30 PM EST | Atlantic Council | Register Here
Once thought to be irreconcilable adversaries, Israel and the Gulf states have quietly grown closer in recent years. Drawing the two camps together is a slew of security, political, and economic interests that in light of changing regional geopolitics, is now out from under the table. Yet the unresolved Palestinian issue as well as limited ties in a number of sectors pose barriers to normalization.
In their just-launched issue brief Israel’s growing Ties With the Gulf Arab States (PDF coming soon), Jerusalem-based journalist Jonathan Ferziger and National Defense University Professor Gawdat Bahgat trace the remarkable evolution of these relationships in recent years. Joining them to discuss suggestions for policymakers are Anne W. Patterson, former Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs,and Marc J. Sievers, Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council and former US Ambassador to Oman.
Speakers:
Dr. Gawdat Baghat: Professor of National Security Affairs, National Defense University
Jonathan Ferziger: Former Chief Political Reporter for Israeli and Palestinian Affairs, Bloomberg News
Ambassador Anne W. Patterson: Former Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs
Ambassador Mark J. Sievers: Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Atlantic Council - The Scramble for Libya: A Globalized Civil War at Tipping Point | July 8, 2020 | 9:30 AM – 10:45 AM EST | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace | Register Here
In the wake of recent battlefield developments in Libya, regional and global powers are maneuvering for influence and supremacy, with far-reaching implications for Libyan sovereignty, stability, and cohesion. What are the interests and goals of these interveners and what prospects remain for peaceful settlement? How have these states weaponized media narratives to augment their military meddling, and what is the effect both inside Libya and abroad?
A distinguished panel of scholars will offer insights into Russian, Turkish, Emirati, Egyptian, and French roles, as well as Libyan perspectives on foreign actors.
Speakers:
Dmitri Trenin: Director, Carnegie Moscow Center
Sinan Ulgin: Visiting Scholar, Carnegie Europe
Jalel Harchaoui: Research Fellow, Conflict Research Unit, Clingendael Institute
Khadeja Ramali: Libyan Researcher (Specialty: Social Media Analysis)
Frederic Wehrey: Senior Fellow, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace - Congressional Perspectives on US-China Relations | July 8, 2020 | 2:00 PM – 3:00 PM EST | U.S. Institute of Peace | Register Here
The U.S.-China relationship is having an increasingly profound impact on the global economy and plays a crucial role in influencing the international order. The House of Representatives’ bipartisan U.S.-China Working Group provides a platform for frank and open discussions and educates members of Congress and their staff. These congressional perspectives toward China have influence over U.S. policy and the bilateral relationship, particularly regarding oversight of the global coronavirus pandemic, implementation of phase one of the U.S.-China trade agreement, and Beijing’s imposition of a controversial new national security law in Hong Kong.
Join USIP as we host the co-chairs of the U.S.-China Working Group, Rep. Rick Larsen (D-WA) and Rep. Darin LaHood (R-IL), for a conversation that explores key issues facing the U.S.-China relationship, shifting views in Congress on the topic, and the role of Congress in managing rising tensions and facilitating engagement between the two countries.
Speakers:
Representative Rick Larsen (D-WA): U.S. Representative from Washington
Representative Darin LaHood (R-IL): U.S. Representative from Illinois
The Honorable Nancy Lindborg: President & CEO, U.S. Institute of Peace - Information in Iran: How Recent Global Events Are Used to Shape & Skew Reality | July 9, 2020 | 9:00 AM EST | Atlantic Council | Register Here
While there has been significant attention given to foreign influence operations by state-actors like Iran, far less has been given to how global events shape—and skew—the reality depicted by the Iranian regime to the Iranian people. Over the past months, Iran has faced new challenges and opportunities in the information landscape – domestically, regionally, and internationally.
Iran has been especially hard hit by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has been exacerbated by heavy-handed censorship about the threat of the disease and the government’s response. The situation has been compounded by an influx of general health misinformation about coronavirus that proved fatal to hundreds of Iranian citizens.
Across the Middle East, COVID-19 is the latest topic in a long-running contest of narratives between regional adversaries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt. The competition is not new, but the topics certainly change with the news.
The Iranian regime has also attempted to shift attention toward other country’s shortcoming in responding to COVID-19 and capitalize on unrest elsewhere, especially racial justice protests over the killing of George Floyd in the United States. This is the latest in an effort not to proactively push propaganda with a focus on domestic control in the face of Iran’s own ongoing protest movement and international competition against adversarial nations.
This digital panel discussion will examine Iran’s information environment in the face of the latest global developments. This event, hosted by the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab and Middle East Program, will provide an overview of these overlapping information conflicts.
Speakers:
Emerson T. Brooking: Resident Fellow, Digital Forensic Research Lab, Atlantic Council
Holly Dagres: Non-Resident Fellow, Atlantic Council
Simin Kargar: Non-Resident Fellow, Digital Forensic Research Lab, Atlantic Council
Michael Lipin: Voice of America
Farhad Souzanchi: Director of Research & Media, ASL19
- How to Lose the Information War: Russia, Fake News, and the Future of Conflict | July 9, 2020 | 1:00 PM – 2:00 PM EST | Wilson Center | Register Here
Since the start of the Trump era, and as coronavirus has become an “infodemic,” the United States and the Western world have finally begun to wake up to the threat of online warfare and attacks from malign actors. The question no one seems to be able to answer is: what can the West do about it?
Nina Jankowicz, the Disinformation Fellow at the Wilson Center’s Science and Technology Innovation Program, lays out the path forward in How to Lose the Information War: Russia, Fake News, and the Future of Conflict. The book reports from the front lines of the information war in Central and Eastern Europe on five governments’ responses to disinformation campaigns. It journeys into the campaigns the Russian and domestic operatives run, and shows how we can better understand the motivations behind these attacks and how to beat them. Above all, this book shows what is at stake: the future of civil discourse and democracy, and the value of truth itself.
Jankowicz will delve into the case studies in the book and the broader implications of disinformation for democracy in discussion with Asha Rangappa, Senior Lecturer at Yale University’s Jackson Institute for Global Affairs and former FBI counterintelligence agent and with Matthew Rojansky, Director of the Wilson Center’s Kennan Institute.
Speakers:
Nina Jankowicz: Disinformation Fellow, Wilson Center
Asha Rangappa: Senior Lecturer, Yale University Jackson Institute for Global Affairs
Matthew Rojansky: Director, Kennan Institute, Wilson Center
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Missing in action
2020 marks the ninth year after Gadhafi’s ouster. On February 24, the Brookings Institution hosted a panel discussion on “Solving the Civil War in Libya.” The discussion featured two speakers: Federica Saini Fasanotti, a nonresident fellow at the Brookings Institution, and Karim Mezran, director of the North Africa Initiative and a resident senior fellow with the Rafik Hariri Center at the Atlantic Council. Michael E. O’Hanlon, senior fellow and director of research in Foreign Policy at Brookings, moderated.
Today’s Libya
Fasanotti described the situation in Libya as bad. Khalifa Haftar and his Tripoli headquartered forces are attacking Tripoli, headquarters of the internationally legitimized Government of National Accord (GNA). Egypt and Russia are supporting Haftar with arms. Even in colonial times, Egypt posed a threat to Italy’s control over Libya due to insurgents’ mobility along the border. Fighters still pass easily over the border, which has allowed Egypt to help Haftar conquer the eastern part of Libya.
Mezran added that the mujahideen fighters believe Muslims are obliged to keep infidels out of the area. But religious narratives are misleading. Haftar is neither an Islamist militia nor a secularist, but rather a creation of foreign powers. The issues are political and difficult to resolve.
Remedies?
Fasanotti attributed the difficulty to solving the Libyan civil war to four factors.
- Media coverage on different narratives is disruptive.
- A variety of militias in Tripoli makes it hard to start a conversation with Haftar.
- Haftar is accused of murder and torture in Benghazi.
- The Berlin Conference and peace talks failed.
Both Haftar and the GNA have become stronger because of their external backers. Russia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey all have different economic and political interests in Libya. This spoils the chance to bring peace.
Mezran believes that peace plans don’t work because situations keep changing on the ground. Bombardments against civilians induce continued struggles and attempts at negotiation. Mezran suggests neighboring states, such as Egypt and Algeria, can do much more than the Berlin Conference.
Fasanotti is disappointed that the US is missing in action in Libya. She called for President Trump to expand bilateral relations and encourage the Secretary of Defense to resolve conflicts with Libya. Mezran argues that Libya is not important in comparison with other US geopolitical interests in the region, which make it unlikely the US will restrain the states that support Haftar.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks | February 24 – 28
After Suleimani: Crisis, Opportunity, and the Future of the Gulf | February 24, 2020 | 9:00 AM – 12:15 PM | Center for Strategic and International Studies | Register Here
The killing of Gen. Qassem Suleimani in January 2020 sent conflicting signals about the depth of U.S. engagement in the Gulf. The United States seems intent to diminish its presence while keeping an active hand in regional affairs. Meanwhile, Russia and China are exploring ways to reshape their own presence in the region.
Please join the CSIS Middle East Program for a conference to examine the Gulf region in the wake of General Qassem Suleimani’s death. Two expert panels will explore security threats and new opportunities for diplomacy in the region. General Joseph L. Votel will then deliver a keynote address on Great Power competition in the Gulf, followed by a Q&A moderated by Jon B. Alterman, senior vice president, Zbigniew Brzezinski chair in global security and geostrategy, and director of the Middle East Program.
Speakers:
General Joseph L. Votel, President and CEO, Business Executives for National Security
Ambassador Anne Patterson, Former Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, U.S. State Department
The Honorable John McLaughlin, Distinguished Practitioner in Residence, Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS)
Dr. Ali Vaez, Iran Project Director, International Crisis Group
Ambassador Douglas Silliman, President, the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington
The Honorable Christine Wormuth, Director, International Security and Defense Policy Center, RAND Corporation
Jon B. Alterman, Senior Vice President, Zbigniew Brzezinkski Chair in Global Security and Geostrategy, and Director, Middle East Program
Solving the Civil War in Libya | February 24, 2020 | 11:00 AM – 12:00 PM| Brookings Institute | Register Here
With armed factions vying for control of the country’s strategic assets and United Nations-facilitated negotiations leading nowhere, 2020 has seen no improvement to the turmoil that has plagued Libya since the ouster of Moammar al-Gadhafi in 2011.While the self-styled Libyan National Army of General Khalifa Haftar continues, unsuccessfully, to try to take over the country militarily, the internationally-recognized government of Prime Minister Fayez Serraj in Tripoli, propped up by militias opposed to Haftar, retains control over major institutions and sources of national wealth. With the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt backing Haftar, and Turkey and Qatar backing Serraj, weapons of increasing sophistication are flowing to opposing sides, pitting foreign powers against each other and violating U.N. sanctions.
Meanwhile, facing a stagnant economy and constant threats to infrastructure, the Libyan people are caught in the crossfire of this protracted jockeying. Unchecked migration and the threat of extremist groups taking hold in the country’s contested spaces likewise make Libya’s internal situation a security concern for Europe and the United States. Solving the civil war in Libya would restore needed stability to a strategically vital part of northern Africa, while laying the groundwork for the prosperity of the Libyan people.
On February 24, the Brookings Institution will host an event to discuss these issues. Moderated by Michael O’Hanlon, the conversation will feature Federica Saini Fasanotti, whose new book “Vincere: The Italian Royal Army’s Counterinsurgency Operations in Africa 1922-1940” provides timely and salient insight into the history of warfare in Libya.
Speakers:
Michael E. O’Hanlon (moderator), Senior Fellow and Director of Research for Foreign Policy at Brookings Institute
Federica Saini Fasanotti, Nonresident Senior Fellow for Foreign Policy and Center for 21st Century Security and Intelligence at Brookings Institute.
Karim Mezran, Resident Senior Fellow, Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East at the Atlantic Council
Turkey Forging Its Own Path: Looking at the Changing US – Turkish Relations | February 24, 2020 | 12:00 PM – 2:00 PM | Middle East Institute| Register Here
Turkey’s relations with the West are at an all-time low. Scarcely a day passes without a report or headline on the front page of leading newspapers questioning Turkey’s reliability as a Western ally. The widening gulf between Turkey and the West and the increasing number and the growing complexity of the issues over which the two sides differ make it imperative to understand the dynamics of the relationship between Turkey and the West. The Middle East Institute (MEI) is pleased to host a launch event for Dr. Oya Dursun-Özkanca’s new book, Turkey–West Relations: The Politics of Intra-alliance Opposition. In her book, Dr. Dursun-Özkanca seeks to explain how and why Turkey increasingly goes its own way within the Western alliance and grows further apart from its traditional Western allies.
Please join us for a discussion on US-Turkish relations with Dr. Dursun-Özkanca and the director of MEI’s Center for Turkish Studies Dr. Gönül Tol. Books will be available for purchase at the event.
Speakers:
Oya Durson- Özkanca is the endowed chair of International Studies and Professor of Political Science at Elizabethtown College.
Gönül Tol, moderator, is the founding director of The Middle East Institute’s Center for Turkish Studies.
Colombian Human Rights Leaders Protect Their Peace | February 24, 2020 | 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM | United States Institute of Peace | Register Here | Will be live webcast
Since the agreement with the FARC was signed in 2016, human rights leaders in Colombia have been operating in an increasingly high-risk climate. Just last month, the U.N. released a report detailing the elevated numbers of threats and assassinations targeting human rights leaders throughout 2019—particularly in rural areas and against those advocating on behalf of women and ethnic groups such as indigenous and Afro-descendant communities. But despite this growing security risk, the winners of the 2019 National Prize for the Defense of Human Rights have worked tirelessly to advance and protect core tenets of the peace agreement in their communities.
Organized by the Swedish humanitarian agency Diakonia and the ACT Church of Sweden, the Colombian National Prize for the Defense of Human Rights honors social leaders as they continue to defend their communities’ right to security, land, education, health, reparations, and access to justice under the 2016 deal.
Join the U.S. Institute of Peace,
the Washington Office on Latin America, and the Latin America Working Group
Education Fund as we host the winners of the 2019 awards. These leaders will
discuss how they engage diverse social sectors as well as local, regional, and
national institutions and authorities to promote peace and ensure democratic
spaces for civic engagement.
The event will be streamed live. To follow the conversation on Twitter, use
#ColombiaPeaceForum.
Speakers:
Clemencia Carabali, 2019 National Prize for the Defense of Human Rights “Defender of the Year” Award Winner, Director, Association of Afro-descendant Women of Norte del Cauca
Ricardo Esquivia, 2019 National Prize for the Defense of Human Rights “Lifetime Defender” Award Winner; Executive Director, Sembrandopaz
Lisa Haugaard, Co-Director, Latin America Working Group Education Fund; Juror, National Prize for the Defense of Human Rights
Annye Páez Martinez, Representative of the Rural Farms Association of Cimitarra River Valley; 2019 National Prize for the Collective Experience or Process of the Year
Marco Romero, 2019 National Prize for the Defense of Human Rights “Collective Process of the Year” Award Winner, Director, Consultoría para los Derechos Humanos y e Desplazamiento
Gimena Sánchez- Garzoli, Director for the Andes, Washington Office on Latin America; Juror, National Prize for the Defense of Human Rights
Keith Mines (moderator), Senior Advisor, Colombia and Venezuela, U.S. Institute of Peace
After Parliamentary Elections: Iran’s Political Future | February 26, 2020 | 10:00 AM – 11:15 AM | Woodrow Wilson Center | Register Here | Event will be live webcast
Iran’s parliamentary elections are set for February 21, 2020. Reformists won a plurality in 2016, but the balance of power is up for grabs after the failure of the reformists’ domestic and foreign agendas, growing discontent reflected in multiple rounds of protests, the tightening security crackdown, and economic woes spawned by the Trump administration’s maximum pressure campaign.
Speakers:
Robin Wright (moderator), USIP- Wilson Center Distinguished Fellow, Journalist and author of eight books, and contributing writer for The New Yorker
Ali Vaez, Iran Project Director, International Crisis Group
Ariane Tabatabai, Visiting Assistant Professor, Georgetown University
Kenneth Katzman, Specialist, Middle East Affairs, Congressional Research Service
What’s in store for U.S. – Turkey relations in 2020? | February 27, 2020 | 2:00 PM – 3:30 PM | Turkish Heritage Organization | Register Here
Speakers:
Jennifer Miel, Executive Director, U.S.- Turkey Business Council, U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Col. Richard Outzen, Senior Advisor for Syrian Engagement, U.S. Department of State
Mark Kimmit, Brigadier General (U.S. Army, ret)
José Andrés on Humanitarian Relief | February 27, 2020 | 6:00 PM – 7:00 PM | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace | Register Here
For a decade, Chef José Andrés and his nonprofit, World Central Kitchen, have been on the humanitarian frontlines. What have they learned? And how can the humanitarian sector renew and revitalize itself for the coming decade?
Carnegie President Bill Burns will host Chef Andrés for a wide-ranging and timely conversation, part of The Morton and Sheppie Abramowitz Lecture Series. The series honors former Carnegie president Morton Abramowitz and his wife Sheppie, two renowned leaders in the world of humanitarian diplomacy, and highlights prominent thinkers and doers who follow in their extraordinary footsteps. NPR’s Nurith Aizenman will moderate.
The event will be preceded by a light reception from 5:00 to 6:00 p.m.
Speakers:
José Andrés is an internationally-recognized culinary innovator, New York Times bestselling author, educator, television personality, humanitarian, and chef/owner of ThinkFoodGroup. In 2010, he founded World Central Kitchen, a nonprofit that provides smart solutions to end hunger He was named one of Time Magazine’s 100 Most Influential People in both 2012 and 2018, and awareded Outstanding Chef and Humanitarian of the Year by the James Beard Foundation.
Nurith Aizenmanis NPR’s correspondent for global health and development. She reports on disease outbreaks, natural and manmade disasters, social and economic challenges, and innovative efforts to overcome them. Her reports can be heard on the NPR News programs Morning Edition and All Things Considered.
William J. Burns is president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He previously served as U.S. deputy secretary of state. He is the author of The Back Channel: A Memoir of American Diplomacy and the Case for Its Renewal.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Reconstruction in the Middle East
On January 16 the Middle East Institute hosted a panel discussion titled, Reconstruction in the Civil War Zones of the Middle East. The panel showcased the upcoming release of the World Bank’s Building for Peace in MENA: Reconstruction for Security, Sustainable Growth and Equity this coming February, the Middle East Institute’s Escaping the Conflict Trap, and Fractured Stability: War Economies and Reconstruction in the MENA.
Speakers on the panel included, Steven Heydemann, nonresident Senior Fellow in the Center for Middle East Policy of the Brookings Institution, Luigi Narbone, Director of the Middle East Directions Programme at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies at the European University Institute, Francesca Recanatini Senior Public Sector Specialist in Governance at the World Bank, and Ross Harrison, senior fellow at The Middle East Institute and faculty of the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. The panel was moderated by Paul Salem, President of the Middle East Institute.
Inaccurate assumptions
Heydemann criticized three assumptions that the international community typically uses to guide reconstruction efforts that are contextually mistaken:
- War completely destroys the pre-war economy.
- Since pre-war institutions are destroyed, the task of post-conflict is to rebuild states and use this reconstruction effort to avoid future conflict.
- The destruction of the prewar institutions generates constituencies that wholeheartedly support reconstruction.
Heydemann critically analyzed these assumptions in the context of the MENA region, proclaiming that oftentimes in MENA there is continuity in the economic norms and practices during wartime. War even amplifies and further consolidates these norms. Secondly, conflict empowers actors to reimpose institutions they can exploit, reigniting previous conflicts. In the process of power sharing negotiations, weak participants are more concerned with positions than than reconstruction efforts.
Harrison emphasized the need for the right diagnosis of the regional conflicts in order to design proper solutions. He challenged the notion that regional actors are only proxy actors, proclaiming that this model is not complex enough to reflect the actual situation. We need realignment at the international and regional levels to create a cooperative environment for reconstruction to take place in.
Competing powers
Narbone spoke about the typical Western liberal blueprint utilized in post-conflict settings, which is not the only power in the region. The MENA conflicts incorporate a plethora of leaders in the region who do not believe in this model, specifically Russia and Iran. Consensus is lacking on the drivers of conflict, with each participant blaming the others. “Reconstruction fatigue” may be appealing but it will have detrimental effects.
Local participation
Recanatini centered her rhetoric around the World Bank’s upcoming report and the importance of citizen participation. After surveying 15,000 Yemeni, Iraqi, and Libyan citizens, asking “What do you believe has been lacking in previous peacebuilding work in your country?” over 19% of Yemenis interviewed, 18% of Libyans interviewed, and 17% of Iraqis agreed that the international community is lacking a vision guiding peacebuilding. Recanatini emphasized the need for international organizations to speak with different actors to ensure that all parts of society are being incorporated and heard. She also urged thinking outside of mandates and crossing into sectors and areas traditionally unexplored by international organizations.
What now?
The panelists all agreed that while civil war conflict zones in MENA would need billions of dollars for reconstruction, smaller grants of money can be used to set examples. Without this kind of support the resulting society will be full of disparities, hierarchies of privilege, vast discrimination and marginalization, etc. All the panelists posited that there is not just one solution to reconstruction in the context of the Middle East. We must be critical of any assumptions underlying efforts in the region.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
One more time: prevention
The Keough School of Global Affairs July 18 hosted a multi-panel event titled “Unity on Global Fragility: Can Today’s Momentum in Washington Stop Tomorrow’s Violent Conflicts?” The event was headlined by Senator Chris Coons (Delaware) and Senator Todd Young (Indiana) who sponsored the Global Fragility Act of 2019. After remarks by Denise Natali, Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations at the State Department, a panel discussion was held featuring Pete Marocco, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations, Patrick Antonietti, Director of Stabilization and Peace Operations in the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Stability and Humanitarian Affairs, Department of Defense, Shamil Idriss, CEO, Search for Common Ground, and Dafna Rand, Vice President for Policy & Research, Mercy Corps. Uzra Zeya, President and CEO, Alliance for Peacebuilding, moderated.
A second panel followed immediately with Rear Admiral Tim Ziemer (US Navy, Ret.), Senior Deputy Assistant Administrator in the Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance at USAID, Anne A. Witkowsky, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Stability and Humanitarian Affairs, Nancy Lindborg, President and CEO, US Institute of Peace, Jake Harriman, Founder ad CEO ofNuru,and Anselme Wimye, Director of Program Quality, DRC Bukavu Office, Search for Common Ground. The second panel was moderated by George A. Lopez, Rev Theodore M. Hesburgh, Professor Emeritus of Peace Studies, Keough School of Global Affairs. Dean Scott Appleby, Marilyn Keough Dean, Keough School of Global Affairs, University of Notre Dame provided the opening and closing remarks.
Here are 5 takeaways from the event:
1. Prevention is better than reactive response:
Senator Young shared a UN statistic that there are currently more than 400 violent conflicts worldwide and half of the conflicts that ended since 2000 restarted within 7 years. Senator Coons added that the US counter-terrorism strategy since 9/11 has been ineffective and costly, listing Libya and Syria as examples of failure. If the US doesn’t invest in prevention it will end up paying more on the back end. The deployment pace for US troops is too high and often times they are ill equipped to deal with the challenges they face, which don’t require direct application of force. Young quoted Benjamin Franklin’s “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” Ziemer said many USAID operations running now are because of prior ineffectiveness in prevention.
2. Prevention needs more funding, better spending and updated success metrics:
Current spending on preventive measures is inadequate and wastes the limited funds available. Coons stated it costs $1,000,000 for every soldier deployed abroad per year, much more than it would cost to send humanitarian and development workers to stabilize weak countries. Admiral Ziemer added that the $1.2 billion over the next 5 years provided by the Global Fragility Act is a drop in the bucket of the budget. One issue is the difficulty in measuring a non-event, making it harder to justify spending to constituents. How do you value avoided cost and pain? To address this the Senators propose new metrics for success rather than money spent, which isn’t tied to any actual results. Both agree that spending should be monitored and if proven to be ineffective should be reevaluated. Witkoswky mentioned much of the funding comes with constraints hampering progress, highlighting the need for more flexible funding.
3. The problem of risk-aversion:
All the panelists agreed that the State Department is too risk averse. Without taking risks and accepting failures it can’t be effective in the crisis areas that most need its help. Harriman said adopting a “fail fast, learn fast” mentality will allow State to work in crisis areas and build off prior experience to formulate better strategy.
4. The need for inter-Agency cooperation and cohesive strategy:
Both the Senators and panelists agree a more cohesive strategy is needed to effectively address global fragility. Currently different departments within the US government and its allies work in many places to fight global fragility but their efforts are fragmented. Defense, Diplomacy and Development need to work together. The State Department needs to work better alongside the Department of Defense to formulate a joint strategy. Coons said “We need to retrain everybody to play the same game.”
Marocco finds State needs to deploy more with the Defense Department to understand the situation on the ground instead of dictating policy from Washington. Antonietti believes stabilization can be planned during all stages of conflict and shouldn’t be left to wait until the initial fighting is over. Harriman added the military needs to find better ways to work with nongovernmental organizations in conflict areas to win hearts and minds. He also emphasized the tendency to promote humanitarian assistance when sustainable development is needed to solve root issues. Anselme Wimye affirmed all the above points, saying that often policies are well-intended but ignore the situation on the ground and the needs of the people who live in crisis areas. If the US. can create a cohesive strategy including military, State Department, allies, and NGOs real progress can be made.
5. Understanding the long-term
Global fragility is a long-term issue. The US can’t spend for 5 years and expect large-scale results. The timeframe is at least a decade, so there is a need for continued support and funding. Ziemer pointed to the President’s Malaria Initiative (2005), which had roughly the same cost, bridged 3 administrations and resulted in a 60% reduction of mortality from malaria. The framework to deal with global fragility is in place, now the hard work of improving it, funding it, and working with allies has to be stepped up to have a significant impact.
A full video of the event is available here.
RSS - Posts
