Tag: Colombia
Stevenson’s army, September 11
– Intercept says Africom leader misled Congress.
– In FP, Cato analysts say Colombia is not proof US military can stop drug cartels.
– NYT says some Members oppose Ukraine aid despite benefits to their districts.
– Lawfare draws security assistance lessons from Ukraine.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. 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:
Reaching for the Heights, but failing
I enjoyed a discussion today at USIP prompted by Fred Hof’s Reaching for the Heights. The book treats Fred’s ultimately failed negotiation for peace between Israel and Syria. It would have returned the Golan Heights (and more) to Syria in exchange for Syria’s strategic reorientation away from Iran, Hizbollah, and Hamas. Chet Crocker presided. Barbara Bodine and Bernie Aronson provided perspective on Yemen and (mostly) Colombia. My assignment was the Balkans. Here are the talking points I prepared, but used only in part:
- First: compliments to Fred for this forthright, interesting, and well-written account of an important but failed negotiation. We need to understand what makes things go wrong, even when so much has been done to make them go right.
- My role here is to comment on how Fred’s experience compares and contrasts with that in the Balkans. I am struck in the first instance by the stark differences.
Stark contrasts
- Both the Bosnia and Kosovo outcomes happened in the unipolar moment when the U.S. could do pretty much whatever it wanted, at least when it came to countries with a few million inhabitants. Working after America was weakened in Iraq and Afghanistan, Fred dealt with a potent ally and a substantial adversary, backed by Iran, Hizbollah, and Hamas.
- Richard Holbrooke in the 1990s wielded all the levers of American power—not only diplomatic but also political, military, and economic. Fred at no time had all the levers of American power in his hands: his role was diplomatic and vaguely economic, not military or even political.
- Holbrooke’s objective in Bosnia was to end a war both sides were tired of fighting. Fred was trying to do something harde. After a long but not very hurting stalemate, entice Syria to reorient itself strategically, cutting ties with Iran, Hizbollah, and Hamas that had helped the Assads survive in power for four decades. He was also trying to get Israel to give up attractive real estate on which it had settled tens of thousands of citizens.
- Other contrasts: the soft-spoken, detail-oriented, and considerate George Mitchell and Dennis Ross vs. the bold, egotistical, and bombastic Holbrooke, the zero-sum territorial equation in the Middle East vs. the identity-focused Bosnian conflict and the sovereignty-focused Kosovo one, the static stance of the Middle Eastern protagonists vs. the rapidly changing situations on the ground in the Balkans, the deep knowledge of Syria that Fred brought to the challenge vs. Holbrooke’s comparatively superficial grasp of the Balkans.
Parallels: the negotiating framework
- But there are also some enduring parallels. Most important is that negotiations need a mutually agreed framework. Holbrooke achieved this in a series of meetings leading up to Dayton that defined basic parameters: one country, two entities, mutual diplomatic recognition, return of DPs and refugees, a powerful international intervention.
- Fred achieved it by building on a framework that John Kerry initiated. Holbrooke likewise often used Congressional pressure from both sides of the aisle to good advantage in the Balkans. State Department officers often complain about Congress but woe to the American diplomat who hasn’t learned to use Congressional clout with foreign governments!
Parallels: key US roles
- The agreed frameworks in both the Balkans and the Syria/Israel negotiation were vulnerable to mutual mistrust and to domestic politics. The U.S. as guarantor was vital in both. Washington needed to be ready to play a major role not only in the negotiations but also in the implementation of any agreement.
- In Bosnia, Holbrooke delivered America’s friend, Izetbegovic, to an unsatisfactory agreement. Only the side-agreement equipping and training Bosnian forces made that possible. The side-letter between Israel and the U.S. would have played a similar role in the Syria negotiation, but delivering Israel was certainly a heavier lift.
- Fred notes the importance of “top cover,” protection from those in your own government who might have ideas of their own or not like yours. Holbrooke frightened off potential meddlers. That is different from the protection rooted in respect that Dennis Ross provided to Fred, but the effect was similar. Without top cover, no American negotiator can survive. It seems half an international negotiation is always with Washington.
- Relief from sanctions played a key role in the Balkans, as it would have had to do also vis-à-vis Syria. Lifting sanctions is at least as important as imposing them if you want to get results.
Failure is always an option
- It was Bashar’s violent crackdown on the demonstrators that made lifting sanctions impossible for Washington. Milosevic’s violent repression of the Kosovo rebellion did likewise in the Balkans. We shouldn’t expect autocrats to behave differently when challenged domestically. .
- One concluding thought, admittedly beyond my remit.
- Fred hasn’t entirely convinced me, or himself, that Bashar would have been able to reorient Syria in the Western direction, even if he regained every inch of territory he sought. The Iranians and Hezbollah would have made Assad’s life—and maybe his death—very difficult if he tried. Nor am I, or Fred, convinced that Bibi was prepared to give up the Golan Heights.
- Such re-orientations more often come before international agreements, not because of them. That is what happened with Sadat’s Egypt. That also happened throughout Eastern Europe at the end of the Cold War and with Ukraine, though of course in Ukraine we haven’t yet seen whatever international settlement will emerge.
- My reservations about Fred’s assessment of the situation only increase my admiration for what he tried to do. Negotiations are never a sure thing. The Dayton agreements were completed in penalty time. Kosovo was settled only after a negotiation failure at Rambouillet.
Courage merits admiration
- Fred faults himself in the end for failing to convince American policymakers of the contribution a Syria/Israel peace agreement would have made to U.S. national interests and to a more comprehensive Israel/Arab peace.
- My bottom line is different. Fred Hof is a courageous man who tried to do the right thing on the issue entrusted to him. This book enables his substantial successes and his ultimate failure to educate those who come next. I am grateful for the book and admire the courage.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, August 8
– An individual Senator is slowing work on infrastructure bill.
– In fact, the Senate has been meeting on a lot of weekends in recent years.
-NYT reports on fall of Kunduz to Taliban.
– NYT also details recruitment of mercenaries from Colombia.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, July 11
I can’t figure out what’s happening in Haiti, but sure hope somebody can. WaPo says observers fear a “Somalia in the Caribbean.“
NYT summarizes the power struggle. There’s a poor country with a long history of poverty, political violence, corruption. No wonder the US doesn’t want to get involved militarily. WaPo has scary first-person story.
Nobody knows who hired the Colombian mercenaries who are alleged to be the assassins
of the president. I’m waiting for one of the China hawks to blame Beijing because Haiti is one of the few countries to recognize Taiwan and there was a break in at the embassy [I don’t think this is likely, but conspiracy theories don’t require evidence.]
Catching up with other items worth reading:
– How WH reporters are coping with Trump’s absence.
– Dan Drezner explains “lab leaks” from IR scholars. He draws on FP piece by former APSA Congressional Fellow Paul Musgrave.
– FP notes Chinese interest in bases across the Indo-Pacific.
– Since President Biden made a vigorous defense of his Afghanistan policy and even answered questions, I thought you should see the full transcript.
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 | May 17 – May 21
Notice: Due to public health concerns, upcoming events are only available via live stream
1. Migration and Displacement in Libya: Converging Challenges and Pathways Forward | May 18, 2021 | 10:00 AM – 11:00 AM ET | Middle East Institute | Register Here
Speakers
Mohamed Abu Araba: Program Manager, Bawader Foundation
Malak Edoudi: Livelihoods officer, Danish Refugee Council
Mohamed Hmouma: Program manager, Almotawaset Organization for Migration and Relief
Mohamed Saad: Lecturer, faculty in Chemical Engineering, University of Sirte
Jean-Louis Romanet Perroux (moderator): Director and co-founder, NAPI
This event will feature several of NAPI’s Young Policy Leaders and NAPI affiliates, who will discuss their research on the impact of migration and forced displacement in Libya. There are currently an estimated 12.4 million displaced people across the MENA region: a tremendous humanitarian emergency that is compounded by various environmental and governance factors. In Libya, the International Organization for Migration (IOM) accounted for 245,000 IDPs in February 2021, and over 620,000 returnees since 2016. Together, they make up close to 900,000 displaced Libyans in five years, which is approximately 14% of the Libyan population. In addition to IDPs, IOM tracked 576,000 migrants in Libya in February 2021, although these do not include migrants in movement and those in the hands of people traffickers. The speakers’ research spans intersections such as the economic recovery of people impacted by conflict, the state of migrant detention centers, the rights of migrant workers, the experiences of IDPs in establishing livelihoods, and the connection between climate change and displacement.
2. The Marine Corps and the future of warfare | May 18, 2021 | 10:00 AM – 11:00 AM ET | Brookings Institution | Register Here
Speakers
Gen. David H. Berger: Commandant, Marine Corps
Michael E. O’Hanlon (moderator): Director of Research, Foreign Policy
The Marine Corps is pursuing significant changes to address the realities of great power competition, including implementing a new force design. Evolving technology, uncertainty about the budgetary and fiscal environment, and accelerating innovation by America’s emerging competitors have forced the Marine Corps to adapt by reconfiguring itself to better address the nation’s future defense outlook. Much work, though, remains to be done. On May 18, Foreign Policy at Brookings will host Commandant of the Marine Corps General David H. Berger to discuss Marine Corps modernization, the budgetary environment, and the challenges of great power competition.
3. After the pandemic: Health security and multilateralism at work | May 19, 2021 | 8:00 AM – 9:30 AM ET | European Council on Foreign Relations | Register Here
Speakers
Werner Baumann: CEO, Bayer
Gunilla Carlsson: Vice-Chair, Global Fund Strategy Committee
Sergio Dompé: President of Dompé Farmaceutici
Anthony Dworkin: Research Director and Senior Policy Fellow, ECFR
Alessandro Speciale (moderator): Rome Bureau Chief, Bloomberg
The covid-19 pandemic has highlighted the vulnerabilities of an interconnected world, but it has also created a new sense of urgency behind the need for multilateral action, which has been shown to be directly connected to the health and well-being of individuals in every country.
4. What is the road ahead for Colombia? | May 19, 2021 | 9:30 AM ET | Atlantic Council | Register Here
Speakers
Adriana Mejía Hernández: Vice Minister of Multilateral Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Colombia
Jason Marczak (moderator): Director, Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, Atlantic Council
Amid the third peak of the pandemic, over 400,000 people took to the streets in Colombia to protest a now-withdrawn tax-reform bill proposed by the government to address the country’s economic crisis. In some cities, protests were permeated by criminal acts, vandalism, and blockades. What steps is the Colombian government taking to address social and political tensions? How will Colombia stabilize its fiscal deficit and public debt? How can the United States support its longstanding ally at this critical moment?
5. Yezidis in Iraq & Syria: Genocide, Recovery & Geopolitical Challenges | May 19, 2021 | 1:00 PM – 2:30 PM ET | Wilson Center | Register Here
Speakers
James F. Jeffrey: Chair, Middle East Program
Amy Austin Holmes: Public policy fellow, Harvard University
Pari Ibrahim: Executive Director, Free Yazidi Foundation
Murad Ismael: President, Sinjar Academy
Nadine Maenza: Commissioner, US Commission on International Religious Freedom
Merissa Khurma (moderator): Program Director, Middle East Program
The Biden Administration must develop policies for Iraq and Syria that prioritize Yezidi and minority rights and must ensure that Yezidis do not suffer persecution and further marginalization even after the military defeat of ISIS. This panel will discuss the challenges and opportunities for Yezidis, the geopolitical terrain, and possible paths forward for the United States.
6. Economic Security of the Black Sea Region: Internal and External Challenges | May 19, 2021 | 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM ET | Middle East Institute | Register Here
Speakers
Altay Atli: Founder, Atli Global
The emerging market economies of the Black Sea – including Turkey, Ukraine, and Georgia – are facing significant economic challenges, amplified by the COVID-19 pandemic. Such challenges are impacting the overall security of these countries, and the security of the wider region. The Middle East Institute’s (MEI) Frontier Europe Initiative is pleased to host a panel event to explore these challenges. What are the internal economic dynamics of Turkey, Ukraine, and Georgia? How can they adequately manage a post-pandemic recovery, both as individual states and through cooperation with regional neighbors?
7. Calibrated Resistance: The Political Dynamics of Iran’s Nuclear Policymaking under Trump | May 20, 2021 | 12:15 PM – 2:00 PM ET | Belfer Center | Register Here
Speakers
Abolghasem Bayyenat: Stanton Nuclear Security Postdoctoral Fellow
Drawing parallel with domestic and international conditions leading to the successful conclusion of the JCPOA in 2015, this research seeks to put Iran’s nuclear policymaking during the Trump administration into perspective and explain why Iran pursued the strategy of calibrated resistance, how this strategy became possible, and why alternative policies became unthinkable or impossible.
8. Elections and crises in Somalia and Ethiopia | May 20, 2021 | 10:00 AM – 11:30 AM ET | Brookings Institution | Register Here
Speakers
Abdirahmen Aynte: Co-Founder, Laasfort Consulting Group
Bronwen Morrison: Senior Director, Dexis Consulting Group
Lidet Tadesse: Policy Officer, European Centre for Development Policy Management
Vanda Felbab-Brown (moderator): Director, Initiative on Non-State Actors
For over a year, Somalia and Ethiopia have faced severe crises in governance and security. As Ethiopia heads into elections in early June, the Tigray insurrection against the central government has metamorphosed into an entrenched insurgency, even as external powers such as Eritrea have reinforced the Ethiopian military. Dangerous tensions have also escalated between Ethiopia and Sudan. In Somalia, an effort by President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed to delay presidential and parliamentary elections and extend his rule has brought the country to the edge of a civil war. Intersecting with complex rivalries in the Red Sea region and the Middle East, tensions between Somalia’s federal government and federal member states risk wiping out a decade of stabilization efforts. Meanwhile, the terrorist group al-Shabab has been growing stronger over the past four years. On May 20, Foreign Policy at Brookings will convene a panel to discuss these internal crises, their regional complexities and repercussions, and June elections in Ethiopia and Somaliland — a state within Somalia. After their remarks, panelists will take questions from the audience.
9. The Role of Integrated Air and Missile Defense for Strategic Deterrence | May 21, 2021 | 10:00 AM – 11:15 AM ET | Center for Strategic and International Studies | Register Here
Speakers
LTG Daniel Karbler: Commander, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command
Tom Karako: Senior Fellow, International Security Program and Director, Missile Defense Project
Please join the CSIS Missile Defense Project on Friday, May 21 for a conversation on the U.S. Army’s space and air and missile defense plans with Lieutenant General Daniel Karbler, Commander of the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command.
10. After Navalny’s Arrest: Whither the Russian Opposition | May 21, 2021 | 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM ET | Wilson Center | Register Here
Speakers
Leonid Volkov: Head, Network of Regional Headquarters for Alexei Navalny
Matthew Rojansky (moderator): Director, Kennan Institute
The return to Russia and subsequent imprisonment of Alexei Navalny represents a possible turning point in Russian domestic politics. Navalny’s reappearance on the Russian stage sparked a series of large protests and a predictable sharp reaction from authorities. Can the opposition remain organized and united in light of this crackdown, or will Putin’s authoritarian turn be sufficient to maintain his grip on power?
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks | October 12 – October 16, 2020
1. What Do Africans Think About the Continent’s Future? | October 13, 2020 | 9:00 – 10:10 AM EDT | United States Institute for Peace | Register Here
New data from Afrobarometer’s latest round of public attitude surveys provide important guideposts for U.S. policymakers and Africa analysts. Findings from 18 countries offer insights on Africans’ aspirations for sovereignty, self-sufficiency, and democratic and accountable governance—as well their inclination toward open borders and free trade rather than protectionism. They also reveal a continued preference for the United States over China as a development model, their rejection of “debt diplomacy,” and their belief that English, rather than Chinese, remains the international language of the continent’s future.
These findings come amid wide recognition that progress on democratic governance in Africa has stalled, with many African governments falling back to authoritarian practices. The effectiveness of U.S. policy has been questioned as a result, and analysts have argued that U.S. policy toward Africa needs to be updated and revitalized. This is especially true in the context of a global pandemic that has undermined African economies and livelihoods, raised threats to governance and the rule of law, and revealed the potential global implications of access to health services.
Join USIP and Afrobarometer for a first look at Afrobarometer’s latest survey research and results, as well as a discussion on how the data can help guide U.S. government policy in Africa and provide key insights for policymakers on trends and potential threats to peace and security in Africa.
Speakers:
Ambassador Johnnie Carson: Senior Advisor, U.S. Institute of Peace
Dr. E. Gyimah-Boadi: Interim CEO, Afrobarometer
Dr. Carolyn Logan: Director of Analysis, Afrobarometer; Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Michigan State University
Josephine Appiah-Nyamekye Sanny: Regional Communications Coordinator/Anglophone West Africa, Afrobarometer and Ghana Center for Democratic Development
Susan Stigant, moderator: Director, Africa Program, U.S. Institute of Peace
2. COVID-19 and the Futures of Conflict in the Middle East | October 14, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
Ongoing analysis in the Middle East Institute’s (MEI) Strategic Foresight Initiative is examining scenarios of what conflict in the region could look like in 2025 based on different combinations of factors related to the COVID-19 pandemic. MEI is pleased to bring together experts to pose two important questions: What signals do we see of the pandemic’s impacts affecting foreign policy and conflict behaviors of key actors in the region? How are long standing social dynamics in the region being affected by the pandemic and in turn influencing conflict dynamics?
Speakers:
Alexandra Clare: Co-founder and CEO, Re:Coded
Nancy Ezzeddine: Research Fellow, Clingendael Institute
Ross Harrison: Senior Fellow and Director of Research, MEI
Steven Kenney, moderator: Non-resident scholar, MEI; founder and principal, Foresight Vector LLC
3. The Impact of COVID-19 on Local Peacebuilding in the Middle East | October 14, 2020 | 9:30 – 11:00 AM EDT | United States Institute for Peace | Register Here
The outbreak of COVID-19 in conflict zones was regarded by many as an opportunity for peace. But today, the stark reality in many conflict zones has shown that the opportunity may have been missed. Cease-fires are being ignored, and the politics of the pandemic have enabled conflict and violence rather than deterred them. The past few months have shown that while the COVID-19 health crisis will eventually subside, its economic, social, and political implications will unfortunately outlive it. In the face of these challenges, how are local peacebuilding efforts in the Middle East coping with the far-reaching effects of the pandemic in both the short- and long-term?
Join USIP and the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) for a panel discussion featuring peacebuilding experts and practitioners from the Middle East. The online conversation will look at the implications of COVID-19 on peacebuilding at the local level in three particular Middle Eastern contexts—Yemen, Syria, and Iraq—as well as how regional and international actors should engage in the Middle East to support local peace actors as they try to preserve the gains they’ve made over the past few years.
Speakers:
Dr. Elie Abouaoun, opening remarks: Director of Middle East and North Africa Programs, U.S. Institute of Peace
Dr. Sultan Barakat: Founding Director, Center for Conflict and Humanitarian Studies
Dr. Kathryn Nwajiaku-Dahou, opening remarks: Director of Politics and Governance, ODI
Mrs. Nadwa Al-Dawsari: Non-resident Fellow, The Middle East Institute
Mrs. Noor Qais: Program Officer, Sanad for Peacebuilding, Iraq
Dr. Sherine Taraboulsi-McCarthy, moderator: Interim Senior Research Fellow, The Politics and Governance Program (ODI)
4. Conversation on a ReSTART for U.S.-Russian Nuclear Arms Control | October 14, 2020 | 11:30 AM—12:30 PM EDT | Carnegie Endowment for Peace | Register Here
The last remaining U.S.-Russian nuclear arms control agreement, New START, is rapidly approaching its end. President Trump seeks a new agreement that includes China and covers all nuclear warheads. But is this approach feasible? If not, what provisions should be included in a successor to New START?
Please join us for a conversation with James Acton and Pranay Vaddi from Carnegie’s Nuclear Policy Program, as they share insights from their new report: “A ReSTART for U.S.-Russian Nuclear Arms Control: Enhancing Security Through Cooperation.” They will be joined by Alexei Arbatov, and Rose Gottemoeller as moderator.
Speakers:
James M. Acton: Jessica T. Mathews Chair and co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program; senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Pranay Vaddi: Fellow in the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Alexey Arbatov: Head of the Center for International Security at the Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations.
Rose Gottemoeller: Distinguished Lecturer at the Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford University. Previously served as deputy secretary general of NATO.
5. Obstacles to a Free and Fair Presidential Election in Syria | October 14, 2020 | 16:00—17:30 EEST | Carnegie Endowment for Peace | Register Here
Syrian presidential elections are scheduled for 2021. President Bashar al-Assad and his close confidants have said that they will go ahead with the elections without a new constitution and irrespective of whether they meet the standards of the political process outlined in Security Council Resolution 2254.
Holding a fair presidential election would require many legislative changes, and new mechanisms to allow internally displaced persons and refugees to vote en masse. Adding to the complications at a practical level are the opaque and questionable voter rolls and a lack of appropriate voting procedures. Additionally, the political and security environment inside Syria would need to change significantly. Voters would need to feel that the election process is safe, fair, and legitimate. These conditions do not presently exist and achieving them requires far more than minor amendments to the electoral law and voting mechanisms. There is also a need to consider the role of elections as part of a successful peace or transition process. Legitimizing elections prematurely would likely do more harm than good.
What precisely would a fair election in Syria look like? What are the voting options available for those residing outside Syria? What are the practical tasks and timelines required for achieving a free and fair election in Syria—decoupled from arbitrary timelines? Join us on Wednesday, October 14 from 4:00–5:30 p.m. Beirut (3:00-4:30 p.m. CEST) to discuss the upcoming presidential election in Syria. The discussion will be held on Zoom in English with simultaneous interpretation to Arabic. To join, please register for the event here.
Speakers:
Assaad Al-Achi: executive director of Baytna Syria.
Sead Alihodzic: senior programme manager with the Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.
Dima Moussa: member of the Syrian Opposition Coalition.
Vladimir Pran: senior technical adviser for the International Foundation for Electoral Systems.
Emma Beals: senior advisor at the European Institute of Peace and is an independent consultant focused on Syria.
6. Why Denouncing White Supremacy Creates Safety, Security, and Racial Equity | October 14, 2020 | 2:00 – 3:00 PM EDT | Brookings Institute | Register Here
During the first presidential debate, President Donald Trump avoided an explicit denouncement of white supremacists and instead asked them to “stand down and stand by.” These remarks were reminiscent of his statement after the deadly 2017 white supremacist rally in Charlottesville when he said that there were “very fine people on both sides.” Racist rhetoric from government officials, including calls to incite voter intimidation and promote civil unrest, are sadly not unprecedented in American history. In fact, the increasing use of social media among white supremacists for hate speech, along with the racial and ethnic tribalization surfacing over the last few years, have stifled the country’s attempts to combat racism and systemic inequalities.
While white supremacist groups are finding a geopolitical landscape that has grown more supportive of their rhetoric and activities, Black Americans are also exercising resistance and resilience in light of recent alarming statements. Like the historic civil rights movement, Black Lives Matter has drawn Americans to grapple with contemporary nationalism. America is now in fragile times that deserve the attention of federal, state, and local policies to confront white supremacy and other historical vestiges standing in the way of racial healing and reconciliation.
On October 14, Governance Studies at Brookings will host a conversation on the roots of white supremacy, the impact of racist rhetoric during critical moments in history, and how Black Americans, as well as other people of color, have responded and continue to respond. Panelists will also offer policy recommendations for how the country can promote racial empathy and redress the symptoms of power, race, and privilege, which will be critical issues facing the next administration.
Speakers:
Nicol Turner Lee, moderator: Senior Fellow – Governance StudiesDirector – Center for Technology Innovation
John Allen: President – The Brookings Institution
Keisha N. Blain: Associate Professor of History – University of Pittsburgh2020-2021 Fellow, Carr Center for Human Rights Policy – Harvard University
Fredrick C. Harris: Nonresident Senior Fellow – Governance Studies
Darrell M. West: Vice President and Director – Governance StudiesSenior Fellow – Center for Technology Innovation
7. Examining the EU-Iran-US Triangle | October 15, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
Since the US withdrawal from the Iran nuclear agreement in May 2018, France, Germany and the UK (the E3 countries) have been under pressure from both Washington and Tehran. The Trump administration has tried unsuccessfully to gain E3 support for its sanctions-based maximum pressure policy, including the extension of the arms embargo on Iran resulting in tensions at the UN Security Council. Tehran has been pressuring the bloc for economic aid and sanctions relief while lobbying the E3 to save the JCPOA and defend Iranian interests. Within Iran, leaders including Supreme Leader Khamenei have been particularly critical of the E3 and called for Iran to build stronger ties with more dependable states like China.
Frustrated by Tehran’s destabilising regional activities and escalation of its uranium enrichment program and Washington’s unilateral approach, the E3 has maintained unity on its JCPOA strategy. It has not however been able to provide meaningful political and economic solutions, resolve differences between Tehran and Washington, or address the many outstanding bilateral issues on the table.
In this webinar, organized by the Middle East Institute and Chatham House’s MENA Programme, speakers will discuss and unpack the triangular challenges and opportunities for Washington, Tehran, and the E3 and consider how the US presidential election might impact dynamics going forward.
Speakers:
Clément Therme: Post-doctoral research fellow, Nuclear Knowledges Program, Sciences Po; research associate, School for Advanced Studies in Social Sciences
Sanam Vakil: Deputy director and senior research fellow, Middle East and North Africa Programme, Chatham House
Azadeh Zamirirad: Deputy head, Middle East and Africa Division, German Institute for International and Security Affairs
Alex Vatanka, moderator: Director, Iran Program, Middle East institute
8. Lessons for Afghanistan from Colombia’s Peace Process | October 15, 2020 | 9:00 – 10:30 AM EDT | United States Institute for Peace | Register Here
Formal talks are underway between the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the Taliban to end over four decades of violent conflict and instability. At this vital phase of the Afghan peace process, it’s important to draw lessons from recent negotiated settlements. The comprehensive settlement between the Colombian government and the FARC has become one of the most widely recognized examples of how a comprehensive peace process can address the root causes of violence and result in a political settlement. While the Colombian and Afghan conflicts are distinct in many ways, Colombia is an important reference point that could provide some valuable insights and an imperfect roadmap for Afghanistan.
There isn’t a single standard model for negotiations—but analyzing historical processes, understanding their application, and identifying opportunities to adapt to specific contexts can serve countries who seek to resolve and transform seemingly intractable conflicts.
Join USIP and the Embassy of Afghanistan for a discussion on important lessons from the Havana Process with the FARC, highlighting both the successes and shortcomings of the negotiation and its implementation. This is the first discussion in an ongoing series launched by the Embassy of Afghanistan that examines peace processes around the world. Panelists will explore the importance of political consensus building, how to address continued violence, the role of neighboring countries and third-party facilitators, among other pressing issues.
Speakers:
Scott Worden, welcoming remarks: Director of Afghanistan and Central Asia Programs, U.S Institute of Peace
Her Excellency Roya Rahmani: Ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan to the United States
Bernard W. Aronson: Founder and Managing Partner, ACON Investments. Former U.S. Special Envoy to the Colombian Peace Process
Humberto de la Calle: Former Colombian Government Chief Negotiator, Former Vice President of Colombia
Sergio Jaramillo: Senior Advisor, European Institute of Peace. Former Colombian High Commissioner for Peace
Dag Nylander: Director, Section for Peace and Reconciliation, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Former Norwegian Special Envoy to the Colombia
Alejo Vargas Velásquez: Director of the Center on the Peace Process, Vice Dean on Research, Faculty of Law, Political and Social Sciences, National University
Belquis Ahmadi, moderator: Senior Program Officer, U.S. Institute of Peace
Paula Garcia-Tufro, moderator: Project Director, U.S. Institute of Peace
9. Russia and China: Common interests and rivalry in South Caucasus and Central Asia | October 16, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
Russia’s recent Kavkaz 2020 military exercises have demonstrated the scale and scalability of Russian military capabilities in the broader Caspian region. A number of other states, including China and Iran, also took part in Kavkaz 2020, which was an impressive show of military force. The recent renewed fighting between Armenia and Azerbaijan have underlined the fluid power politics of the region where Moscow’s once dominant position is under question.
Is such multilateral military cooperation a signal of a genuine deepening of Russian-Chinese understanding and cooperation in this part of the world that Moscow has for so long considered to be its “near abroad”? What is the nature of the Russian-Chinese relationship overall in and around the Caspian region; what are the areas of complementarity and how much of the joint Russian-Chinese efforts are aimed at countering American and other Western interests?
Speakers:
Mark Galeotti: Non-resident scholar, Frontier Europe Initiative, MEI
Bruce Pannier: Senior Central Asia correspondent, RFE/RL; editor, Qishloq Ovozi blog
Niva Yau: Resident researcher, OSCE Academy in Bishkek; fellow, Foreign Policy Research Institute
Alex Vatanka, moderator: Director, Iran Program; senior fellow, Frontier Europe Initiative, MEI
10. Russia’s War in Donbas: Ripe for a Resolution? | October 16, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:15 AM EDT | United States Institute for Peace | Register Here
More than six years after Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and invasion of eastern Ukraine, there is little evident movement toward a peaceful resolution of the conflict. The implementation of a package of measures dubbed the “Minsk II” process—which calls for a cease-fire, troop withdrawal, the return of border control to Kyiv, and local elections—is bogged down. Both Ukraine and the international community are looking for new solutions that would bring about a long-awaited peace.
Join USIP and prominent experts and policymakers for a discussion on possible solutions for resolving the ongoing conflict. The event will look at the current status of peace negotiations, as well as what a settlement might look like, the war’s political and social consequences and how COVID-19 has exacerbated its effects, and how regional dynamics—including instability in neighboring Belarus—have the potential to influence Ukraine’s security situation.
Speakers:
Ambassador William B. Taylor: Vice President, Office of Strategic Stability and Security, U.S. Institute of Peace
George Kent: Deputy Assistant Secretary, European and Eurasian Bureau, U.S. State Department (to be confirmed)
Orysia Lutsevych: Research Fellow and Manager, Ukraine Forum, Chatham House
Oleksii Reznikov: Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine, Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine
Ambassador Volodymyr Yelchenko : Ambassador, Embassy of Ukraine to the United States
Donald Jensen, moderator: Director, Office of Strategic Stability and Security, U.S. Institute of Peace
RSS - Posts
