Tag: Democracy and Rule of Law
Stevenson’s army, July 22
– Despite the Constitution’s requirement that the census count “the whole number of free persons” but “excluding Indians not taxed,” the Trump administration wants somehow to exclude noncitizens from the count. NYT explains the politics.
– The administration also wants to send agents in DHS to act as local police in Democrat-controlled cities. Lots of push-back on that — from James Comey, from the heads of Lawfare, from the Atlantic’s David Graham. Even SecDef Esper worries that agents in camouflage gear might be mistaken for active duty troops. I give all these articles because I am outraged by this — and I’m not usually outraged. I will acknowledge that law prof Steve Vladeck calls it “lawful but awful.” Drezner also weighs in.
More on the media focus from CJR: In recent days, media critics have argued that federal agents in Portland were trying to get national attention—namely from right-wing media. Right-wing outlets have been on top of the story. Sean Hannity and others have provided wild descriptions of Portland as a warzone where the Trump administration has bravely fended off leftist mobs hellbent on anarchy. As The Oregonian’s Eder Campuzano reported over the weekend, that’s nonsense: a majority of protesters have been peaceful; violent clashes have been limited to a small section of the city during nighttime hours. Since the truth does not match Trump’s preferred narrative—that Democratic-led cities are on fire, and only he can put out the flames—it appears that his administration is using blunt force to put on a show of his law-and-order bonafides. On Sunday, Anne Applebaum, of The Atlantic, told CNN that the crackdown on Portland amounts to “performative authoritarianism.” Will Bunch, of the Philadelphia Inquirer, called it “made-for-TV fascism.”
After a 20 month hiatus, reportedly to avoid contradicting the president, DNI Ratcliffe has agreed to testify on global threats before the Senate Intelligence Committee early in August.
AEI’s Norm Ornstein predicts election day shambles
Politico details the pre-election measures against China, most recently ordering closure of its Houston consulate.
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, June 16
[You’re reading, aren’t you? Actually 2 separate topics. Clickbait 101.]
– FT says US is increasingly viewed as unreliable by its Asian allies.
– Japan drops Aegis Ashore missile defense — too expensive, too delayed.
– North Korea blows up liaison office. Some analysis from Daily Beast writer.
-Unintended consequences: Atlantic article tells how “sex” discrimination was added to civil rights act as a poison pill, a joke, that enabled textualist Justice Gorsuch to support gay rights.
– Trump said US troops would leave Germany. Are they going to Poland?
– Dems have good reasons to oppose DOD policy nominee.
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, June 7
– CJCS Milley has reached out to Capitol Hill leaders.
– “General” Barr backtracks, too. But Politico has photos of his anti-protester activities in 1968.
– A former speechwriter for Gen. Dunford describes weakening of civilian control of US military.
– Several reports say Trump demanded 10,000 active duty military to be deployed in DC.
-WaPo writer suggests US counterinsurgency and urban warfare doctrine has made militarization of police more acceptable.
– WSJ has long article describing souring of US corporate views of China.
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:
No law, no order
President Trump is trying to claim the mantle of law and order: he has urged governors to crack down on demonstrators and threatened to mobilize military forces, not to mention boasting of the ferocity of his White House guards and their willingness to rough up a crowd. Just one little problem with all this: he is trying to impose order without respecting the law. Remember when he urged police not to be too gentle when arresting people? That’s essentially what he is urging now, on a grand scale.
The law does not allow the use of American military forces for domestic law enforcement, with the exception of the National Guard when mobilized not by the President but rather by governors. The law requires police to respect the right to life, not to suffocate a handcuffed prisoner with a knee on his neck. The law does not allow the President’s guards to mistreat demonstrators. Nor will doing any of those things bring order.
Of course his 40% of America understands that Trump’s crackdown will not be on them. The Trumpians are almost entirely white and mostly male. They will continue to carry their guns into state capitals to intimidate legislators. They will continue to act as agents provocateurs attracting demonstrators into violent acts. Trump’s targets will be his political opponents: Antifa is his convenient smear for them. And he has claimed, with no evidence whatsoever, that they are acting on behalf of his political opponent, Joe Biden.
This is not law and order. It is no law and no order. It is intended to provoke a violent reaction, which then helps to justify the escalation of the violent crackdown. Trump’s autocratic impulses have long been apparent. The current disorder in American cities provides him with the perfect excuse for acting on those impulses. The order he wants is a diktat: freedom for his supporters, imposed discipline for everyone else.
That is not the only reason the violence is unwise. It will also limit participation in the protests and lessen the political pressure to undertaken the difficult law enforcement reforms required. It is all too obvious that America’s police need retraining to “serve and protect.” Instead, police departments will feel justified in continuing to acquire the vast arsenal of military equipment the Federal government makes available to them. That, in turn, isolates the police from citizens and provokes hot heads to raise the ante with even more violence.
This kind of violent spiral is a losing proposition for both the protesters and the police. The protesters end up with less support. A lot of people aren’t going to join the protests if there is a risk of violence. The police have to use more and more violence to impose their will. That puts them at risk too. The best policing is community policing that is in close touch with the citizens. It requires dialogue and understanding, not tear gas and flash/bangs. Order prevails when communities feel the police are on the citizens’ side. That’s what we teach abroad. That’s what we should do at home.
Here is the no law and no order President posing awkwardly yesterday with a Bible he all too clearly finds an alien object in front a Church opposite the White House. He had peaceful protesters teargassed so he could do it, without asking the church’s permission:
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Tenuous transitions
“The two most populous countries in the Horn of Africa—Ethiopia and Sudan—are both struggling with once-in-a-generation political transitions. Complicating these already tenuous transitions is a convergence of worrying trends, such as widespread food insecurity, severe pressure on public finances, ongoing or unresolved internal conflicts, large numbers of displaced persons, and now, the coronavirus pandemic. The fate of the transitions in Ethiopia and Sudan may determine the broader prospects for peace in the region for years to come.” On May 28, the United States Institute of Peace held an online discussion on the specific challenges facing the political transitions in these countries. The discussion was led by Aly Verjee and featured four speakers:
Manal Taha: Sudan Program Advisor, United States Institute of Peace
Payton Knopf: Senior Advisor, United States Institute of Peace
Aaron Maasho: Independent Journalist
Emebet Getachew: Ethiopia County Program Manager, Life and Peace Institute
Aly Verjee (Moderator): Senior Advisor, United States Institute of Peace
Current Context
In opening remarks, Verjee underscored that moments of great promise and great peril characterize the current transitions of both Ethiopia and Sudan. Striking parallels in regard to internal tensions, inclusivity, economic and environmental pressures, and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic tie these nations together despite their differences.
Sudan
Taha believes that in order to make any real progress, the transitional government of Sudan must change its focus of reform within the capital of Khartoum to the regions in which the revolution began. Security reform, in particular, remains complicated in Darfur because of the presence of various armed groups. During the transition in Sudan, the voices of youth and women have remained underrepresented. This notable weakness of the transitional government can in part be attributed to the inherent patriarchal social structure of Sudanese society. To remedy this problem, Taha calls for further solidarity among Sudanese women across political and socio-economic lines.
Knopf highlighted that in the year since the Sudanese revolution took place and Omar al-Bashir was deposed, many citizens maintained unrealistic expectations for the pace of change within Sudan. The vast majority of Sudanese people sense opportunity for renewal, reinvigorating Sudanese cultural pride and patriotism that was tarnished from years of brutality by the al-Bashir regime. The establishment of the transitional arrangement in Sudan avoided the worst-case scenarios of state fragmentation or dramatic escalation of violence.
Ethiopia
Speaking on the election of Abiy Ahmed as the Prime Minister of Ethiopia, Maasho noted that a sense of optimism initially erupted across the country. Since then, Ethiopia has remained quite fragile and ravaged by ethnic tensions and rivalry. In the last three years, ethnic violence has led to the displacement of nearly three million people. Although the Ethiopian government has pressured displaced peoples to return to their communities, further eruptions of violence remain likely. Notably, Maasho believes that Covid-19 has generated a downward economic trajectory that will exacerbate tensions.
Getachew stresses that the government of Abiy Ahmed is trying to further consolidate its power and build institutions reflective of its own interests. The failure to establish checks and balances will result in authoritarianism. It remains too early to discern whether democracy has truly arrived in Ethiopia. In regard to the status of women, Getachew praised the appointment of women to various governmental positions. Although this may signal that Ethiopians are ready for women to hold key positions within society, one must remain skeptical of deeply entrenched ideas that have informed gender-based discrimination.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Covid crackdowns and mobilization
“Government responses to the new coronavirus are disrupting civil society all over the world. But while government measures are dramatically restricting civic space, the global crisis is also catalyzing new forms of mobilization.” On May 20, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace hosted a discussion on “Global Civil Society and the Pandemic.” The discussion was moderated by Thomas Carothers and featured three other guest speakers:
Thomas Carothers (Moderator): Senior Vice President for studies, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Yousseff Cherif: Deputy Director of Columbia Global Centers, Tunis
Maureen Kademaunga: Doctoral Researcher at the Human Economy Research Program, University of Pretoria, South Africa
Janjira Sombatpoonsiri: Associate Fellow at the German Institute of Global and Area Studies (GIGA)
Vijayan MJ: Independent researcher and writer, Research Collective, New Delhi, India
Current context
In his opening remarks, Carothers touched on the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s current research on the state of civil activism throughout the world. There are conflicting narratives. On one hand, there has been a trend toward governmental restriction on the role and function of civil society. On the other hand, a new generation of dynamic, fluid, and tech-savvy civil activists has emerged despite increasing state restrictions.
Carothers believes that the COVID-19 pandemic intensifies this dualism within civil society. Many governments throughout the world have implemented state lockdowns and have increased restrictions on freedom of movement, freedom of association, and freedom of speech. Carothers views the current period as “the most restrictive period in living memory for civic activism.” Despite this fact, Carothers highlights that the COVID-19 pandemic creates an enormous need for citizens to engage, respond, and find ways to improve governmental responses to the virus.
Changing roles
Cherif highlights new roles the COVID-19 pandemic has created for civil society groups in Tunisia. Many organizations have shifted their work from democracy promotion and governance to combating COVID-19. This includes aiding hospitals, distributing masks, and cleaning public spaces. In places where the government has proven to be inefficient or too weak to act, civil society groups have continued the work of government and have led COVID-19 relief initiatives. Although the Tunisian government has shown interest in working with these groups during the pandemic, Cherif believes that future cooperation remains unlikely.
Kademaunga believes that the government of Zimbabwe has utilized the COVID-19 crisis to justify further restrictions on civil society groups. Government human rights abuses against civil society groups in Zimbabwe are increasing. Simultaneously, these groups continue to increase their efforts in assisting the government of Zimbabwe in the provision of essential services during the current lockdown.
Vijayan states that civil society groups in India quickly changed their agendas at the start of the COVID-19 crisis. During the initial stages of the pandemic, civil society groups took charge when the Indian government remained absent. Indian civil society groups have been more efficient than the Indian government in devising a plan of action.
Transformation of activist means
Cherif observes that the COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically increased the online presence of civil society groups on various digital platforms throughout the Arab world. Civil society groups have utilized webinars as spaces for new online discussions. Notably, some have started to increase their educational initiatives online.
Kademaunga predicts that the shift towards online platforms post-COVID-19 will harm those in rural areas who do not possess widespread digital access. Previously, in Zimbabwe they accounted for the majority of civil society participation. Kademaunga stressed that this changing dynamic will foster heightened inequality between rural and urban areas. Ultimately, those within urban centers will dominate the agenda making processes for civil society groups.
A pivotal moment for legitimacy
Cherif regards the COVID-19 pandemic as pivotal to how ordinary citizens view the legitimacy of civil society groups. Previously, the majority of Tunisians viewed civil society groups as unfavorable and distant from the rest of society. Due to their integral role in providing support during the current crisis, these groups have gained legitimacy and favorability.
Kademaunga believes that the COVID-19 pandemic will bring about a major change in the perception of civil society society groups in Zimbabwe. Traditionally, the government of Zimbabwe has fueled negative discourse against civil society groups. However, the role of civil society groups in providing aid amid the COVID-19 pandemic disproves negative stereotypes that portray these groups as being in opposition to the interests of general citizens.
RSS - Posts
