Tag: Democracy and Rule of Law
Unfuck Greece
It is difficult to write anything about Greece in the current confused course of events, but I thought this Guardian video captured the situation well:
Unfucking Greece will not be easy. I take it this is the International Monetary Fund report the government is relying on to claim that austerity won’t work. But what the report says is that the debt is unsustainable because of Greek government policy failures.
Later today the Greek Council of State is supposed to rule on the validity of Sunday’s referendum. If it goes ahead, it will be a referendum on staying in the eurozone, though the question posed is not about that but rather about the austerity package the European Union has been pressing.
If I were betting, it would be on a Greek exit from the eurozone, which seems to be the only way to force its creditors into restructuring and reducing its debt. But anyone expecting the good life to return with the drachma is fooling themselves. Devaluation will impoverish Greeks even further.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Who let the Black Christian out?
President Obama’s eulogy yesterday at the Clementa Pinckney funeral in Charleston was both strikingly Black in its cadences–not to mention his rendition of “Amazing Grace”–and Christian in his theology, which includes a concept of grace foreign to a Reform Jew like me:
While the occasion was a somber one, the President has good reason for his new-found confidence and connectedness. He has won in the last week a remarkable series of battles:
- in Congress, he got “fast track” negotiating authority (aka Trade Promotion Authority, or TPA) that will enable him (and eventually his successor) to get an up or down vote on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), without possibility of amendment;
- at the Supreme Court, he won make or break cases on Obamacare subsidies, gay marriage and housing discrimination.
“Fast track” required the President to support Republican maneuvers around Democratic resistance. House Minority Leader Pelosi, who nominally lost, is likely none too upset at the outcome. She got credit from labor unions for resisting TPA, but avoided undermining a Democratic President. The result also liberated Hillary Clinton from the need to take a stand she has been trying to avoid.
I imagine a good number of Republicans feel the same way about losing on Obamacare. They got credit for opposing it but avoided the mess that would have followed annulment of the law. It wasn’t going to help their cause to upset the more than 10 million or so voters who get subsidies for health insurance under Obamacare, never mind the millions who have stayed on their parents’ health insurance because of the law or wouldn’t have insurance at all because of pre-existing conditions. Ditto gay marriage: Republicans are on the record in opposition but can now accept the decision and avoid surrendering the entire LGBT community to the Democrats.
The Supreme Court victories all depended on more conservative justices crossing the line to support more liberal views. The passage of “fast track” depended on Democrats crossing the line to support Republican views on trade.
So American democracy and justice, which not long ago were thought to be hopelessly deadlocked, have somehow bounced back to make important decisions that by my lights go in the right direction.
President Obama has good reason to feel more confident. Maybe that is what allowed him to let the Black Christian out, despite the likelihood that his audience included many who would not support him on gay marriage. I doubt he’ll have much success on gun control, which was one his memes in Charleston yesterday, but for the moment at least it looks as if the Confederate flag will be coming down in many places, another meme he emphasized.
Politics is war by other means. You win some and you lose some. But this was a winning week for President Obama, who is looking like a pretty peppy, Black and Christian, lame duck.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace picks June 15-19
1. Calculating the Costs of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict| Monday, June 15th | 12:00-1:15 | Wilson Center | REGISTER TO ATTEND | This event will explore both the economic and the non-economic factors surrounding the conflict that might influence the parties’ decisions and the long-term implications for Israel, the West Bank and Gaza and the international community. Speakers include: C. Ross Anthony, Senior Economist, RAND Corporation and Director, RAND Israeli-Palestinian Initiative; Lucy Kurtzer-Ellenbogen, Director, Arab-Israeli, U.S. Institute of Peace; Aaron David Miller, Vice President for New Initiatives, The Wilson Center; Ambassador Charles Ries, Vice President, International, RAND Corporation. Presentation by C. Ross Anthony and Ambassador Charles Ries.
2. Global Cooperation Under Threat: Adapting the U.N. for the 21st Century | Monday, June 15th | 1:30-3:30 | Brookings Institution | REGISTER TO ATTEND | The Foreign Policy program at Brookings will host Susana Malcorra, Chief of Staff to the United Nations Secretary-General for a discussion exploring how the U.N. is adapting to new geopolitical, transnational, and sub-state challenges. Speakers include: Susana Malcorra, Chief of Staff to the United Nations Secretary-General; Ambassador Thomas Pickering, Fellow of Foreign Policy, Brookings Institution; Bruce Jones, Acting Vice President and Director, Foreign Policy program, Brookings Institution.
3. The Banyan Tree Leadership Forum with K Shanmugam, Foreign Minister of Singapore | Monday, June 15th | 2:30-3:30 | Center for Strategic and International Studies | REGISTER TO ATTEND | Mr. Shanmugam will discuss Singapore’s bilateral relations with the United States, regional relationships, and the opportunities and challenges facing Singapore. Speakers include: Mr. K Shanmugam, Singapore’s Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Law.
4. Can Afghanistan Stabilize as U.S. Forces Plan Their Exit? | Tuesday, June 16th | 10:00-12:00 | United States Institute of Peace | REGISTER TO ATTEND | The United States’ current policy in Afghanistan mandates a “responsible withdrawal” of U.S. forces by January 2017, when President Obama leaves office. With 18 months to go, a sense of crisis is mounting in Afghanistan as the economy sags, Taliban attacks increase, and the eight-month-old unity government remains deadlocked. Speakers include: Dr. William Byrd, Senior Expert in Residence, USIP; Ali Jalali, Former Minister of the Interior of Afghanistan, Senior Expert in Residence, USIP; Scott Smith, Director, Afghanistan and Central Asia Programs, USIP; Dr. Moeed Yusuf, Director, South Asia Programs, USIP. Moderated by Dr. Andrew Wilder, Vice President, Center for South and Central Asia, USIP.
5. Making the Case for Peace: 2015 Global Peace Index| Wednesday, June 17th | 9:30-11:00 | Center for Strategic and International Studies | REGISTER TO ATTEND | What is the state of global peace in 2015? What are the main threats to peace and how can we prevent violence in the future? What are the implications of these trends for foreign policy and aid interventions? The 2015 Global Peace Index discussion will explore these questions, detailing recent trends in militarization, safety and security, and ongoing conflict, with a focus on analyzing the factors that underpin peaceful societies. Speakers include: Ambassador Rick Barton, Former Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations; Melanie Greenberg, Executive Director, Alliance for Peacebuilding; Matt Wuerker, Editorial Cartoonist and Illustrator, Politico. Moderated by Aubrey Fox, Executive Director, Unites States, Institute for Economics and Peace. Global Peace Index results presented by Daniel Hyslop, Research Manager, Institute for Economics and Peace.
6. Gulf Youth and the City | Wednesday, June 17th | 12:00-1:30 | The Arab Gulf States Institute | REGISTER TO ATTEND | Gulf cities have followed similar paths of urbanization and architecture shaped by state planning and commercial development. Recent events across the globe, from the Occupy movements to the 2011 Arab uprisings, have brought the role of cities in political life to the forefront. However, with few exceptions, Gulf cities are known more as glittering global consumer capitals than places of civic engagement or political struggle.With a dynamic younger generation rising in the Gulf, what is the public’s role, especially youth, in the remaking of their cities? Speakers include: Farah Al-Nakib, Director, Center for Gulf Studies, American University of Kuwait; Diane Singerman, Associate Professor, Department of Government, American University. Moderated by Kristin Smith Diwan, Senior Resident Scholar, Arab Gulf States Institute.
7. The New Politics of Religion and Gender in Israel | Thursday, June 18th | 2:00-3:30 | Brookings Institution | REGISTER TO ATTEND | This year’s Israeli elections provoked resurgent debates over religion and saw the emergence of powerful female voices in the political debate. Join the Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings on June 18 to engage with three of these dynamic Israeli figures, as we launch a new agenda of research and events examining important changes in Israel’s politics and society. Speakers include: Adina Bar Shalom, President and Chairwoman, Haredi College of Jerusalem; Merav Michaeli, Member of Knesset; Rachel Azaria, Member of Knesset, Former Deputy Mayor of Jerusalem.
8. Fighting Terrorism in the Age of ISIS | Thursday, June 18th | 5:00-6:30 | Center for Strategic and International Studies | REGISTER TO ATTEND | Please join the Smart Women, Smart Power initiative for a discussion of ‘Fighting Terrorism in the Age of ISIS’ with Fran Townsend, Former Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Adviser to President George W. Bush. Speakers include: Fran Townsend, Former Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Adviser to President George W. Bush. Moderated by Nina Easton, Senior Associate, CSIS, Editor and Columnist, Fortune, Chair, Most Powerful Women International.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Forget about it
My friends at Pristina daily Koha Ditore sent me some questions this week, mostly focused on Macedonia. They published my replies today:
Q: Macedonian police for two days fought with a group in the town of Kumanovo. How have you seen these developments in Macedonia?
A: So far, I see this mainly as a law and order problem, caused by armed people who allegedly wanted to rebel. The police reacted. That is what they are supposed to do. I can only regret that so many police were killed. But we need to await a full investigation, and trial of those arrested, to get a fuller understanding of what this is all about.
Q: Many residents claimed that this is just a game by the government, after the Gruevski wire-tapping scandal, published by the opposition. Can these developments be linked?
A: I hear people suggesting that somehow the government created the incident. Anyone who spreads that rumor needs to provide evidence. I haven’t seen any. The tapes are more than a little embarrassing, but are you really suggesting that the government killed 14 people to distract attention from them? And where would you find 14 Albanians dumb enough to dress up in battle dress uniforms and carry automatic weapons, to please the Macedonian government and get themselves killed?
I suppose it is possible that the police took action last weekend against a group it had known about for some time. But if someone thought that would distract attention they were wrong: two ministers and an intelligence chief have now lost their jobs. Prime Minister Gruevski is facing strong calls for his resignation, due principally to the material in the wire taps.
Q: Is there a danger that the tension created in Kumanovo will shift into other cities in Macedonia, where the Albanians are in the majority?
A: I hope not. Albanians in Macedonia can gain nothing by supporting an armed rebellion. And they have a good deal to lose. Nonviolent pursuit of rights—both in the streets and in the courts—is part of the normal democratic process. Automatic weapons are not.
Q: How do you see the role of the Albanian political parties in Macedonia. BDI led by Ali Ahmeti continues to be part of the government, despite requests to leave the coalition with Gruevski?
A: My understanding is that even if Ali Ahmeti were to leave the government, Gruevski would still be able to cobble together a majority. And even if Gruevski fell, he might do well in the next election. So what would leaving accomplish? It might even lead to another Albanian party joining the government. No matter how unhappy they may be with a political situation, most leaders will try to figure out how to gain, not lose.
If someone wants to bring Gruevski down, they need to find a majority in parliament to vote no confidence or convince him to resign. He does not appear inclined to do so, as he won big in an election just last year. But my understanding is that there is a demonstration scheduled for May 17. If that is very big and peaceful, it could have a serious political impact. So, too, could action by the courts, if they can find the evidence and the courage. There is a good reason why an independent judiciary is vital in democracy. Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Tough love
Monday’s statement by American Ambassador to Macedonia Jess Baily starts mildly enough but then goes ballistic, starting at 1’50” with criticism of the prime minister for failing to account for allegations of wrongdoing in wiretaps published by the main opposition party:
Yesterday Prime Minister Gruevski fired his interior and transportation ministers as well as his intelligence chief, all of whom have featured prominently in the wiretaps that have generated calls for Gruevski’s resignation. All this occurs in the wake of a gun battle last weekend in which 14 people alleged to be trying to foment rebellion and eight policemen were killed.
So why should anyone more than 300 miles from Skopje care about all this?
The short answer is that they shouldn’t need to. Macedonia got the best of what Western international intervention had to offer: a preventive UN deployment that protected it after independence in 1991, lots of assistance in dealing with the outflow of Albanians from Kosovo during the NATO/Yugoslavia war in 1999, candidacy for the EU membership in 2005 and full qualification for NATO membership by 2008. I’m skipping the rougher moments, but even with those the arc of history is clear: it points Macedonia toward a happy home in Euroatlantic institutions.
But it stalled along the way. Part of the problem lies in Greece, which has blocked EU accession negotiations and NATO membership in contravention of an International Court of Justice decision because it claims exclusive rights to use of the name “Macedonia.” But part of the problem resides inside Macedonia, where the political elite seems more committed to holding on to, and benefiting from, power than to ensuring the establishment of serious democratic institutions. Ivana Jordanovska accuses:
They have rigged elections, taken bribes, wiretapped more than 20,000 citizens, blackmailed businesses, created media content, imprisoned political opponents, exercised control over the judiciary and misused their power for their personal financial benefit.
In three words: abuse of power.
Prime Minister Gruevski had come to power in 2006 as a reformer, and reform he did. His economic program helped Macedonia achieve an unprecedented period of growth and (relative) prosperity. But the economy has suffered in recent years from the Eurozone’s ailments. Gruevski has turned to nationalist flag-waving, electoral fraud, restrictions on press freedom and control over the judiciary to ensure his political dominance. He won 61 of 123 seats in parliament in 2014.
In a democratic society, the normal check on abuse of power comes from the courts and the opposition. The wiretaps have demonstrated Gruevski controls the courts. Macedonia’s opposition has not only been strikingly unsuccessful at the polls but more inclined towards sensationalism than serious critique. The wiretaps have unquestionably embarrassed Gruevski and might have brought him down in a truly democratic environment, but not so far in Macedonia. A big demonstration to push Gruevski to resign is scheduled for May 17.
The best that can be said about the current crisis is that it hasn’t pitted ethnic Macedonians against the one-quarter or so of the population that is Albanian. So far, it is largely a squabble among the Macedonians. Last weekend’s gun battle raised the prospect of interethnic violence, as it recalled an Albanian uprising in 2001. But this time the Albanian reaction seems quite different: instead of expressing sympathy for the alleged rebels, at least some of whom appear to have come from Kosovo, they are wondering out loud whether the whole thing wasn’t a plot by the government to distract attention from the wiretapping scandal.
I find that hard to believe–how would the Macedonian intelligence service find Kosovars dumb enough to dress up in BDU’s and carry weapons into northern Macedonia? But we haven’t got any hard evidence on the issue. I suppose that narrative signals Albanian rejection of armed rebellion and is therefore a good sign, no matter how far from reality.
What Macedonia needs now is tough love. The American ambassador has essentially read Gruevski the riot act. If he fails to respond constructively and concretely, the Europeans and Americans need to be prepared to react forcefully, which means fulfilling the threat to move Macedonia back from the EU and NATO and squeezing its access to international institution funding. That won’t be easy to organize, as the Europeans will fear precipitating instability and ethnic strife. But the risks associated with allowing abuse of power to continue are greater.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Uneasy Kosovo, and Macedonia
Kosova Sot, a Pristina daily, asked me some questions last week and published the answers today. My responses are below (1-18), but then Sunday they sent me an additional question, about Macedonia, which appears first here:
Q: In the meantime armed conflicts occurred in Kumanovo in Macedonia where there were policemen killed, civilians and gunmen. Do you think the situation in Macedonia will escalate? Did Macedonia failed to be a state for all citizens, because Albanians are the nation’s largest after the Macedonians in this country?
A: I think it is too early to speculate on the precise political origins and objectives of the group involved in this incident. But one thing is clear to me: those who challenge state structures in the Balkans today have no justification. The states potentially involved–not only Macedonia but also Kosovo, Serbia, Albania and Bosnia–will need to be prepared to protect themselves from those who intend to use violence to achieve political ends. I’ve got nothing but sympathy for the state security officials called upon to suppress rebellion, so long as they do so in strict observance of the rule of law.
Macedonia is having a hard time. All its citizens need to reflect on how it can begin to move forward on its Euro-Atlantic ambitions. Visible motion in the direction of joining NATO and the EU would do wonders for the country’s internal stability.
1. Kosovo is on the verge of a new challenge, the establishment of the Special Court, which will handle allegations of Dick Marty’s report. Was it an necessary court?
A: No. It was made necessary by the failure of Kosovo and Albania to pursue criminal investigations of people associated with the Kosovo Liberation Army.
2. Among the persons accused in the report of Dick Marty, is the name of the former KLA leader, former Prime Minister Hashim Thaçi. Would you be surprised if his name appears also in the list of defendants?
A: Who could be surprised after years of discussion of this possibility? But I saw no convincing evidence of his involvement in the allegations of the Marty report, and I’ve seen none since then either.
3. This Court will not address, however, war crimes, acts of corruption or political killings. Would it be good that such a Court, to deal with these cases, which remain unresolved?
A: I would like to see the Kosovo courts begin to deal with these issues, as the Serbian courts have begun to do. A sovereign state is obligated to investigate all crimes on its own territory.
4. What consequences can have Kosovo, if parliament fails to vote on constitutional changes that facilitate the establishment of this Court?
A: I suppose it would slow the process of EU integration, which is already far too slow, and displease the Americans.
5. Let us talk about other developments in Kosovo. The coalition of the two major parties, PDK and LDK, is facing increased social pressure of opposition, strikes and protests. Do you think such a government is going to last, knowing that even serious surveys show a record decline in satisfaction with the performance of institutions?
A: If the coalition holds together, the government will last, no matter how many protests and strikes there are.
6. Unofficially there may be about 100 thousand people who left Kosovo during last months, especially after the formation of the new government, that for PDK it was the third consecutive mandate. Are people losing their people?
A: Do you mean is Kosovo losing its people? Yes, I think people are voting with their feet, as we say. Kosovars are looking for jobs and finding at least some of them in Europe.
7. The opposition is protesting against, as they call them, state capture, which in fact is a reality known to all. What do you think, how the state can be de-captured, when those same politicians are being recycled in power?
A: The proper way to remove politicians from power is to win elections. The opposition hasn’t been able to do that. It has every right to protest peacefully, but I’m not sure that will help at the polls.
8. Politicians are the richest caste in Kosovo, while businesses can hardly survive if unrelated to power. Is Kosovo being turned into an oasis of corruption, clientelism, nepotism, as in fact foreign media portrayed us recently?
A: Kosovo seems to me more or less on a par with other countries in the region when it comes to corruption, clientelism and nepotism. It is a small country where everyone knows everyone else, which makes meritocracy difficult. The wealth of politicians troubles me. Someone needs to investigate where the money comes from.
9. The rule of law is in crisis, and nor EULEX is not performing its work. This mission is covered by corruption scandals, while “big fishes”, mentioned once, remain untouchable. Do you see a dose of courage in the Kosovo justice to enable the rule of law?
A: I really don’t think foreigners can penetrate the web of economic and political interests in Kosovo or any other country. I think it takes courageous judges and prosecutors who are native to the environment. I served many years as a diplomat in Italy. Without the courageous Italian anti-Mafia magistrates, there would have been no progress against organized crime there. The Americans helped with intelligence and witness protection, but Italian courage was vital. Read more
RSS - Posts
