Tag: Democracy and Rule of Law
This week’s peace picks
The holiday season has ended. Monday is particularly busy:
1. A Bleak Winter: Providing Needed Aid to Those Fleeing Conflict in Syria, Monday January 14, 9:30 AM – 11:00 AM, Migration Policy Institute
Venue: Migration Policy Institute, 1400 16th Street NW, Washington, DC 20036, Suite 300 (third floor), MPI Conference Room
Speakers: Mort Abramowitz, George Rupp, Fadi al Khankan, Kathleen Newland
The humanitarian crisis in and around Syria is intensifying as more people are forced to flee their homes in the face of continuing violence. More than half a million Syrians have left the country, at least two million are internally displaced, and many more have seen their normal lives and livelihoods destroyed. As winter sets in, stocks of food and fuel are dwindling. The strain on neighboring countries is testing their ability to keep borders open to Syrian refugees and international assistance is not keeping up with the growing needs. No one seems to expect an early end to the displacement, even if the Assad regime falls in the near future.
A delegation of the International Rescue Committee (IRC) visited Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, and Iraq in late November to discuss the humanitarian crisis with refugees, officials from host and donor governments, representatives of international humanitarian organizations and local nongovernmental agencies; and to get a firsthand look at the work of IRC partners and staff who are directly involved in providing assistance to the refugees and to Syrians trapped inside the country.
Please join MPI and IRC on January 14 to discuss the delegation’s report, augmented by the perspective of Dr. Al Khankan, representing the Syrian Expatriates Organization, an organization of Syrian professionals who are raising funds, sending critically needed supplies, and providing direct humanitarian assistance within Syria. The discussion will be moderated by MPI’s Kathleen Newland, who is an IRC overseer and was a member of the delegation that produced the report.
Register for this event here.
2. Conference on Israel’s 2013 Election, Monday January 14, 10:00 AM – 3:30 PM, Georgetown University
Venue: Georgetown University, 37th and O Streets NW, Washington, DC 20057, Copley Hall, Copley Formal Lounge
Speakers: Moran Stern, Natan Sachs, Natasha Mozgovaya, Ghaith Al-Omari, Dennis Ross, Dan Schueftan, Robert Lieber, David Makovsky, Robert Wexler
A conference examining the upcoming general election in Israel, scheduled for January 22, 2013. Experts will discuss the issues that will be factors influencing Israelis as they prepare to go cast their ballots.
This all-day conference in Copley Hall’s Formal Lounge will feature three panels examining domestic politics, regional politics, and Israel-US relations.
Domestic Politics, 10:00 am-11:30 am
Moran Stern (Georgetown, moderator); Natan Sachs (Saban Center at the Brookings Institution); Natasha Mozgovaya (Haaretz Daily Newspaper)
Regional Politics, 11:40 am-1:00 pm
Moran Stern (Georgetown, moderator); Ghaith Al-Omari (American Task Force on Palestine); Amb. Dennis Ross (Georgetown); Dan Schueftan (Georgetown); Gunol Tol (Middle East Institute)
Israel-US relations, 2:00 pm-3:30 pm
Robert Lieber (Georgetown, moderator); David Makovsky (Washington Istitute for Near East Policy); The Honorable Robert Wexler (S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace).
Register for this event here.
3. A Kingdom’s Future: Saudi Arabia Through the Eyes of its Twentysomethings, Monday January 14, 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM, Wilson Center
Venue: Woodrow Wilson Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004, 5th Floor
Speaker: Caryle Murphy
The “Arab Awakening” has focused the world’s attention on young people in the Arab world, where they have been agitating for political reform. But what about young Saudis, who have not taken to the streets like many of their peers? Have they been affected by the “Arab Awakening?” A Kingdom’s Future: Saudi Arabia Through the Eyes of Its Twentysomethings explores the self-image of young Saudis and what they want when it comes to education, marriage, politics, religion, and personal liberties. It is based on research during Murphy’s three-year reporting tour in the kingdom, as well as scores of interviews while a public policy scholar at the Wilson Center.
Register for this event here.
3. Turkey Rising: Challenges and Prospects for the New Administration, Monday January 14, 12:30 PM, Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Venue: Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 1828 L Street NW, Washington, DC 20036, Suite 1050, Stern Library and Conference Room
Speakers: Ross Wilson, James F. Jeffrey, Soner Cagaptay
With a booming economy and improving ties with the United States and NATO, Turkey now has a real chance to become a regional power. Yet formidable challenges remain, such as resolving the Kurdish issue, competing with Iran, and easing domestic political friction. To assess these issues and their impact on U.S. policy, The Washington Institute invited Ambassador Ross Wilson, Ambassador James F. Jeffrey, and Soner Cagaptay to address a Policy Forum luncheon in Washington, DC, on Monday, January 14, 2013, starting at 12:30 p.m. EST. The speakers will also discuss Dr. Cagaptay’s new report on Turkey.
Register for this event here.
4. What’s Next for Syria: Humanitarian and Political Perspectives, Monday January 14, 2:00 PM – 3:30 PM, Brookings Institution
Venue: Brookings Institution, 1774 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Falk Auditorium
Speakers: Ross Wilson, James F. Jeffrey, Soner Cagaptay
With a booming economy and improving ties with the United States and NATO, Turkey now has a real chance to become a regional power. Yet formidable challenges remain, such as resolving the Kurdish issue, competing with Iran, and easing domestic political friction. To assess these issues and their impact on U.S. policy, The Washington Institute invited Ambassador Ross Wilson, Ambassador James F. Jeffrey, and Soner Cagaptay to address a Policy Forum luncheon in Washington, DC, on Monday, January 14, 2013, starting at 12:30 p.m. EST. The speakers will also discuss Dr. Cagaptay’s new report on Turkey.
Register for this event here.
5. The International Development Assistance Ecosystem of the U.S.: A Development and Foreign Policy Strategic Asset, Monday January 14, 3:00 PM – 5:00 PM, CSIS
Venue: CSIS, 1800 K Street NW, Washington DC, 20006, B1 Conference Room
Speakers: Carol Lancaster, Paul O’Brien, Tessie San Martin, Susan Reichle, Asif Shaikh, Daniel Runde
Since the end of the Cold War, the method by which the United States delivers foreign aid to the developing world has changed considerably. During this time, as the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) saw large-scale staff reductions coupled with an increase in programs, a large base of U.S for-profit and nonprofit organizations grew up to implement projects and programs in the developing world. Although the budgetary situation reversed beginning in 2002, staffing levels at USAID remained low and a need to engage the U.S. implementer community continues. Concurrently, a broader discussion occurred over the effectiveness of development assistance by major donors. This effort, which resulted in the Paris Declaration of 2005 and later agreements at Accra in 2008 and Busan in 2011, enshrined the notion of country ownership—that the developing world must drive its priorities to ensure sustainability. The Obama administration launched its USAID Forward agenda to re-establish USAID as the premier development agency in the world. A central aspect of this agenda are reforms designed to reduce the Agency’s dependence on contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements with U.S. development implementers and shift to a greater use of government to government support and local organizations.
The report argues that the current U.S. ecosystem of international development assistance should be treated as a strategic asset that plays an important role in meeting U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives. As with all systems, it can and should be improved; however, it should be strengthened, not weakened. This system, while imperfect, delivers a level of accountability and transparency for the U.S. government that is vital to continued political support for foreign assistance. The development implementers must do more to evolve to meet the changing nature of how the U.S. government sees development and the broader trends in the field. However, there are significant risks associated with USAID’s proposed reforms, which, if fully implemented, may not achieve the results desired.
Please join us for a panel discussion of this timely report. Copies will be available at the meeting and online the day of the event.
RSVP for this event to ppd@csis.org.
6. Two Years Later: Assessing Tunisia’s Progress since the Jasmine Revolution, Monday January 14, 5:30 PM – 7:30 PM, Johns Hopkins University
Venue: Johns Hopkins University, Bernstein Offit Building, 1717 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Room 500
Speakers: Leila Chennoufi, Eamonn Gearon, Stephen McInerny, Samia Msadek, Mohamed Malouche, Daniele Moro
On January 14, 2011, Ben Ali was forced to leave Tunisia by a popular uprising commonly known as the Jasmine Revolution. This historic event triggered mass protests that would sweep the Arab world, forcing other longstanding authoritarian leaders from power and potentially transforming the region. Since that time, Tunisia has witnessed the country’s first free and fair elections, the emergence of new political parties and coalitions, and the many difficulties of maintaining stability amid an uncertain political transition. On the second anniversary of this historic moment, it is important to assess Tunisia’s progress in its difficult transition to democracy and examine the prospects and challenges that lie ahead.
Register for this event here.
7. U.S. Grand Strategy in the Middle East: Is There One?, Wednesday January 16, 9:30 AM – 12:00 PM, Rayburn House Office Building
Venue: Rayburn House Office Buidling, Washington, DC 20515, Gold Room (2168)
Speakers: Chas W. Freeman Jr., William B. Quandt, Marwan Muasher, John Duke Anthony, Thomas R. Mattair
The Middle East Policy Council invites you and your colleagues to our 71st Capitol Hill Conference. Live streaming of this event will begin at approximately 9:30am EST on Wednesday, January 16th and conclude around noon. A questions and answers session will be held at the end of the proceedings. Refreshments will be served.
RSVP for this event to info@mepc.org.
8. The Iran Nuclear Challenge: Explore Policy Options, Wednesday January 16, 12:30 PM – 1:30 PM, American Security Project
Venue: American Security Project, 1100 New York Ave, NW Washington DC, Suite 710W, Conference Room E
Speakers: William Fallon, Frank Kearney, Lawrence Wilkerson, Stephen Cheney
Join us for a discussion with retired military leaders on U.S. military options towards Iran. The discussion will begin promptly at 12:30 p.m. Please arrive by 12:15 p.m. for registration.
We hope you can join us.
RSVP for this event to events@americansecurityproject.org.
9. Freedom in the World 2013 Launch, Wednesday January 16, 1:30 PM – 3:00 PM, Council on Foreign Relations
Venue: Council on Foreign Relations, 1777 F Street NW, Washington DC, 20006
Speakers: David Kramer, Mark Lagon, Arch Puddington, Jill Dougherty, Larry Diamond, Tamara Wittes
Please join us as we release the findings of Freedom in the World 2013, the latest edition of Freedom House’s annual assessment of political and civil rights. This event will feature an in-depth discussion of advances and setbacks in freedom over the past year and the challenges these trends pose for American foreign policy.
Register for this event here.
10. The Way Forward in Afghanistan, Friday January 18, 11:00 AM – 12:00 PM, Heritage Foundation
Venue: Heritage Foundation, 214 Massachusetts Avenue NE, Washington, DC 20002, Lehrman Auditorium
Speakers: Lisa Curtis, Thomas Donnelly, Bill Roggio, Steven Bucci
The United States is moving into a new phase of engagement with Afghanistan as it draws down its combat presence in the country. During last year’s presidential campaign, President Obama declared a goal of bringing American troops home and focusing instead on “nation building” here in the U.S. But a hasty U.S. troop withdrawal and a failure to remain seriously engaged with the Afghans in other ways risks sacrificing everything the U.S. has fought for over the last decade.
What are the best options for the pace and scope of withdrawal over the next two years? What level and type of U.S. troop presence should remain in Afghanistan post-2014 to ensure the country does not revert to its previous status of terrorist safe haven? What are the realistic possibilities for reconciling with the Taliban in a way that preserves democratic and human rights gains?
Join us as a distinguished group of experts addresses these and other questions related to the future of U.S. engagement with Afghanistan.
Register for this event here.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
A soap balloon bursts
Pristina Friday and over the weekend saw violence against those promoting equal rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people. The Ministry of European Integration on behalf of government issued a strong statement. Deputy Foreign Minister of Kosovo (and Member of State Commission of Religious Freedoms) Petrit Selimi (@petrit) also commented. The US Embassy in Pristina joined in condemning the attack, also praising the swift reaction of the government. This is an edited version of Petrit’s comments, originally published in Albanian in the Pristina-based Express:
By now you ought to have heard the story. A Kosovo magazine called Kosovo 2.0, a seasonal publication, announced that its next issue will be dedicated to sex and sensuality. The magazine organized civic debates on the issues of gender and sexual identity, with special focus on the sensitive topic of the LGBT community in Kosovo and Balkans. The magazine is sponsored by, among others, the U.S. National Endowment for Democracy and Norwegian Foreign Ministry, both entities helpful in supporting democratization of Kosovo, even if some projects have a distinct anti-government line.
The planned event was accompanied by a concert and DJ’s, as well as guests attending a parallel event of Prishtina Youth Summit organized by Youth Initiative for Human Rights. A few days earlier, a “student” organization and some people pretending to be football fans of Prishtina FC (Plisat) started making noise on social networks about “a night of orgies” and “immorality”. On top of that, in some Kosovar mosques, some imams used (what one can freely call) hate-speech and called “Xhemat” [the believers] for “action” to “stop immorality” and “propagation of whoredom” (a direct quote from one such statement of one so-called religious leader).
The event was reported to the police, as were the threats that organizers received. Police did send a patrol to be present at the actual opening of the event. Possibly, the risk-assessment by both the organizer as well as police was not the best, as those 4-5 policemen did give their honest best, but couldn’t stop a few dozen hooligans and religious extremists who were chanting “Allahu Akber”, “Faggots Faggots”, “Whores Whores” while entering and demolishing the stage of Youth and Sports Center where the lecture were planned to take place. You can see the recordings on YouTube.
Very promptly, special police units come to the scene to stop a more serious incident unfolding.
Shocked by the phone calls I received from friends stuck inside the center who didn’t dare come out, as soon as I landed home from Zagreb (where Adriatic Charter meeting took place), I went there to witness scenes one usually sees far from Pristina. A hundred guys or so were cursing, throwing items while a big number of police was escorting the participants from the Sports and Youth Center. Naturally, as many of these participants were guests of Republic of Kosovo for the Prishtina Youth Summit (including members of family of Nelson Mandela as well as diverse journalists) the entire event had a potential to bring a serious blow to our reputation. We, different from Serbia and despite the extremist discourse found online, are not known to have public shows of violence against freedom of speech and sexual minorities. This illusion burst as a soap balloon when I recall the scenes from Friday.
What’s worse, some of these hooligans also showed up with baseball bats in several coffee-shops “looking for faggots” like a moral militia that “protects the feelings of majority.” Some individuals who were not even part of the organization of events also received threats from these groups. In social networks we witnessed a rapid explosion in hate-speech. The same goes for local news portals, which readily become a disgusting source of uncontrollable hate by allowing publication of online comments that threaten human dignity and integrity. For these websites, gaining clicks is more important than checking the discourse.
Some groups and institutions must give us some answers:
1. Kosovo police and courts must act swiftly and without a doubt. OSCE has reacted. Samuel Zbogar on behalf of EU reacted. The European Parliament through Ulrike Lunacek reacted. The Ombudsperson of Kosovo reacted. The Government of Kosovo reacted through a strong statement issued by Prime Minister Thaci, EU Minister Vlora Citaku, Minister of Interior Rexhepi. Mrs Citaku reacted first because she coordinates all efforts for Kosovo to fulfill all criteria from the Feasibility Study, including freedom of speech. Interior Minister Bajram Rexhepi and Justice Minister Hajredin Kuci and country’s prosecutors must act addressing this issue in the weeks ahead. This work has to be visible and without a shred of doubt in its seriousness. On this issue, political points and electoral politics should be forgotten, as we are part of Europe. The EU will not let this issue drop from attention. Extremism will not disappear by ignoring it. The evil has to be cut at its roots. In Kosovo we still have ample space to be firm against these groups.
2. The Islamic Community of Kosovo (ICK) will have to distance itself from the imams who use a discourse of violence and hate. If the Islamic Community is advocating with the government to introduce religious lessons in schools to be taught by ICK staff, then they have to understand that with these kind of behavior these people will never, I repeat never, be allowed anywhere close to school buildings. The Wahabi style of extremism demands a clear response by ICK. I fully understand that ICK, as well as the Catholic Church and other faith organizations do not appreciate homosexuality. This is not a subject of discussion here. The truth is that some mosques have been used to recruit “moral” militia who seek to curtail freedom of speech based on gender or sexual orientation. What happens when one of these “believers” commits a murder, inspired by what he hears in a mosque? Does he go to Hell or Heaven? I believe the answer is known by the religious leaders and since you know the answer, your reaction has to be based on the teaching of The Book, which is a book of love and peace and not hate and violence.
3. An answer is needed from the leaders of Prishtina football fans as well. In my younger days, being a “Plis” meant to be proud of the city club, being proud of the diversity and urban spirit of the capital city compared to all the other cities. It meant being proud of civic culture. So I plead with my friends, Minister of Agriculture Blerand Stavileci and Minister of Sports Memli Krasniqi, who are both active participants of the sports landscape and who both have credit for the successes of the Prishtina football and basketball clubs to distance themselves from the fake representatives of the capital city’s sports clubs. These people are using the cover of Plisat fans to promote an extremist agenda. This reaction is especially important now after FIFA’s decision to allow for [our] clubs to play international football. We should not allow our fans to blacken the image of our country, as Serbia’s hooligans do.
4. An answer has to be provided by political parties as well, especially those that pretend to speak on behalf “of the people” and who advocate for “direct democracy of the majority.” One easily forgets that there is a fundamental problem with the concepts of “rule of majorities” as in those ideologies one seldom finds space for the minority. An uneducated guy can’t be closer to these parties than the much respected Igballe Rugova, a Kosovo icon of social activism who was the focus of the planned magazine launch on Friday. She has given a personal contribution for Albanians, for Albanian woman, for the 20,000 raped women of the war and she frequently criticizes the Government on the challenges of the contemporary social and economic situation. According to those extremists that have taken the mantle of deciding who is Albanian and who not by their standards of morality (aided by those that support such populist, radical and anti-system discourse), Mrs. Rugova should be lynched. I don’t have to hide my disgust when I think of how she’s been treated. Also, misogynist attacks on Minister Vlora Citaku and women in politics from some of the members of such political parties have undoubtedly contributed to creation of a landscape prone to violence and intolerance. From a word uttered the path to action taken is very short and radicals know this. De facto they love this, as by provoking violence they hope they can change the system. But the system will not fall. They should forget this scenario before someone looses a life.
5. Civil society organizations should also speak out loud against these bandits with baseball bats who have an issue with sex. I have a bad taste in my mouth when some of them say “we have bigger problems to tackle such as corruption, rule of law or Mitrovica.” Some of world’s worst theocracies have little corruption and no problem with rule of law. Rule of Law is not an aim in itself but a means to reach the type of society that we aim. Our Constitution projects that societal consensus. Until we change our Constitution, as it stands, the category of religious identity such as being Catholic, Buddhist or, as over 90% of Kosovars say, Muslim is exactly the same as the ethnic category, or indeed sexual orientation. One cannot raise voice in protest for protection of rights of Albanians in northern Kosovo but stay silent on rights of gays in central Prishtina. I repeat myself – I am not entering a debate on the values – I’m merely basing this column on the existing legal and constitutional framework. The relativist explanations by some that “both sides are to be blamed” and that “it’s all governments fault as they don’t provide employment” are weak, meek and basically cynical, closing our eyes in front of darkness that stares at us.
With some of those that were threatened on Friday and the subsequent weekend, I have strong political disagreements and we often debate in the media. Some of them support radical political options just because they share common policies against this government. This type of flirtation based on temporary daily political needs makes them forget the fundamental difference between the ethnic and civil concepts of the state. Such a political chimera was bound to eat the hand that fed it.
There are many people, many more then those frustrated hooligans, who believe in rules and laws and believe that we deserve to be Europe; that we are Europe; that we want an economy entrenched in Europe and personal freedoms like those in Europe. These are innumerable islands that must be connected in an archipelago of civic resistance and coalitions beyond the political party divisions and personal fights.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The referendum is about Morsi
Egypt is voting today and next Saturday on its draft constitution, which President Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists ramrodded through a rump constituent assembly that secularists, Christians, moderate Islamists and others had abandoned. Most of the opposition seems to be urging a “no” vote, rather than a boycott. But turnout may be low. Egypt has had a lot of elections in the last two years. The rules have been changed to require that people vote in their assigned polling places. Previously you could vote anywhere.
Morsi won his presidency with only 51% of the vote. If he loses this referendum, that will be a vote of no confidence from the Egyptian people, who have had a scant two (or three) weeks to consider the question. Morsi has promised popular election of a new constituent assembly to draft a new constitution within six months thereafter if this one fails to gain majority approval.
What if he wins, as most expect? Then Egypt is supposed to go to parliamentary elections. But a win with less than 60% of the vote will send one signal: Morsi is vulnerable. A win with more than 70% of the vote will send a different one: Morsi is in command. Between 60 and 70%, some will spin it one way, others the other way. In any event, it will be the parliamentary elections that will determine Egypt’s course, if Morsi in fact surrenders the dictatorial powers he had arrogated to himself.
Apart from the outcome, the conduct of the referendum will count. Judges are supposed to supervise each polling center. It is unclear whether enough will be available to do so. This is presumably one of the reasons Morsi chose to conduct the voting in some governorates this weekend and in others next weekend. But the opposition is challenging that arrangement in court. Despite clashes in Alexandria yesterday, polling so far seems to be proceeding, with the usual glitches. If it becomes disorderly, a great deal will depend on whom Egyptians blame for precipitating problems.
Egypt has careened through a tumultuous transition since Hosni Mubarak stepped down in February 2011. The best that can be said for the outcome so far is that no one is fully satisfied. The secularists who mounted the initial demonstrations are disappointed that the result is not full-fledged democracy. Minorities, especially Egypt’s Coptic Christians, feel ill-treated. Rich Egyptians and the “remnants” of the old regime feel under attack. Poor Egyptians have seen little tangible benefit. The economy is on the ropes. The Muslim Brotherhood sees threats behind every demonstrator. The Salafists regard even the draft constitution as insufficiently Islamic.
I am hoping the constitution is defeated. That would give Egypt the opportunity for a more inclusive do-over. It would also teach Morsi that he needs to exert himself to be the president of all Egyptians. The process by which the current constitutional draft was written failed to be inclusive and transparent. Even an overwhelming vote in its favor will not erase the hard feelings that has engendered.
The odds are against defeat. If the referendum is approved, the only immediate recourse is the parliamentary election. The opposition needs to learn quickly the tricks of the electoral process if it is to do well. It has consistently failed to do so. Competing with the Muslim Brotherhood will require grassroots campaigning, not unruly demonstrations. It will also require opposition collaboration and unity.
Is Egypt headed back to autocracy, or will it develop a more open and representative political system? Only time will tell. Ten years from now, the answer will be clear. Today nothing is.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Are Islamist victories avoidable?
“If democracy is to triumph in the Middle East, then Islamist victories are unavoidable and essential.” This was the resolution debated in the opening panel of last Thursday’s event on “Dictators and Dissidents: Should the West choose sides?” hosted by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Reuel Marc Gerecht of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and Brian Katulis of the Center for American Progress affirmed the resolution and Rob Satloff of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal opposed it. Though there were two teams, four different positions emerged.
Gerecht argued that democracy takes time and we should have faith in the democratic process. We may not know what the ultimate outcome of a democratic process, but we do know what will happen with the alternative. Dictators in the Middle East did not move their countries any closer to democracy. They created an environment that gave rise to al Qaeda.
Stephens responded arguing that the democratic process will not be successful when those participating, Islamists in his example, are opposed to democracy. Democratic process cannot be conflated with democracy. Stephens added that sometimes we have to make difficult choices, like supporting a dictator if we think the outcome will be more democratic than a democratic process in the same area would yield. Gerecht equated this with Kemalism, which he called “enlightened despotism.”
Satloff denied the inevitability of Islamist victories. In reality, Islamists rarely win – they almost never get more than 1/3 of the popular vote. What really happens is that non-Islamists lose because of in-fighting and lack of coherent vision. Ahmed Shafiq won 48% of the popular vote even though he was associated with Mubarak suggesting desire for non-Islamist leadership. A capable non-Islamist candidate from an organized party would have had a good shot. To believe that people in the Middle East will often elect Islamists is to fall victim to what Satloff calls the “bigotry of low expectations.” We should believe that people in the Middle East are capable of making reasonable decisions and as such, will not elect Islamists every time.
Katulis argued the opposite point. He said debating this resolution is like debating gravity. Islamists are winning. When they do win, he believes they will have to moderate their ideals and policies, which might be the best antidote to extremism.
It was unclear who won the debate. It seems like the root question is about how much faith one has in the democratic process. Election outcomes don’t matter if your faith is strong.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
This week’s peace picks
Our suggested events begin and end with Egypt, but on Tuesday there are four overlapping discussions of Afghanistan. Thoughtless think tanks?
1. Revolution in Progress: Will There be a Democratic Egypt?, Monday December 10, 1:00 PM – 2:30 PM, U.S. Capitol Visitor Center
Venue: U.S. Capital, U.S. Capitol Visitor Center, Congressional Meeting Room North, Washington, DC 20510
Speakers: Nancy Okail, Steven Cook, Charles Dunne
With President Mohammad Morsi claiming widespread new powers leading to massive public protests the future of Egyptian democracy remains in the balance. Bitter fights continue over the distribution of authority. NGO workers, including those of Freedom House, continue to face prosecution for their work. The role of human rights, women, and religion in the new Egypt remain unclear. And these defining struggles are taking place in a near-institutional vacuum, in which the law, the constitution, and the relations between branches of government are all up for grabs. How these issues are settled will determine Egypt’s future— and its relationship with the United States.
Register for this event here.
2. Muslim-Majority Constitutions and the Right to Freedom of Religion or Belief, Monday December 10, 6:00 PM – 7:30 PM, Karamah
Venue: Karamah, 1420 16th Street NW, Washington, DC 20036
Speakers: Elizabeth Cassidy, Mohamed Abdel Aziz Ibrahim, Knox Thames
A representative from the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) and an expert on Muslim constitutions will present and discuss USCIRF’s recent report entitled, “The Religion-State Relationship and the Right to Freedom of Religion or Belief: A Comparative Textual Analysis of the Constitutions of Majority Muslim Countries and Other OIC Members.” At this time when many nations are rewriting their foundational documents, the report provides a comparative analysis of religious freedom provisions in the constitutions of majority Muslim countries and other members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.
Register for this event here.
3. Is America Still Exceptional? Foreign Policy over the Next Four Years, Monday December 10, 8:00 PM – 9:30 PM, Marvin Center Ampitheater
Venue: Marvin Center Ampitheater, 800 21st Street NW, Washington, DC 20037
Speakers: Henrey Nau, Daniel Deudney, James Goldgeier
This event features a debate between Henry Nau (GWU) and Daniel Deudney (JHU) on the future of American foreign policy. Moderated by James Goldgeier, Dean of AU’s School of International Studies.
Register for this event here.
4. Syria in Transition: An Insider’s View, Tuesday December 11, 12:15 PM – 1:30 PM, New America Foundation
Venue: New America Foundation, 1899 L Street NW, Washington, DC 20036, Suite 400
Speakers: Mohammed Ghanem, Ilhan Tanir, Leila Hilal
While fears of chemical weapons and of an impending “failed state” dominate discussions on Syria, a narrative is being largely lost: civil leaders inside Syria who are taking matters into their own hands.
Civilian administrative councils have emerged throughout Syria in so-called “liberated zones.” Civilians are organizing for purposes of administering basic municipal services and law and order as they prepare for a post-Assad future.
What do these pockets of self-governed territory look like and how can they be sustained? What is the relationship between the civilian councils and the military brigades? How can the United States most effectively help civilian units prepare for a post-Assad future?
Please join the New America Foundation’s Middle East Task Force for a conversation with Ilhan Tanir, Washington correspondent for Vatan, and Mohammed A. Ghanem, senior political advisor at the Syrian American Council, who has just returned from Syria. Ghanem and Tanir will discuss how Syrian civilians are creating a government of their own and how this movement may impact the country’s future.
Register for this event here.
5. Elections, Reconciliation, and the Final Two Years of Afghanistan’s Transition: Perspectives from the International Community, Tuesday December 11, 1:00 PM – 4:30 PM, USIP
Venue: United States Institute of Peace, 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20037
Speakers: Steve Coll, Jim DeHart, Thomas Lynch, Clare Lockhart, Thomas Ruttig, Francesc Vendrell, Scott Warden, Scott Smith, Andrew Wilder
As the clock winds down on the final two years of Afghanistan’s security transition, where does the accompanying political transition stand?
The main elements of the political transition are the 2014 presidential elections and the attempt to forge a political reconciliation with the Taliban. These issues are interrelated. Some say that there can be no effective elections unless a reconciliation process can first ensure adequate security conditions. Others say that reconciliation is impossible until there is a newly elected government in Kabul.
Both processes are affected by Afghanistan’s many uncertainties. Yet some recent developments have settled some questions and opened new opportunities. The re-election of President Obama has settled the question of who is responsible for US policy. The recent release of Taliban leaders by Pakistan could indicate a willingness on the part of Islamabad to play a more active role in supporting a negotiation. The consolidation Salahuddin Rabbani as the Chairman of the High Peace Council may yield greater progress in talks with the armed opposition. The setting of the election date by the Independent Election Commission fulfilled a longstanding demand by the political opposition, but also raised questions about the feasibility of holding elections.
The press of time will force the international community to take a number of positions on a number of complex issues in Afghanistan. Please join USIP for two panel that will look at both processes of the political transition.
Register for this event here.
6. Afghanistan: Endgame or Persisting Challenge with Continuing Stakes?, Tuesday December 11, 2:00 PM – 3:30 PM, Brookings Institution
Venue: Brookings Institution, 1775 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Saul/Zilkha Rooms
Speakers: Martin Indyk, Vanda Felbab-Brown, Ronald E. Neumann
After more than a decade of great effort and sacrifice by the United States and its allies, the Taliban still has not been defeated, and many Afghans believe that a civil war is coming. In 2014, foreign forces will complete the handover of security responsibility to their Afghan counterparts, international financial flows will radically decrease, and Afghanistan’s presidential elections will intensify political uncertainties. These challenges are mounting at a time when Afghanistan is dealing with rising insecurity, dysfunctional governance, rampant corruption and ethnic factionalization, while the regional environment is not easily conducive to stability in the country. With the U.S. and international publics tired of the war, fundamental questions about any remaining stakes in Afghanistan and the efficacy of any persisting stabilization efforts are increasing.
On December 11, Foreign Policy at Brookings will host the launch of a new book, Aspiration and Ambivalence: Strategies and Realities of Counterinsurgency and State-Building in Afghanistan (Brookings, 2012), by Brookings Fellow Vanda Felbab-Brown. Aspiration and Ambivalence analyzes the past decade of U.S. and international efforts in Afghanistan and offers detailed recommendations for dealing with the precarious situation leading up to the 2014 transition and after. In her book, Felbab-Brown argues that allied efforts in Afghanistan have put far too little emphasis on good governance, concentrating too much on short-term military goals to the detriment of long-term peace and stability. Felbab-Brown will be joined by Ronald E. Neumann, president of the American Academy of Diplomacy and former U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan (2005-07). Vice President Martin S. Indyk, director of Foreign Policy, will provide introductory remarks and moderate the discussion.
After the program, panelists will take questions from the audience.
Register for this event here.
7. The United States and South Asia After Afghanistan, Tuesday December 11, 3:30 PM – 5:00 PM, Carnegie Endowment
Venue: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Root Room A/B/C
Speakers: Alexander Evans, Husain Haqqani, Karl F. Inderfurth, Cameron Munter, Wendy Chamberlin
U.S. interests in South Asia are evolving. An intense focus on counterterrorism and Afghanistan since 9/11 is giving way to a broader range of interests. Washington takes India’s global status seriously and is working closely with New Delhi on a range of regional and global issues. China’s rise, often neglected as a factor in South Asia policy, is encouraging a more strategic U.S. approach to Asia policy as a whole. As a result, a significant opportunity now exists to rethink U.S. South Asia strategy.
An upcoming report by Asia Society Bernard Schwartz Fellow Alexander Evans draws on over 90 interviews with a range of current and former U.S. policy practitioners from the State Department, National Security Council, Congress, and the intelligence community to consider how the United States can achieve an integrated South Asia policy following the 2014 military drawdown in Afghanistan. The report, which benefits from the expertise of the Asia Society Advisory Group on U.S. Policy toward South Asia, includes recommendations for better incorporating expertise into policy planning.
In conjunction with the report’s release, please join us for a discussion on the prospects for achieving a strategic U.S. approach to South Asia and the hard choices an incoming Administration will need to make to get there. An event will also take place in New York on December 12, Islamabad, Pakistan on December 18, and New Delhi, India on December 20.
RSVP for this event to AsiaDC@AsiaSociety.org.
8. Prescriptions for Peaceful Transitions: Is Democracy Mandatory?, Tuesday December 11, 4:00 PM – 5:30 PM, Johns Hopkins SAIS
Venue: Johns Hopkins SAIS, Bernstein-Offit Building, 1717 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Room 500
Speakers: Carl Gershman, Cynthia Irmer, Marina Ottaway, William Zartman
Carl Gershman, president of the National Endowment for Democracy; Cynthia Irmer, special assistant in the Office of the Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy and Humans Rights at the U.S. Department of State; Marina Ottaway, senior associate in the Middle East Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; and I. William Zartman, SAIS professor emeritus, will discuss this topic.
RSVP for this event to RSVP@ipsinstitute.org.
9. Finish the Job: Jump-Start Afghanistan’s Economy – A Handbook of Projects, Tuesday December 11, 5:30 PM – 7:00 PM, Johns Hopkins SAIS
Venue: Johns Hopkins SAIS, Nitze Building, 1740 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Kenney Auditorium
Speakers: S. Fredrick Starr, Adib Faradi, Geoffrey Pyatt,
S. Fredrick Starr, CACI chairman; Adib Faradi, CACI visiting scholar and former deputy minister of Commerce for Afghanistan; and Geoffrey Pyatt, principal deputy assistant secretary of the U.S. Department of State’s South and Central Asia Affairs Bureau, will discuss CACI’s new report, “Finish the Job: Jump-Start Afghanistan’s Economy.” Note: A reception will precede the event at 5 p.m. Members of the media who want to cover this event should contact Felisa Neuringer Klubes in the SAIS Communications Office at 202.663.5626 or fklubes@jhu.edu.
RSVP for this event to saiscaciforums@jhu.edu.
10. Egypt on the Brink (Again), Friday December 14, 12:30 PM, Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Venue: Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 1828 L Street NW, Washington, DC 20036, Suite 1050
Speakers: Steven Cook, Shalom Cohen, Eric Trager
Nearly two years after throngs filled downtown Cairo to demand the ouster of Hosni Mubarak, tens of thousands are back demanding the ouster of his elected successor, Muhammad Morsi. For the ruling Islamists, winning the planned December 15 national referendum on a new constitution would be the turning point that ends the current crisis; for their opponents, the hastily scheduled referendum only stokes more fury at a democratic transition gone terribly awry.
To discuss the fast-moving events in Egypt and their implications for U.S. policy and regional security, The Washington Institute invited Steven Cook, Shalom Cohen, and Eric Trager to address a Policy Forum luncheon in Washington, DC, on Friday, December 14, 2012, from 12:30-2:00 p.m. EST.
Register for this event here.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
“Nobody has any idea what to do about it”
I’ve never met Laura Seay, except briefly in cyberspace. All I know is that she is @texasinafrica, a Morehouse professor and smart. Her 2009 analysis of the breakdown of governance in “what to do in the congo” holds up well today, but her proposed solutions aren’t happening: the Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (FARDC) aren’t getting any better and the UN force (now called MONUSCO) isn’t able to handle the situation the way she suggests. When I queried her about the need for an update, she answered: “Nobody has any idea what to do about it.” We should all be so clear and concise.
Washington is nevertheless sending its “top Africa diplomat.” That’s Assistant Secretary of State Johnny Carson, a veteran of great virtues. But his means are very limited. To show disapproval of support for the M23 rebels who have taken the provincial capital Goma in Eastern Congo, the United States has suspended $200,000 in military assistance to Rwanda, which has repeatedly supported rebellions across its western border. That’s pocket change even in Kigali, probably intended to support military education for Rwandan officers in the United States. Cutting it off isn’t likely to have much impact.
Meanwhile M23 is wreaking havoc on a mineral-rich area that has already seen several decades of conflict. some of Laura Seay’s suggestions from 2009 are still apropos:
- …the root causes of the conflict – land disputes and citizenship rights – need to be sorted out. This means getting the courts functioning and creating an enforcement mechanism for implementing court decisions about land claims. It also means guaranteeing the citizenship rights of Kinyarwanda-speaking Congolese, which should involve a massive public education campaign. This won’t solve all of the problems, but it would be a start.
- In the provision of public goods other than security, the international community needs to work with local organizations who are already providing efficient, quality services rather than pretending that government institutions are the best entities with which to cooperate. Most government health and education institutions are already being run by third parties (in particular, churches and mosques). International donors should work with these communities to implement positive, locally conceived solutions to seemingly intractable problems.
- Local solutions, proposed by community leaders and the victims of violence, should be privileged in conversations about what needs to be done on almost every issue. Goodness knows the army of international experts (myself included) who pontificate on the DRC have proven that we don’t know how to solve the country’s problems. Let’s give people who might a chance, and let’s take their suggestions seriously for once.
This all makes eminently good sense to me, but none of it is likely happen unless some semblance of stability emerges. I purposely did not say “is reimposed,” as none of the forces in Eastern Congo seem strong enough to definitively dominate the others. The best one can hope for is a balance of forces that is relatively nonviolent and allows the local population to fend for itself.
This will disappoint another of my Twitter acquaintances, Doudou Kalala (@kalala), a Congolese citizen and MA in Human Security and Peacebuilding from Royal Road University, Victoria BC. He is currently volunteering with Cuso International in Jamaica. He argues that DRC is a classic intractable conflict that requires a major, multi-facted, long-term international intervention. In his words:
The point I am trying to make is that, the solution to the conflict in the Congo is a long process that should start now and lead to building administrative infrastructure, accountability, justice, social and intellectual capital, army, police through EDUCATION and research…
The trouble is I don’t see any prospect of that any time soon. Even a balance of forces that allows the local population to fend for itself may be too much to hope for. So let’s wish Johnny Carson good luck. He is going to need it.
RSS - Posts
