Tag: Egypt
People to be thankful for
My friends get in trouble a lot. At the moment, I’m concerned in particular about Ahmed Maher, an Egyptian activist in the April 6 Movement for whom an arrest warrant has been issued because he defied the government’s latest law on demonstrations, which went into effect this week. He already faces other charges related to previous demonstrations. And I’m concerned about Sonja Biserko, who is being criticized for agreeing to testify on behalf of Croatia to support its charge of genocide against Serbia at the International Court of Justice. In Belgrade, where Sonja has lived most of her life, she is accused of being a traitor.
Ahmed was in DC just two weeks ago, when he spoke at the Middle East Institute conference and chatted with some of us privately. He is determined to create space in Egypt for a “third force,” which would occupy the political space between the current military-backed government and the Muslim Brotherhood, now the object of repression but itself intolerant and anti-democratic when it held power for a year, ending last summer. Ahmed’s third force would be committed to human rights, a civil state based on citizenship, and democratic ideals. It has been precisely the lack of support for these ideals that has made the Egyptian revolution such a roller coaster ride.
Ahmed doesn’t expect real success for another ten years or so, which makes his willingness to keep democratic hopes alive now particularly striking. He is trying to maintain a space for political dissent in Egypt, despite the restoration of military authority. This will not be easy. Egypt’s army quickly accuses dissenters of being terrorists, or supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood, against which Ahmed also took to the streets. Now he defends their political rights. Egypt’s restored military regime does not take that kindly.
Sonja is in a different, but no less problematic, situation. Serbia today is a democracy, more or less. So far as I can tell, its government is refusing to comment on her willingness to testify against it at The Hague, but Serbia’s press is condemning her (this is from Novosti last Saturday):
This is one of rare, if not the unique, examples in modern history of a person taking the stand against his or her own state by proclaiming it genocidal. Should the trial take place – meaning should the two sides refuse to withdraw charges – Sonja Biserko would be responsible for war damages citizens of Serbia would have to compensate Croatia that had expelled and plundered 450,000 Serbs in 1990s. What’s even worse, the title of the genocidal state would be forced on Serbs who had sided with the Allies in WWI and WWII. And all that in favor of the country that allied itself with fascists and left a legacy of Jasenovac and other concentration camps in which Serbs in the first place have been systematically eradicated; Serbs against whom a proved genocide was committed, the genocide that for the sake of brotherhood, unity and peace has always been swept under the carpet in SFR of Yugoslavia.
Serbia’s own homicidal record in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990s of course goes unmentioned. That too is one of Sonja’s sins: she mentions it all the time.
Sonja too was in Washington recently, as a member of a UN-commissioned group looking into human rights violations in North Korea. The long-time chair of the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia, like Ahmed she is a well-known figure abroad. Both of them will enjoy some measure of international attention, as well as whatever limited protection that may bring. And if they decide to flee, even temporarily, they will find haven in any number of Western countries where they are known.
People committed to nonviolence like Ahmed and Sonja are trying to assert their rights, not incite violence. Many can’t flee, and most don’t want to. What they want is to be able to speak their minds freely, no matter how unpopular–or distasteful to those in power–their views may be. I am grateful for all of them this Thanksgiving, including those with whom I don’t agree. May you be safe, and may those of us who enjoy freedom be prepared to protect your rights as best we can!
Put aid to Egypt on viagra
I spent a couple of hours last night in mild pain watching “The Square,” a documentary tracing the main turning points of the Egyptian revolution since early 2011. The film is a good one, but the ground rules prohibited reviewing it. Opens in January I think. It’s the revolution I have doubts about.
Knowledgeable colleagues at the event disagreed with me. Yes, they said, mistakes have been made, but the Egyptians are learning and things will come out all right, because there are good people prepared to make good things happen.
Of course. Ahmed Maher, who spoke at the Middle East Institute conference last week, is clearly one of them. The producer, director and human rights lawyer who answered questions at the showing last night certainly count among them. So too do the nuanced and devoted revolutionaries they chose to focus on in the film. Read more
Deal, or no deal?
The nuclear talks with Iran are officially with the P5+1 (that’s the US, UK, France, Russia and China). But they are increasingly looking like a negotiation (at a distance) between Israel and Iran, with the P5+1 acting as mediators and looking for a mutually acceptable compromise. What are the odds of finding one? It depends on what we all call leverage. That comes from being able to walk away, because you’ve got a “best alternative to a negotiated agreement” (BATNA) that you prefer over the agreement on offer.
Iran’s BATNA is clear: it can continue its nuclear program, which entails continuing also to endure increasingly tight sanctions as well as the risk an Israeli or American attack. President Rouhani doesn’t like this option, because he has promised Iranians relief from sanctions, improved relations with the rest of the world, and an improved economy. Iranians are not interested in going to war. But Supreme Leader Khamenei can still veto any proposed agreement. There is every reason to believe he would do so if somehow his negotiators dared to bring home an agreement that completely dismantled Iran’s nuclear program, blocking it from any future enrichment (or reprocessing). Read more
Peace picks, November 11-15
The Federal government is closed Monday for Veterans Day but the rest of the week has lots of peace and war events. The Middle East Institute Conference (last item) is not to be missed:
1. How to Turn Russia Against Assad
Tuesday, November 12th, 2013
6:00pm
Rome Building, Room 806
1619 Massachusetts Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20037
Samuel Charap
Senior Fellow for Russia and Eurasia, IISS
Jeremy Shapiro
Visiting Fellow in the Foreign Policy Program, Brookings Institution
Chair: Dana Allin
Editor of Survival and Senior Fellow for US Foreign Policy and Transatlantic Affairs, IISS
A light reception will follow
No RSVP Required
For More Information, Contact SAISEES@jhu.edu or events-washington@iiss.org
Samuel Charap is the Senior Fellow for Russia and Eurasia at the International Institute for Strategic Studies based in the IISS–US in Washington, DC. Prior to joining the Institute, Samuel was a Council on Foreign Relations International Affairs Fellow at the US Department of State, serving as Senior Advisor to the Acting Undersecretary for Arms Control and International Security and on the Secretary’s Policy Planning Staff.
Jeremy Shapiro is a visiting fellow in the Foreign Policy program at the Brookings Institution. Prior to re-joining Brookings, he was a member of the U.S. State Department’s policy planning staff, where he advised the secretary of state on U.S. policy in North Africa and the Levant. He was also the senior advisor to Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Philip Gordon, providing strategic guidance on a wide variety of U.S.-European foreign policy issues. Read more
Untying the Turkish knot
Mort Abramowitz and Eric Edelman published this week a super Bipartisan Policy Center report “From Rhetoric to Reality: Reframing US Turkey Policy.” Mort was US ambassador in Ankara 1989-91 and Eric 2003-5. It doesn’t get much more knowledgeable when it comes to US policy on Turkey than these two. Caveat emptor: Eric is a valued colleague at SAIS (his office is next door to mine) and Mort is a treasured regular lunch partner and occasional co-author.
They argue for something few sitting ambassadors would be keen on, though it seems likely that the current ambassador was at least forewarned if not approving. They want to shift from rhetoric about shared objectives in the Middle East to frank talk (with an Ankara already resenting US policy on Syria, Iran, Egypt, Israel, Palestine and other issues) about Turkey’s domestic situation.
The aim is to keep Turkey moving in a democratic direction, restore its economic vitality, and encourage it to play a leadership role in the region consistent with US policy. As diplomatic propositions go, this is pretty daring:
Practically, this means that Washington should be more open with Ankara about its concerns about issues like press freedom, freedom of assembly, rule of law, and the Turkish government’s increasing sectarianism.
Edelman and Abramowitz view such frank assessments as likely to produce good results and cite chapter and verse of Israel-related occasions on which American bluntness was productive.
The agenda they propose for Washington is an ample one: Read more
The gulf with the Gulf
Yesterday was Gulf day. I spent part of the morning reading Christopher Davidson, who thinks the Gulf monarchies are headed for collapse due to internal challenges, their need for Western support, Iran’s growing power and their own disunity. Then I turned to Greg Gause, who attributes their resilience to the oil-greased coalitions and external networks they have created to support their rule. He predicts their survival.
At lunch I ambled across the way to CSIS’s new mansion to hear Abdullah al Shayji, chair of political science at Kuwait University and unofficial Gulf spokeperson, who was much exorcised over America’s response to Iran’s “charm offensive,” which he said could not have come at a worse time. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) was already at odds with the US. The Gulf was not warned or consulted about the phone call between Iranian President Rouhani and President Obama. Saudi Arabia’s refusal to occupy the UN Security Council seat it fought hard to get was a signal of displeasure. The divergences between the GCC and the US range across the Middle East: Syria, Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen, Iraq and Palestine, in addition to Iran.
On top of this, US oil and gas production is increasing. China is now a bigger oil importer than the US and gets a lot more of its supplies from the Gulf. Washington is increasingly seen as dysfunctional because of its partisan bickering. Its budget problems seem insoluble. American credibility is declining. The Gulf views the US as unreliable. Read more