Tag: Egypt
This week’s peace picks
It’s a busy week with a focus on peacebuilding and subjects that parallel key issues in the presidential debates, like foreign policy in the next administration and violence at embassies.
1. Talking to the Taliban, Monday October 15, 3:00 PM – 4:30 PM, New America Foundation
Venue: New America Foundation, 1899 L Street NW, Washington, DC 20036, Suite 400
Speakers: Anatol Lieven, Peter Bergen
Please join the New America Foundation’s National Security Studies Program for a conversation with award-winning author Anatol Lieven. He will discuss his talks in July with figures close to the Taliban and the views they expressed on the contours of a possible peace settlement.
Officials recently dismissed the possibility of securing a political deal to end the conflict in Afghanistan, a longtime keystone of the American military strategy in Afghanistan, saying their goal now is to leave Afghanistan with the best tools possible for maintaining security and political stability. After 11 years of war, has the conflict budged at all in either the coalition’s or the insurgents’ direction? Lieven and Bergen will discuss this question, as well as the likelihood of different future scenarios for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Register for this event here.
2. The European Union and International Organizations in a Time of Crisis, Monday October 15, 5:30 PM – 7:00 PM, Elliott School of International Affairs
Venue: Elliott School of International Affairs, 1957 E Street NW, Washington, DC 20052, Lindner Family Commons
Speaker: Francois Rivasseau, Romuald Sciora, Harvey Feigenbaum
Mr. Rivasseau will discuss the relationship between the EU and other international organizations, such as the UN, NATO, the World Bank, and the IMF, during this time of crisis. He will also assess the place of the EU in the new global order.
Register for this event here.
3. Religion, Culture, and Interpretations of Democracy: Implications for Peacebuilding, Tuesday October 16, 9:30 AM – 11:30 AM, United States Institute of Peace
Venue: United States Institute of Peace, 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20037
Speakers: Marc Gopin, Mohammad Abu-Nimer, James Patton, Juliette Schmidt
The final meeting of the three-part series on democracy and conflict will reflect on the influence of religion and culture on interpretations of democracy around the world and the implications for peacebuilding and conflict prevention. Political parties, civil society actors, church leaders, as well as western governments and donors are all participating in the process of building and maintaining democracies in post-conflict settings. This distinguished panel will discuss specific factors that play a role in the perception and development of democratic institutions in different parts of the world, and their relationship with sustainable peace.
Register for this event here.
4. Realism, Idealism & the Politics of Obama’s Foreign Policy, Tuesday October 16, 12:00 PM – 1:30 PM, Georgetown University
Venue: Georgetown University, Mortara Building, 3600 N Street NW, Washington, DC 20057
Speakers: James Mann, Tom Hamburger
Author and former Los Angeles Times correspondent Jim Mann will discuss his latest book, The Obamians, with Tom Hamburger, a member of the National Staff of the Washington Post. They’ll talk about politics and foreign policy, and the current presidential campaign. James Mann is a Washington-based author who has written a series of award-winning books about American foreign policy and about China. Mr. Mann is a former newspaper reporter, foreign correspondent and columnist who wrote for more than twenty years for the Los Angeles Times. He is now an author-in-residence at Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. Tom Hamburger joined The Washington Post’s national desk in 2012 after working for more than eight years in the Los Angeles Times’ Washington bureau as a reporter specializing in the intersection of money and politics in the nation’s capital. He has covered the White House, Congress and the courts and has written extensively about lobbying, campaign finance and corruption at all levels of government. A finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in 1996, he worked previously for The Wall Street Journal, the Minneapolis Star Tribune and the Arkansas Gazette.
Register for this event here.
5. Is Al-Qaeda Defeated? An Experts’ Debate, Tuesday October 16, 12:15 PM – 1:45 PM, New America Foundation
Venue: New America Foundation, 1899 L Street NW, Washington, DC 20036, Suite 400
Speaker: Peter Bergen, Thomas Lynch III, Thomas Joscelyn, Bill Roggio, Reuel Gerecht
In Collaboration with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
While some counterterrorism analysts and officials say that U.S. military efforts over the past 11 years have resulted in the defeat of al-Qaeda, others argue that the terrorist organization is more durable than that. The successes won by the CIA drone program in Pakistan’s tribal regions and the symbolic killing of Osama bin Laden might be tempered by the growing strength of al-Qaeda’s affiliates in countries such as Yemen, Somalia, and Libya. On the other hand, many point out that al-Qaeda has failed to carry out a large-scale terrorist attack in the United States since 9/11.
With the Taliban toppled in Afghanistan, hundreds of militants killed in U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan, and the death of bin Laden last year, has the United States come to the end of the “War on Terror”? The New America Foundation’s National Security Studies Program and the Foundation for Defense of Democracies invite you to a lively debate on whether or not we have seen the defeat of al-Qaeda. Peter Bergen, the director of New America’s National Security Studies Program, and Col. Thomas Lynch III, a Distinguished Fellow at National Defense University, will argue for the motion that al-Qaeda is defeated. Foundation for Defense of Democracies Senior Fellows Thomas Joscelyn and Bill Roggio will argue against the motion.
Register for this event here.
6. Transforming Terrorism and Radicalism with Muslim Nonviolent Alternatives, Tuesday October 16, 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM, USIP
Venue: USIP, 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC
Speakers: Qamar-ul Huda, Chaiwat Satha-Anand, Ayse Kadayifci-Orellana
The violent and nonviolent protests around the Muslim world regarding the anti-Islamic film, “Innocence of Muslims,” have reinvigorated the debate over the prevalence of nonviolent practices in Islamic communities. With religious extremists and zealous secularists posing serious threats to societies, it is critically important to examine the ethos of pluralism, peacebuilding activities, and the culture of sustainable peace in conflict zones in Muslim-majority countries.
Please join us for a conversation with Dr. Chaiwat Satha-Anand, a prominent nonviolent activist and scholar from Thammasat University in Bangkok, Thailand, on the subject of transforming radical extremism with principles of nonviolence action. Has the rise of extremist voices weakened principles of nonviolence and moderation in Muslim communities? Are moderate Muslims capable of defeating extremism with nonviolent practices of tolerance, social justice, and education? Dr. Satha-Anand will explore these and other questions.
USIP’s efforts in the Middle East and larger Muslim world have aided in developing the capacity of civil society actors in peacebuilding and conflict management. Whether it be a peace education curriculum for madrasas in Pakistan, or an inter-faith mediation center in Nigeria, or a gender peacebuilding training toolkit in Iraq, USIP’s on-the-ground field work and research aims to resolve conflicts through nonviolent means.
Register for this event here.
7. Waging War on Corruption – Inside the Movement Fighting the Abuse of Power, Tuesday October 16, 6:00 PM – 8:00 PM, George Mason University
Venue: George Mason University, Founders Hall, 3351 Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22201, Room 125
“The Arab Spring was the trigger that prompted me to finally start writing a book that Ihad long been thinking about – a book that aims to change the conversation about one of the gravest problems facing most countries: corruption in government. I have been involved in civil society organizations dedicated to fighting corruption for more than 20 years and seen remarkable progress in this period. The achievements have been formidable. It is time to convert discussion about the prospects of curbing graft and bribery from one of skepticism, indeed cynicism often, to one of cautious optimism and hope. The upbeat conclusion of this book rests, above all, on the remarkable – often exceptionally courageous – work of many heroes in many countries, from the civil society activists on the front lines, to the public prosecutors, investigative journalists, outstanding political leaders and former leaders of the United Nations and World Bank, “think tank” academics, and philanthropists. I believe individuals do change history. The heroes in this book are changing history. But, all of the work of these remarkable people would be in vain without massive public engagement. In the Arab Spring we saw tens of thousands of people overcome fear of vicious security forces to go into the streets and the town squares in the name of their personal dignity and self-respect and to protest illegitimate governments. The valor seen in Tunisia and Egypt, replicated in many countries now, represents a tipping point in the fight against the abuse of office by politicians and government officials for their personal enrichment. And, the anti-corruption movement, which overlaps so closely with efforts to promote human rights, protect journalists and build democracy, has been enormously powered in most recent times by the Internet in a hyper-connected age of transparency where the villains haveever fewer places to hide. I believe that if more people are made aware of the progress being seen in many countries today in the war on corruption then that in itself will further power vital efforts for reform and improve the human condition. This book does not minimize the challenges. The anti-corruption movement has reached base camp, but still has an Everest of corruption to climb. But for the skeptics, let me say bluntly there is a powerful momentum now in campaigns for transparency, accountability and justice and, as I note in the final line of the book, it is important for people now to stand on the right sideof history.” ~Frank Vogl, September 2012.
8. The Middle East: Policy Choices for the New Administration, Wednesday October 17, 9:30 AM – 12:00 PM, Rayburn House Office Building
Venue: Rayburn House Office Building, 45 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20515
Speakers: Paul Pillar, Scott McConnell, Jocelyne Cesari, Nathaniel Kern, Thomas R. Mattair
The Middle East Policy Council invites you and your colleagues to our 70th Capitol Hill Conference. Live streaming of this event will begin at approximately 9:30am EST on Wednesday, October 17th 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.
9. Understanding Iranian Public Opinion, Wednesday October 17, 9:00 AM – 11:00 AM, Stimson
Venue: Stimson, 1111 19th Street NW, Washington, DC 20036, Twelfth Floor
Speakers: Ebrahim Mohseni, Steven Kull, Geneive Abdo, Sebastian Grafe
In the midst of bombastic rhetoric exchanged among Iran, Israel, and Western states over the nuclear issue, Iranian public opinion is often lost in the discussion. Where do the Iranian people stand? Iranian public opinion is seldom heard on topics such as the nuclear program, international sanctions, and a potential military strike.
Please join Heinrich Böll Stiftung North America and Stimson for a discussion of Iranian public opinion. Drawing on polls from numerous sources, including recent surveys conducted inside Iran, as well as polls conducted by calling into Iran, the speakers will analyze Iranian attitudes on the country’s nuclear program, nuclear weapons, international sanctions, and a potential military strike. The discussion will also focus on how sanctions and military threats have shaped Iranian opinion toward their own government and the West.
Register for this event here.
10. Bringing Peace Through Facilitated Dialogue: A Book Launch, Wednesday October 17, 10:00 AM – 11:30 AM, USIP
Venue: USIP, 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC
Speaker: Daniel Serwer, Rusty Barber, Colette Rausch, David Smock
Today’s international conflicts typically involve multiple actors, interests, and drivers that have sparked long, violent histories. Ending these conflicts relies more and more on facilitated dialogue, a process in which a neutral third party helps a broad spectrum of conflicting parties overcome the many barriers to effective communication.
Facilitating Dialogue: USIP’s Work in Conflict Zones, edited by David Smock and Daniel Serwer, presents seven case studies of the U.S. Institute of Peace’s facilitated dialogue efforts in Iraq, Kosovo, Israel/Palestine, Colombia, Nigeria, and Nepal. Covering a variety of conflict situations and peacemaking efforts, the cases tell stories of peacebuilding successes, efforts in progress, limitations on what can be achieved, and lessons learned.
This workshop will present samples of the chapters in the book and a summary of lessons learned. Facilitating Dialogue: USIP’s Work in Conflict Zones will be available for purchase at this event.
Register for this event here.
11. Pedagogies for Peace in Post-Conflict and Fragile States, Thursday October 18, 9:30 AM – 11:00 AM, USIP
Venue: USIP, 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC
Speaker: Margaret Sinclair, Jeff Helsing, Xanthe Ackerman, Qamar-ul Huda, Lili Cole
What kind of curricula promote the best education for long-term peace in post-conflict, fragile and low resource contexts? Many kinds of primary and secondary school curricula aim to promote social cohesion, greater tolerance and recovery from violence. But until recently we have had little research on the different benefits of various curricula in different types of conflict, or on how they can be used together most effectively, and on whether these curricular approaches need to be sequenced temporally after conflict, and if so, how.
In May 2012, Education Above All, a Doha-based education group, commissioned papers from practitioners and thematic experts that map and analyze the most widely used of these different curricula, collectively designated as “education for global citizenship,” and the policies that have accompanied their implementation. A major finding of this research project was that “transformative education for local, national and global citizenship and peace CAN be implemented even under difficult conditions if there is a policy commitment to do so.” To explore this important issue, the project director, technical adviser and expert on conflict and education, Margaret Sinclair, will discuss these research findings with experts from the U.S. Institute of Peace and the Brookings Institution.
Through its Academy for Conflict Management and Peacebuilding, research by Senior Fellows, and projects supported by grants, USIP has considerable experience in the creation of citizenship, human rights, history and peace curricula, including peace curricula specifically designed for use in Muslim religious schools, or madrasas, most recently in Sudan, Iraq and Pakistan. Two USIP staff members, Lili Cole and Qamar-ul Huda, contributed essays to Education for Global Citizenship.
Young people between the ages of fifteen and twenty-four represent nearly one-fifth of the population of the Middle East and North Africa. This group has played a central role in shaking up the old order, and while so far they have not been able to shape the policies of the new regimes, it remains key to the outcome of transitions in the region. A Generation on the Move, a study cosponsored by The Issam Fares institute at the American University in Beirut and UNICEF, offers important insights on the aspirations and problems of Arab youth. The study includes polling data that reveals further information about this demographic.
Register for this event here.
13. US-Pakistan Relationship Post-2014, Thursday October 18, 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM, Center for National Policy
Venue: Center for National Policy, One Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20001, Suite 333
Speakers: Stephen Tankel and Timothy Hoyt
U.S.-Pakistani relations have been defined by a curious mixture of antagonism and cooperation. Even before the 9/11 attacks, Pakistan was involved in the illegal proliferation of nuclear technology and support for militant Islamist organizations. Since 9/11, the bilateral relationship has rested on occasional cooperation against al-Qaeda, while being severely strained by state support for the Taliban, Haqqani Network and other militants at war against the Afghan state and the U.S.-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).
With the ISAF mission drawing down to a close by the end of 2014, what is the future of this troubled relationship between “frenemies?” Will relations improve as the strain of the Afghan campaign diminishes? Or will the U.S. more openly express its bitterness once its military is no longer reliant on supply routes that pass through Pakistan? Will Pakistani support for terrorist groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba persist? There are factors that may only further radicalize the Pakistani security services following an ISAF drawdown such as the potential for renewed civil war and Indian “meddling” in Afghanistan. How will these affect relations with the United States?
Register for this event here.
14. Reality Diplomacy: How Ambassadors Deal with Crime and Corruption Abroad, Thursday October 18, 12:30 PM – 2:00 PM, George Mason University
Venue: George Mason University, Founders Hall, 3351 Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22201, Room 113
Speakers: Richard Kauzlarich and Kenneth Yalowitz
For American business operating abroad, crime and corruption are realities of doing business internationally that must be avoided. The risk is that companies end up on the wrong side of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Further in many cases they need the help of US Embassies to avoid having to deal with corrupt host government officials. For non-official Americans living abroad, the facilitative payment to the traffic cop who arbitrarily stops their car to check papers, or to the border guard to speed up clearance of their household effects through customs is simply a small price to pay in societies that seem to operate on different standards of public service than Americans are used to. For students and academics, crime and corruption are political and sociological phenomena to be sliced and diced in the classroom and in scholarly articles as impediments to good governance to be eliminated through establishing independent judiciaries and democratically-elected legislatures passing the right sort of laws. Ambassadors Kenneth Yalowitz and Richard Kauzlarich, retired Senior Foreign Service Officers, have dealt with crime and corruption in countries where US foreign policy and national security objectives are at risk through the interaction criminal and corrupt official behavior. What can Ambassadors do when confronted with this nexus of crime and corruption while trying to accomplish a broad set of US political, economic and security priorities? Ambassadors Kauzlarich and Yalowitz will discuss their professional experiences in this regard and provide lessons-learned that will underscore the importance of better understanding how the intersection of terrorism, transnational crime and corruption represents a major non-traditional security challenge for the United States in the 21st Century.
15. Next Steps in Reducing Nuclear Arms, Friday October 19, 10:00 AM – 11:30 AM, Brookings Institution
Venue: Brookings Institution, 1775 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Falk Auditorium
Speakers: Martin S. Indyk, Michael O’Hanlon, Steven Pifer, Strobe Talbott
As the 50th anniversary of the Cuban missile crisis approaches, nuclear arms control has received scant attention in the current U.S. presidential campaign. Yet the future of arms control has major implications for U.S. national security, and no matter who is elected on November 6, the next president will have an opportunity to use arms control to enhance domestic and global security. In their new Brookings Focus Book, The Opportunity: Next Steps in Reducing Nuclear Arms (Brookings Press, 2012), Brookings Senior Fellows Steven Pifer and Michael O’Hanlon make a strong case for further steps in nuclear arms control, explain in clear and straightforward prose the background to complex arms control issues, and offer practical and realistic proposals for action by the administration in 2013 and beyond.
On October 19, the Arms Control Initiative and 21st Century Defense Initiative at Brookings will host a discussion to explore the possibilities for next steps on arms control and place them in a broader foreign policy context. They will relate the issues to the Pentagon’s budget situation and the longer-term vision of trying to move to a world without nuclear weapons. Pifer and O’Hanlon will be joined by Brookings President Strobe Talbott. Vice President Martin Indyk, director of Foreign Policy at Brookings, will moderate the discussion.
After the program, panelists will take audience questions. Copies of The Opportunity: Next Steps in Reducing Nuclear Arms will be available for sale at the event.
Register for this event here.
16. European and US Perspectives on Bosnia and Herzegovina, Friday October 19, 12:00 PM, American Institute for Contemporary German Studies
Venue: American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, 1755 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Suite 700, R.G. Livingston Conference Room of AICGS
Speakers: Dominik Tolksdorf
Please join AICGS on Friday, October 19, 2012, for a seminar with Mr. Dominik Tolksdorf, DAAD/AICGS Fellow, on “European and U.S. Perspectives on Bosnia and Herzegovina.” The discussion will take place at 12pm in the R.G. Livingston Conference Room of AICGS, 1755 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Suite 700. A light luncheon will be served.
Transatlantic cooperation in Bosnia can generally be considered as strong. However, diverging views have become apparent in the past years. The future role of the international community in the country and of the Office of the High Representative is especially debated. However, the U.S. and the EU do share a common interest in supporting constitutional reform in Bosnia. The seminar will focus on the roles of the European Union and the U.S. in Bosnia in the past years and transatlantic efforts to reform the Dayton system.
Dr. Dominik Tolksdorf holds a PhD from the University of Munich. In his dissertation he examined the European Union’s support to reform processes in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Since 2006, he has worked as research fellow at the Center for Applied Policy Research (CAP) at the University of Munich, as senior associate researcher at the Institute for European Studies, and as adjunct assistant professor at Vesalius College at the Vrije Universiteit Brussels. In his research, he focuses on the EU’s external relations, including the pre-accession process with the western Balkan states and Turkey, EU neighborhood policies, and the structure of the External Action Service.
Please register by Wednesday, October 15.
Please register for this event here.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Why riot?
You don’t have to be a foreign affairs expert to see that there are political reasons for the Innocence of Muslims-inspired protests around the Muslim world in what has been termed “the video incident.” America’s recent wars in predominantly Muslim countries have heightened tensions. U.S. support for Israel also contributes.
But this can’t be just about politics. The video offended Muslim sentiments. If these protests were really about politics, why were they not more widespread and why did they not take on a more explicitly political guise?
Americans find it difficult to understand the religious justification for these protests. Either they are reduced to cultural relativism (“things are different in the Muslim world”) 0r they wonder if Muslims are so weak in their faith that any offense to their prophet pushes them to mass violence. Neither produces interesting answers.
What Westerners fail to appreciate is the cultural milieu in which Islam originated and propagated. Islam emerged from a pre-existing oral tradition of poetry. The influence is apparent in the Holy Qur’an, which often reads like poetry:
Say, “I seek refuge in the Lord of mankind,
The Sovereign of mankind,
The God of mankind,
From the evil of the retreating whisperer –
Who whispers [evil] into the breasts of mankind –
From among the jinn [spirits] and mankind.” (Surat an-Nas 114)
Recitation of the Qur’an is art, and those with the Qur’an memorized are respected. In early Islam, that was the only way to experience the Qur’an. It is believed Muhammad was illiterate, so when he received the Qur’an from the Angel Gabriel he memorized it and taught it to his followers. The sunnah, or the large body that encompasses the words and actions of the Prophet and some of his close followers, was also initially memorized and passed along orally.
Memorization and oral transmission were the privileged modes of gaining and disseminating knowledge. How was it to be determined whose oral transmission was legitimate? What would be done if two people remembered something differently? In the case of the sunnah an incredibly complex system developed for evaluating the legitimacy of different ahadith (pieces of the sunnah, particular stories about things the Prophet said or did). Was it possible that a certain transmitter could have had contact with another in order to pass along a hadith? Did both transmitters live in the same era and were they known to have traveled in the same region?
The issue of legitimacy also brought into question each transmitter’s character. Ignoring other variables, one might trust what one transmitter said the Prophet did over another if the first had a reputation for honesty while the second was known to lie. The legitimacy of the information a transmitter passed along was intimately connected to the transmitter’s reputation: how honest he was, how often he prayed, whether his teachings were consistent. Character is vital to legitimacy in the Islamic tradition.
The connection between the legitimacy of the content and the character of the content’s originator or transmitter implies that criticism of the latter calls the former into question. If a transmitter is not of high moral standing, there are implications for whether the ahadith he transmitted are considered legitimate. Insulting the Prophet, the original transmitter, calls into question his message, or all of Islam.
In the Shi’i tradition a religious leader’s character is very important, especially in a Muslim’s choice of Ayatollah. Because of the occultation of the last imam, Ayatollahs are selected to demonstrate how a Muslim should live her life until the last imam returns. The importance of an Ayatollah modeling good character is captured in the title given to a well-respected Ayatollah, marja-e-taqlid, which translates as “source of emulation.”
This is strange from the Judeo-Christian perspective, which privileges text. Jews are exigent about error-free copying of the Torah. Western culture worries about plagiarism. Improperly expropriating text undermines an author’s credibility and may call into question everything she has written. We have little need to worry about an author’s character to decide whether a text is valid or not.
It is therefore not surprising that the Judeo-Christian tradition includes insulting, teasing, or at least recognizing the faults of religious leaders without it negatively reflecting on their mission. In the Jewish tradition, many of the prophets are far from moral perfection, but their character flaws do not affect the sanctity of their purpose. Most Christians had a good laugh at the late-night TV jokes about Jesus’ possible wife. The ancient Greeks often mocked the gods.
There is of course no justification for the killings associated with the recent demonstrations. But the importance of transmitters in preserving the Islamic tradition provides some insight into the anger a number of Muslims are feeling around the world, an anger that so many in the West cannot begin to understand.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
George W. Bush’s playbook
I can do no better in summing up Mitt Romney’s foreign policy speech today than he does himself in the penultimate sentence:
The 21st century can and must be an American century. It began with terror, war, and economic calamity. It is our duty to steer it onto the path of freedom, peace, and prosperity.
Here’s the problem: the terror, war and economic calamity Romney refers to occurred not on Barack Obama’s watch, but on George W. Bush’s. And Governor Romney’s foreign policy prescriptions, like many of his domestic policy prescriptions, are drawn from George W. Bush’s playbook.
The few innovations in Romney’s speech at Virginia Military Institute today are hardly worth mentioning. He wants to see the Syrian revolutionaries get more arms, in particular anti-aircraft and anti-tank weapons, but he fails to say how he will prevent these from being used against us, except to say that those who receive them will have to share our values. That should fix everything in the arms bazaars of the Middle East.
He says he will support a two-state solution for peace between Palestine and Israel. Nice to see him return to the mainstream from the extremist wings of Israeli and American politics, which is where he was during the “47%” fund-raising dinner in Florida when he suggested we would kick the can down the road and maybe skip the two-state solution altogether. Trouble is, the people he pitched that line to are supporting his campaign with fat checks. He says there will be no daylight between America and Israel, which is code for saying that the Jewish settlements will continue to expand, since that is what Netanyahu’s Israel wants. I fail to understand an American presidential candidate who outsources U.S. policy on the Palestinians to Israel.
In Libya he’ll track down the killers of our personnel, which is exactly what Obama promises to do. I’d just be curious how those 15 Navy ships he plans to build each year will help in the effort.
He pledges to condition aid to Egypt but makes the conditions both vague and easy to meet: build democratic institutions and maintain the peace treaty with Israel. There are lots of problems with President Morsy’s Egypt, but you won’t be able to hang him for either of those offenses, yet.
In Afghanistan, he calls the withdrawal the president has pledged a retreat but makes it clear he is not proposing anything very different.
Then there is this on foreign assistance:
I will make further reforms to our foreign assistance to create incentives for good governance, free enterprise, and greater trade, in the Middle East and beyond. I will organize all assistance efforts in the greater Middle East under one official with responsibility and accountability to prioritize efforts and produce results. I will rally our friends and allies to match our generosity with theirs.
The trouble here is that the Ryan budget guts the foreign affairs budget, including foreign assistance. There won’t be any American generosity to be matched with theirs if Romney is elected. This is where Romney departs definitively from Obama and shows his reliance on George W.’s playbook.
I hasten to add that I’d be all for organizing our assistance efforts in the greater Middle East under one official. That would be a good idea.
One last issue: with all this overload of American values as the basis for our foreign policy, I’m curious what Romney plans to do about Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Kuwait, Jordan, Morocco and other less than fully democratic friends in the region? They get no mention in this speech, but of course they really can’t be mentioned in a speech that gives unequivocal backing to both our friends and our values. What would Romney do when there is a choice between the two? Keep silent would be a good guess.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Constitutions count. What does tech do?
Constitutions count. In a democratic society ruled by law, they distribute power among institutions and determine how it is gained and how it is lost. The process of preparing one after civil war or dictatorship is particularly fraught, as we are seeing in the recent Arab Spring revolutions. Society is divided, who truly represents “the people” is unclear, how those who draft the constitution are chosen is problematic, and power still grows out of the barrel of a gun. How does a constitution avoid capture by armed elites and gain popular legitimacy in these difficult situations? What role can and should the public play? How can technology best contribute?
A group of experts on constitution-making and on technology met last week in DC to discuss these issues at a roundtable co-hosted by Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and Google Ideas. Some conclusions on constitution-making were clear: the process should be seen to be transparent, it has to fit the particular context in which it is occurring, and it has to create or demonstrate a broad, inclusive consensus around main issues. The ways in which technology can contribute are still the subject of experimentation. It can facilitate public participation by enabling substantive citizen inputs to the text of a constitution, improving transparency, enhancing civic education and expanding inclusiveness. The drafting of a constitution can also benefit from technology that makes the body of all past constitutions discoverable and searchable.
The constitution-making experts see the process as a complex one that includes not only public participation but also judicial engagement and external assistance in deliberating, drafting, adopting, promulgating and implementing a new constitutional order. The South African process is often viewed as the best example and imitated elsewhere, because public participation ensured the post-apartheid constitution’s legitimacy, even though there was little apparent impact on the constitutional text, which remained virtually unchanged. Even where public participation has had an impact on the text, it is rarely extensive. Historically, relatively few provisions have attracted intense public scrutiny.
Legitimacy also depends to an important extent on the transparency of the constitution-making process as well as public understanding of the outcome. A good constitutional process lays the foundation for good implementation and the creation of a culture of constitutionalism. This is particularly difficult to achieve if the constitution is the product of an international intervention, as in post-war Bosnia, Kosovo and Iraq. There international officials actually wrote the initial constitutions, with little consultation with local citizens. What the internationals consider “universal” principles do not necessarily translate well. It might have been better to adopt a transitional or provisional constitution, (as in Tunisia and Libya) that can be used until the local population is in a position to conduct its own constitution-making process.
When the time comes for a locally prepared constitution, the process needs to be transparent but still allow for elite deal-making and technical drafting behind closed doors. Not everything can be done in public, as some compromises will embarrass participants with their own constituencies. Expectations need to be managed. The public should not be led to believe it will have an impact on the drafting if in fact it will not, which happened in Iraq. Over-promising in post-conflict situations creates big difficulties. So too does drafting that is piecemeal or uncoordinated. The pieces of a constitution need to fit together, without leaving gaps and overlaps that will create problems later. It is also important to provide a suitable mechanism and threshold for amendments, which are difficult decisions in post-war situations.
Technology-based experiments conducted so far in connection with public participation in constitution-making processes include those in Iceland, Tunisia, Egypt and Somalia.
The recent Icelandic constitution-making process included weekly publication of drafts and an extensive dialogue on Facebook, Twitter and Youtube conducted by members of the drafting committee. This enabled direct interaction with interested members of the public, who were able to comment on a website as the draft evolved. Out of a national population of 300,000, there were 40,000 visitors to the site, 12,000 views on the YouTube channel and 3,600 comments.
In Egypt and Tunisia, Google supported the creation of web platforms that provided YouTube videos for voter education and enabled the general public to comment on all the individual articles of the constitutions. On the Egyptian site, articles could be sorted by how happy users were with them and how hotly debated they were (using Face book ‘likes’ and ‘comments’, respectively). This gave the drafters clear input and enabled the public to verify that their views were taken into account, but it allowed for little nuance. Egyptians have made upwards of 150,000 “inputs” to the constitutional process.
In Somalia, Voice of America (VOA) and Google Ideas partnered in a telephone survey conducted by professional Somali journalists skilled in asking questions and getting answers. Each survey’s results were discussed on daily political talk radio, with call-in listeners and even directly on-air with the Somali Prime Minister. This allowed people living in a precarious security environment to give their opinions while remaining anonymous. The polling reached over 3,000 people.
None of these experiments is definitive but some have already been transplanted from one context to another. All illustrate the potential of technology to open the constitution-making process and build legitimacy and trust in the public eye. But they tend to favor the technology-enabled part of the society, which may amplify the influence of some parts of society at the expense of others. They also favor individual contributions and may disadvantage some technology-poor civil society organizations. Direct democracy is not necessarily good democracy. Especially in post-conflict societies, there is the real possibility of illiberal results. We need to be careful not to harm the democratic process. Technology should enable constitution-making, not drive it.
There is also an important role for technology in supporting the drafting process. More than anything else, drafters want examples of how to deal with their problems. They often turn to the constitutions of countries that share their geography, culture or language, to find possible models and appropriate solutions, even sometimes copying typographical errors. No easily retrievable central repository of these documents currently exists. The Constitution Explorer project, run out of Stanford University and the University of Texas, aims to change that, by collecting and coding the world’s constitutions for the past two hundred years. This kind of toolbox is what those charged with drafting most need to avoid pitfalls and improve their own product.
This applies more broadly as well. There is no definitive solution to the problem of how technology can contribute to public participation in constitution-making. There is a growing variety of tools that may be appropriate—or not—in particular contexts. Where they work well, they can improve not only substantive input but also transparency, accountability and civic education, leading eventually to a democratic and constitutional culture.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Arab women agree on problems, not solutions
Women have played important roles in the Arab awakening but they now face an uphill struggle to consolidate their gains.
During the first panel of this week’s Woodrow Wilson Center about “Women after the Arab Awakening,” participants discussed the problems facing women on the Middle East. Heads nodded and the audience, mostly women, groaned and laughed together. All cringed when speakers presented alarming legal and cultural setbacks for women and smiled or applauded for stories of courage or insightful comments about the status of women.
In the second panel, when the speakers were asked to identify a path forward, tensions flared. The audience tittered at provocative statements and the question and answer period turned into a heated argument. Underlying the tension, were important issues: the appropriate role of religion in government, the tension between Islam and feminism and the appropriate representation of minorities in democracies.
Dalia Ziada, one of Newsweek’s most influential women and CNN’s eight agents of change in the Arab World, sees politicians and political systems as only part of the problem. Culture is also responsible. Suzanne Mubarak advanced the status of women with the “khula” law giving women the right to divorce and other legislation allowing women to pass down their nationality. President Mubarak allocated 64 seats in the lower house of parliament to women. These legal successes did not result in meaningful improvement in status for women in Egypt because of culture. Most women who ran for office had connections to Suzanne Mubarak or other leaders and were often not considered competent.
Rihab Elhaj, co-founder of the New Libya Foundation, made a similar point. Eighty of the 200 seats in the Libyan parliament are allotted for political parties, which are required to include women alternately with men on their party lists. This helped women get 33 seats, but they have not yet taken on leadership roles because they are unconnected to leading male politicians.
In Tunisia, culture and social norms have also interfered with women achieving the status laws allow. Tunisia has a unique history of legislation promoting women’s rights. But when Omezzine Khelifa, a political party leader in Tunisia and adviser to the Minister of Tourism, proposed parity, many disagreed. Some thought it was not the time to deal with women’s issues. Others opposed a parity law because it suggests that women are incapable of getting into public office any other way. Parity in Tunisia passed, but as in Egypt it did not allow women to win 50% of the seats. Most political parties chose men to head their lists, so women won seats only if a party received enough votes to win multiple seats.
Fahmia Al Fotih, Yemeni journalist, also described cultural barriers. Several key women leaders during the revolution were subjected to harassment and even violence as a result of their participation in the protests. A barrier was erected to keep women and men separate, but some women chose to ignore the barrier in protest and were often beaten as a result. The National Consensus Government is composed of 35 members, of whom only three are women.
Not all problems in the Middle East can be attributed to patriarchal culture. There are real legal, physical and social barriers preventing women from reaching high positions. In Yemen, a humanitarian crisis has pushed political participation from many women’s minds as they struggle to feed their families. According to an Oxfam report this year, four out of five Yemeni women report that their lives have gotten worse in the past twelve months. Saudi blogger Hala Al Dosari recounted harassment by the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, a woman jailed for driving and a youth conference on the empowerment of civil society shut down at the last moment. Ziada expressed concern about possible Egyptian legislation allowing marriage at 14 and female genital mutilation. In Tunisia, Khelifa reported on the recent debate about whether women should be described as “complementary” or “equal” to men in the constitution. Al-Nahda’s draft of Article 28 to the constitution, which used the “complementary” wording, was defeated, but the debate will not be over until the constitution is finalized.
The second panel was intended to address what should be done to solve these problems. Syrian Honey Al-Sayed of Souriali Radio called for an effort to define equal roles for Syrian women now, before the revolution is over. Heads nodded in response, given that so many of the speakers had noted how optimistic they were about women’s rights during their revolutions and how things changed afterwards. Elhaj said that the change in Libya was not because of some Islamist scheme to remove women from the public sphere, but because of a natural reversion to the status of women prior to the revolution. Al-Sayed argued that Syria might be able to avoid this if there is a large-scale education campaign and civil society organizations are developed now.
Gabool Al-Mutawakel, Youth Leadership Development Foundation co-founder, made a similar argument for working to keep the spirit of the Yemeni revolution going, but she offered new insight: the problem facing women is the notion of “women’s issues.” She cited a female politician who preferred to talk about being a woman in politics rather than her policy ideas. Women will not succeed in Yemeni politics if the only areas about which they can speak with credibility are women’s issues. Women must not just represent women, but all of Yemen. Al-Mutawakel suggested we teach women about leadership, not just empowerment. We should also foster a culture of competition where women learn how to win and lose. Quotas can have the effect of killing a woman’s motivation to fight for a seat.
It was in this panel that tensions flared. Hanin Ghaddar, a Wilson Center Public Policy Scholar and editor of NOW News, saw an inherent contradiction between feminism and Islam and argued for separation of religion and state in Lebanon. The revolution taught her that small changes are no longer acceptable and that we need drastic, radical changes, which an Islamic government cannot offer. Yassmine ElSayed Hani, Wilson Center Visiting Arab Journalist, argued on the contrary that separation of religion and state is not realistic in Egypt. Sharia is a way of life that should not be reduced to the troubling laws in the Middle East that are supposedly based on it. About 80% of the Egyptian population is Muslim, so the government should reflect the majority of the population. Ghaddar argued in response that a democracy should protect the minority. Ziada suggested that Egypt may not need a religious government exactly because its population is so religious.
There is agreement about the problems women in the Middle East face, but disagreement on what to do about them.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
This week’s peace picks
There are good choices this week including the kickoff presidential debate.
1. How Should the Next American President Engage the World?, Monday October 1, 6:30 PM – 8:00 PM, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Venue: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036
Speaker: David Rothkopf, Jessica Tuchman Matthews, Thomas Friedman, John Ikenberry, Robert Kagan
Foreign Policy’s David Rothkopf will moderate a debate with Thomas Friedman, John Ikenberry, Robert Kagan, and Jessica T. Mathews. This debate, the second in a three-part series sponsored by the Carnegie Endowment, will focus on one of the key issues in this year’s election—How should the next American president engage the world?
Register for this event here.
2. Building Inclusive Societies: Transatlantic Perspectives on Multiculturalism and Integration, Tuesday October 2, 8:30 AM – 12:30 PM, Johns Hopkins SAIS
Venue: Johns Hopkins SAIS, The Nitze Building, 1740 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington DC, 20036, Kenney Auditorium
Speakers: Francois Rivasseau, Rokhaya Diallo, Kubra Gumusay, Nasar Meer, Michael Privot, Emmanuel Kattan, Sonya Aziz, Eduardo Lopez Busquets, Justin Gest
Emerging European and American experts from the spheres of academia, policy making and the media will discuss their experiences and perspectives on this critical issue, including what Europe and the U.S. can learn from each other’s models of multiculturalism and integration. They will consider the challenges that both sides face in reducing anti-immigrant sentiment and improving levels of civic engagement among youth, particularly within emerging demographic groups.
RSVP for this event to Delegation-USA-EU-Events@eeas.europa.eu.
3. Women After the Arab Awakening, Tuesday October 2, 8:45 AM – 1:00 PM, Wilson Center
Venue: Woodrow Wilson Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004, Fifth Floor
Speakers: Dalia Ziada, Omezzine Khélifa, Rihab Elhaj, Fahmia Al Fotih, Hala Al Dosari, Honey Al Sayed, Gabool Almutawakel, Hanin Ghaddar, Yassmine ElSayed Hani, Haleh Esfandiari, Rangita de Silva de Alwis
9:00 – 11:00am PANEL 1: Today’s View from the Ground; Dalia Ziada – Egypt, Executive Director, Ibn Khaldun Center for Development Studies; Omezzine Khélifa – Tunisia, Politician and Advisor, Ministry of Tourism; Rihab Elhaj – Libya, Co-founder and Executive Director, New Libya Foundation; Fahmia Al Fotih – Yemen, Communication analyst and youth focal point analyst, United Nations Population Fund; Hala Al Dosari – Saudi Arabia, Ph.D. candidate in health services research; Moderator: Haleh Esfandiari, Director, Middle East Program, Woodrow Wilson Center
11:15 – 1:00pm PANEL 2: Tomorrow’s Prospects for Women in the Region; Honey Al Sayed – Syria, Director, Syria Program, Nonviolence International; Gabool Almutawakel – Yemen, Co-Founder, Youth Leadership Development Foundation; Hanin Ghaddar – Lebanon, Managing Editor, NOW News; Yassmine ElSayed Hani – Egypt, Independent Journalist, Foreign Desk, Al Akhbar daily newspaper; Moderator: Rangita de Silva de Alwis, Director, Global Women’s Leadership Initiative, Woodrow Wilson Center
4. The Missing Link: How Can the Pakistani Diaspora Improve U.S.-Pakistan Ties?, Tuesday October 2, 11:00 AM – 12:30 PM, Wilson Center
Venue: Woodrow Wilson Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004, Sixth Floor
Speaker: Irfan Malik, Aakif Ahmad
According to research produced by the Asian American Center for Advancing Justice, Pakistani-Americans are the second-fastest-growing Asian-American ethnic group. They are represented in a variety of professional fields, from medicine and accounting to construction and transport, and are known for their affluence and philanthropy. How can they help improve U.S.-Pakistan relations? What can they offer, and how can their resources and expertise be better tapped? This briefing marks the release of a series of recommendations, formulated by a working group of diaspora members convened by the Wilson Center.
5. Iraq Energy Outlook, Wednesday October 3, 9:30 AM – 11:00 AM, CSIS
Venue: CSIS, 1800 K Street NW, Washington DC, 20006, B1 Conference Room
Speakers: Fatih Birol
The CSIS Energy and National Security Program is pleased to host Dr. Fatih Birol, Chief Economist and Director of Global Energy Economics at the IEA, to present highlights from the IEA’s recent World Energy Outlook Special Report, the Iraq Energy Outlook.
Iraq is already the world’s third-largest oil exporter. It has the resources and intention to increase its oil production vastly. Contracts are already in place.Will Iraq’s ambitions be realised? And what would the implications be for Iraq’s economy and for world oil markets? The obstacles are formidable: political, logistical, legal, regulatory, financial, lack of security and sufficient skilled labour. One example: in 2011, grid electricity could meet only 55% of demand.
The International Energy Agency has studied these issues with the support and close co-operation of the government of Iraq and many other leading officials, commentators, industry representatives and international experts. The report examines the role of the energy sector in the Iraqi economy today and in the future, assesses oil and gas revenues and investment needs, provides a detailed analysis of oil, gas and electricity supply through to 2035, highlighting the challenges of infrastructure development and water availability, and spells out the associated opportunities and risks, both for world oil markets and for Iraq’s economy and energy sector.
RSVP for this event to energy@csis.org.
6. Iran: Economic Troubles and International Sanctions, Wednesday October 3, 12:00 PM – 1:30 PM, Wilson Center
Venue: Woodrow Wilson Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004, Fifth Floor
Speakers: Bijan Khajehpour, Djavad Salehi-Isfahani, Suzanne Maloney
By talking about such complexities (existence of a large grey economy, regional interdependencies, deep-rooted merchant tradition, existence of semi-state economic institution etc.), the speakers will address the issue why sanctions do not have the intended result in Iran. Lunch will be served.
Register for this event here.
7. Post-Referendum South Sudan: Political Violence, New Sudan and Democratic Nation-Building, Wednesday October 3, 12:30 PM – 2:00 PM, Johns Hopkins SAIS
Venue: Johns Hopkins SAIS, The Bernstein-Offit Building, 1717 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC, 20036, Room 736
Speaker: Christopher Zambakari
Christopher Zambakari, doctoral student in the Law and Policy Program at Northeastern University, will discuss this topic.
RSVP for this event to itolber1@jhu.edu.
8. Breeding the Phoenix: An Analysis of the Military’s Role in Peacebuilding, Wednesday October 3, 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM, George Mason University
Venue: George Mason University, Arlington Campus, Truland Building, 3301 Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22201, Room 555
Speaker: George F. Oliver, Ho Won Jeong, Solon Simmons, Dennis Sandole
There are numerous professional groups and individuals working for world peace. The reality is, however, that wars between nations or within nations still cause untold human deaths and casualties. World peace, a condition where war no longer affects human societies, is a long way off. This research focuses on how to end wars and restore a sustainable, positive peace to those who have experienced the horrors of war.
More specifically, this study focuses on the military’s role in peacebuilding. In the last twenty years, post-war peacebuilding has emerged as a powerful method that helps nations recover from war. Soldiers, whether they are part of an international intervention attempting to end the war or a member of a United Nations peacekeeping mission, have an important role to play. Today, soldiers do more than win their nation’s wars; they also help other nations and their citizens recover from war. In the last few decades, civilians from organizations like the United Nations, other intergovernmental organizations, other governments and nongovernmental organizations have responded to help nations recover from war or a violent conflict. There is no argument that civilians are better at peacebuilding than the military, yet the military is moving into this realm more and more.
So what are the roles of the military and civilians? This research project answers these questions. The critical factor in determining what the military does and what civilians do is based on security. If security is good, civilians can perform all the aspects of peacebuilding. Conversely, if security is lacking, then the military must step in and take on the various parts of peacebuilding. Security, however, is not like a light switch, on or off, good or bad. It is more like a rheostat with varying degrees of security. This research defines five levels of security and then seeks to find the fine lines where civilians can replace the military in peacebuilding functions.
Current peacebuilding ideas have evolved from practice, but behind that practice are some relevant conflict and conflict resolution theories. These theories are explored and ideas for future peacebuilders are identified. Analysis of real world peacebuilding has led to the creation of various functions that help peacebuilders restore a society after a war. These functional areas are: security, humanitarian assistance, governance, rule of law, infrastructure restoration, economic development and reconciliation. Who performs each of these functional areas is directly related to the security conditions.
This research uses both quantitative and qualitative methods to explore how security impacts the role of the military in peacebuilding. Qualitatively, two case studies are explored, post-World War II Germany and Kosovo. Quantitatively, this research explored the issue through a questionnaire that was taken by 579 soldiers, civilians and experts in peacebuilding. In the end, the hypothesis was proven that the military’s role in peacebuilding is inversely linked to the level of security. If security is sufficient, civilians do the work; and if security is deficient, then the military’s role is larger.
9. Aiding the Arab Transitions: US Economic Engagement with Egypt, Wednesday October 3, 2:00 PM – 3:30 PM, Stimson Center
Venue: Stimson Center, 1111 19th Street NW, Washington, DC 20036, Twelfth Floor
Speakers: Caroline Atkinson, Amb. William Taylor, James Harmon, Mona Yacoubian
With the Middle East still reeling from a spate of anti-American violence, US relations with Egypt, perhaps the most important Arab country in transition, hang in the balance. Just prior to the outbreak of unrest in Cairo, the largest American trade delegation ever to the Middle East completed its historic visit to Egypt. The trade group’s trip came on the heels of a senior US delegation to Cairo to negotiate a $1 billion debt relief deal. In addition, the US government has assembled a package of financing and loan guarantees for American investors and recently established a $60 million US-Egypt Enterprise Fund. With persistent unemployment, low economic growth and anemic foreign investment, the Egyptian economy is struggling as Egypt attempts to meet the challenges of its historic transition. Meanwhile, the recent unrest has spurred calls inside the United States to withdraw its economic support from countries such as Egypt.
A distinguished panel will discuss the role of US economic engagement with Egypt, how this engagement fits into a broader US strategy on the Arab transitions, and the role US economic engagement can play in ensuring a more positive future for Egypt.
Register for this event here.
10. Afghanistan and the Politics of Regional Economic Integration in Central and South Asia, Wednesday October 3, 5:30 PM – 7:00 PM, Johns Hopkins SAIS
Venue: Johns Hopkins SAIS, The Rome Building, 1619 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Rome Building Auditorium
Speakers: Jawed Ludin
Jawed Ludin, deputy foreign minister of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, will discuss this topic. A reception will precede the event at 5:00 PM.
RSVP for this event to saiscaciforums@jhu.edu.
11. Syria After Assad: Managing the Challenges of Transition, Thursday October 4, 9:30 AM – 11:30 AM, USIP
Venue: USIP, 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20037
Speakers: Steven Heydemann, Jim Marshall, Amr al-Azm, Afra Jalabi, Murhaf Jouejati, Rafif Jouejati, Rami Nakhla
The Syrian revolution has taken a terrible toll. Tens of thousands of Syrians have been killed and hundreds of thousands wounded. Millions have been forced from their homes. Urban centers have been destroyed, villages bombed, and communities subjected to horrific brutality at the hands of regime forces and Assad’s loyalist militias. The fabric of Syrian society is fraying under the pressure of escalating sectarian tensions. The militarization of the revolution and the proliferation of armed opposition units pose long term challenges for rule of law and security. Damage to infrastructure and to the Syrian economy will require tens of billions of dollars to repair.
How much longer the Assad regime will survive is uncertain. When it falls, a new government will face daunting challenges. How will the Syrian opposition respond? Will a new government be able to address the urgent needs of Syrians for humanitarian relief, economic and social reconstruction, and provide basic rule of law and security? Even today, in liberated areas of Syria where a post-Assad transition is already underway, the opposition must demonstrate its capacity to address these challenges.
Over the past year, a group of opposition activists collaborated to develop recommendations and strategies for managing the challenges of a post-Assad transition. Join us for the first presentation in the United States of the document they produced: “The Day After: Supporting a Democratic Transition in Syria.”
Register for this event here.
12. U.S.-Egyptian Relations: Where is the Bilateral Relationship Headed?, Thursday October 4, 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM, Center for National Policy
Venue: Center for National Policy, One Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20001, Suite 333
Speakers: Perry Cammack, Stephen McInerney, Shibley Telhami, Gregory Aftandilian
The slow and initial tepid response of the new Egyptian leadership to the attack on the U.S. embassy in Cairo has led many observers to question the efficacy of the U.S.-Egyptian bilateral relationship and caused some members of Congress to advocate for a cut in U.S. assistance. On the other hand, both Egyptian and U.S. officials have indicated that they want the bilateral relationship to be maintained, as each side has equities it wants to protect. Please join CNP Senior Fellow for the Middle East, Gregory Aftandilian, and a panel of experts to analyze this situation and give their assessments on where the bilateral relationship is headed. A light lunch will be served.
Register for this event here.
13. Systematic Approaches to Conflict Mapping, Friday October 5, 10:00 AM – 1:00 PM, George Mason University
Venue: George Mason University, Arlington Campus, Truland Building, 3301 Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22201, Rome 555
Speakers: Sara Cobb, Alison Castel
Conflict-affected societies are complex adaptive environments that often present peacebuilders and policy makers with difficult or “wicked problems.” One movement in the field is to take more holistic or integrated approaches to working with societal conflict.
Systems mapping of conflicts is one tool that is being used to enable peacebuilders to grapple effectively with the complexity these environments present. Dr. Robert Ricigliano will introduce participants to the technique of systems mapping of conflicts as a tool for assessment and planning for peacebuilding operations.
14. Paul Collier – “Making Natural Resources Work for Development,” Friday October 5, 12:15 PM – 2:00 PM, Johns Hopkins SAIS
Venue: Johns Hopkins SAIS, The Nitze Building, 1740 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Kenney Auditorium
Speakers: Paul Collier
Professor Collier has been the Director of the Research Development Department of the World Bank for 5 years from 1998 to 2003. His research covers fragile states, democratization, and the management of natural-resources in low-income societies. Professor Collier is the author of The Bottom Billion, which in 2008 won the Lionel Gelber, Arthur Ross and Corine Prizes and in May 2009 was the joint winner of the Estoril Global Issues Distinguished Book Prize. His second book, Wars, Guns and Votes: Democracy in Dangerous Places was published in March 2009; and his latest book, The Plundered Planet: How to Reconcile Prosperity with Nature, in May 2010. He is currently advisor to the Strategy and Policy Department of the International Monetary Fund, and advisor to the Africa Region of the World Bank. In 2008, he was appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) ‘for services to scholarship and development’. In 2011 he was elected to the Council of the Royal Economic Society.
Register for this event here.
RSS - Posts
