Tag: India
Trump is right
Donald Trump said earlier this week about the Middle East:
Now, are we going to stay in that part of the world? One reason is Israel. Oil is becoming less and less of a reason because we’re producing more oil now than we’ve ever produced. So, you know, all of a sudden it gets to a point where you don’t have to stay there.
This is more sensible than 99% of what the man says, even if I think Israel can more than take care of itself. But the main reason for US military deployments in the Middle East is oil, which is far less important than it was in the 1970s and 1980s. That is what prompted President Carter’s 1980 pledge to defend the flow of oil from the Gulf:
Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.
President Carter’s Doctrine was a response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which he feared presaged a thrust towards the Gulf. The Soviet Union is gone, Afghanistan is a mess, and the US economy is now far less dependent on oil imports and energy of all sorts than it was in 1980. The Gulf oil producers, especially Saudi Arabia, are far more dependent on oil exports, which they send predominantly to Asia, especially China, Japan, India, and South Korea.
The US nevertheless spends about 12% of the Pentagon budget on protecting the flow of oil from the Gulf and holds a Strategic Petroleum Reserve of well over 100 days of imports, thus protecting our principal economic competitors from the effects of an oil supply disruption while they free ride on our preparations. It is true of course that an oil supply disruption would also affect the US economy, since oil prices are set in a global market and US consumers would feel the price hike in imports of goods of all sorts. But changed circumstances should affect burden-sharing: we need to do less and other oil consumers need to do more.
There are other ways in which the Middle East merits lower priority for American foreign policy. Middle East terrorism now has little impact on Americans both at home, where right-wing attackers are far more common than Islamic ones, and abroad, where relatively few Americans have suffered harm, most of them either by sheer accident or by travel into known danger zones. Nuclear proliferation is still an issue, but mainly a self-inflicted one due to American withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran, which is far from the giant threat the Administration is portraying it as. Even if that were not true, American deployments in the Gulf are far too close to Iran for war-fighting purposes. We would need to move them farther away in order to use them in an attack.
The problem is that withdrawal from the Middle East is as problematic as intervention there. That is what President Obama demonstrated. His restraint in Libya, Syria, and Yemen left vacuums filled by jihadis, Iranians, and Gulfies. The results have been catastrophic for each of the states in question. Intervention by middling powers without multilateral authorization and on one side or the other in a civil war is known to have little chance of success and to prolong conflicts. Where the US re-committed its forces in Iraq, whose state was in far better shape than those in Libya, Syria, or Yemen, the results were far more salutary, even if not completely satisfactory.
Part of the problem for the US is lack of diplomatic capacity. American diplomacy has become far too dependent, both physically and strategically, on military presence. Military withdrawal requires a diplomatic posture that can be sustained without the troops. Many other countries by necessity have learned the trick of hitting above their military weight with diplomatic capacity. Witness an extreme example like Norway, or a less dramatic one like Germany. These are countries that lead with their diplomatic and economic clout, not with their troops, ships and planes.
There has been to my knowledge no serious discussion of the difficulties of withdrawal and how they can be met. Part of solution lies in beefing up the political, economic, and cultural capacities of American diplomacy. But withdrawal will remain perilous anyplace a legitimate, inclusive, well-functioning state does not exist. Statebuilding has gotten a really bad name from the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, but it remains a vital component of any effort to reduce US commitments abroad. About that, both Trump and Obama have been wrong.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks November 12 – 18
- Defending Sovereignty and Information Space | Tuesday, November 13 | 11:30 am – 1 pm | Atlantic Council |
1030 15th Street, NW, 12th Floor Washington, DC 20005 | Register Here
How should one respond to the many interlocking elements that make up this tool of statecraft in order to reinforce the resiliency of our societies and technology and how to use all levers of national power to contain the negative effects of Russian activities?
Russia has been exploiting agents of influence and information space to sway public opinion and mislead government actors. In the wake of the 2016 US Presidential election, the United States was forced to come to terms with Russian interference in American democratic institutions and the sudden throwback to many Russian Cold War-era hybrid tactics. Nevertheless, the Republic of Estonia, along with other European allies, have been well aware of these tactics and have been working to counter the resurgence of Russian activities.
As hybrid warfare has benefited immensely from the digital age, the United States and its European allies and partners urgently need to comprehend the tasks, purposes, and organization of these tactics in order to reinforce societal and technological resilience to face unprecedented levels of state-sponsored influence and interference campaigns.
A conversation with:
Ambassador Victoria Nuland
Former Assistant Secretary of State for
European and Eurasian Affairs,
US Department of State;
Chief Executive Officer
Center for a New American Security
Dr. Thomas Rid
Professor of Strategic Studies,
School of Advanced International Studies
Johns Hopkins University
General Riho Terras
Commander
Estonian Defense Forces
Moderated by:
H.E. Jonatan Vseviov
Ambassador
Embassy of Estonia to the United States
2. Promoting American Leadership in 5G Technology | Tuesday, November 13 | 12 pm – 1:30 pm | Hudson Institute | 1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20004 | Register Here
Hudson Institute will host an event to discuss how the U.S. can maintain a competitive edge in the development of 5G technology and the future of global telecommunications. Panelists include former Federal Communications Commissioner and Hudson Senior Fellow Harold Furchtgott-Roth; CEO of global telecommunications company Rivada Networks Declan Ganley; and former Deputy Chief of Staff to President George W. Bush Karl Rove.
Chinese technology has played a growing role in the global 5G network, with over 58 countries agreeing to use Chinese hardware in their future networks. As it emerges over the next decade, 5G promises to vastly increase the speed and responsiveness of wireless networks. While the rollout of 5G will demand billions of dollars, the companies and countries investing now will have a strong say in not only how 5G transmits information, but how others are able to access the system. The discussion will be moderated by Hudson Senior Fellow Arthur Herman.
Speakers
Harold Furchtgott-Roth Speaker
Former Federal Communications Commissioner and Senior Fellow and Director, Center for the Economics of the Internet, Hudson Institute
Declan Ganley Speaker
CEO, Rivada Networks
Karl Rove Speaker
Former Deputy Chief of Staff to President George W. Bush.
Arthur Herman (Moderator) Speaker
Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute
3. The Midterm Elections’ Implications for the Transatlantic Agenda | Wednesday, November 14 | 12:15 pm – 1:30 pm | CSIS | 1616 Rhode Island Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036 | Register Here
The CSIS Europe Program is delighted to host a conversation with U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT), Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s Subcommittee on Europe and Regional Security Cooperation. With the conclusion of the U.S. midterm elections, we will discuss what the future holds for U.S. policy toward NATO and European security, Russia, the Western Balkans, as well as the U.S.-EU trade relationship from a Congressional perspective. Following Senator Murphy’s remarks, CSIS experts will assess the impact that the new Congress will have on foreign and national security policy, and discuss the issues they will be keeping their eyes on in the 116th Congress.
Featuring:
U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D – CT),
Ranking Member, Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Europe and Regional Security Cooperation
CSIS Experts
Heather A. Conley,
Senior Vice President for Europe, Eurasia, and the Arctic; and Director, Europe Program
William Alan Reinsch,
Senior Adviser and Scholl Chair in International Business
Louis Lauter,
Vice President for Congressional and Government Affairs
4. Indo-Pacific Currents: Emerging Partnerships, Rivalries, and Strategic Realities across Asia | Thursday, November 15 | 10 am – 11:30 am | The Stimson Center | 1211 Connecticut Ave NW, 8th Floor Washington, DC 20036 | Register Here
The Indo-Pacific region, a key focus of the Trump administration’s foreign policy agenda, is undergoing significant political and strategic realignments with the return to great power competition. India’s role in the region is central to these developments, both in its emerging partnerships with nations like Japan and the United States and in its deepening rivalry with neighboring China. How are these dynamics likely to play out, and what are their broader strategic implications? Please join the Stimson Center for a panel discussion addressing views from across Asia on the political and security impacts of intra-regional cooperation and competition. Our panelists, Manoj Joshi, Distinguished Fellow, Observer Research Foundation, Brett Lambert, Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manufacturing and Industrial Base Policy, U.S. Department of Defense, Yun Sun, Co-Director of the Stimson Center’s East Asia Program, and Yuki Tatsumi, Co-Director of the Stimson Center’s East Asia Program, will offer comments. Sameer Lalwani, Director of the Stimson Center’s South Asia Program, will convene our meeting, and Elizabeth Threlkeld, South Asia Program Deputy Director, will moderate the discussion.
The Asia Strategy Initiative (ASI) is a joint effort by Stimson’s East, Southeast, and South Asia Program to feature regional perspectives on the shifting strategic dynamics in the Indo-Pacific region. By introducing expert analysis, ASI seeks to facilitate dialogues and develop pragmatic solutions for strategic, political, and economic challenges that the region faces.
5. Decentralization and Centralization: The Future of Governance in Syria | Thursday, November 15 | 12:30 pm – 2 pm | New America | 740 15th St NW #900 Washington, DC 20005 | Register Here
What is the state of governance in the various zones in Syria? Is a pre-2011 hyper centralized governance structure conducive to the peace process? How can a Syria-tailored decentralization model help the peace process? In its latest book publication, Centralization and Decentralization in Syria: The Concept and Practice, Omran Center for Strategic Studies examines Syria’s current forms of governance and how experiences on the ground, in the various zones of influence, converge or diverge from the concepts of centralization and decentralization.
To discuss the book and its findings, New America and Omran present Dr. Ammar Kahf, Executive Director and co-founder of the Omran Center who earned his Ph.D. in Political Science and Islamic Studies at the University of California Los Angeles and previously served as the Chief of Staff to the Secretary General of the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces from 2012 to 2013, and Mr. Yaser Tabbara, Esq., co-founder and board member of the Omran Center, and a former Senior Advisor to the Syrian Interim Government Prime Minister in 2013. Further remarks will be provided by Mona Yacoubian, Senior Adviser for Syria, Middle East, and North Africa at the United States Institute of Peace and former Deputy Assistant Administrator in the Middle East Bureau at USAID from 2014-2017 where she had responsibility for Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon.
Participants:
Ammar Kahf, @ammarkahf
Executive Director, Omran Center for Strategic Studies
Yaser Tabbara, @abulyas
Co-Founder and Board Member, Omran Center for Strategic Studies
Mona Yacoubian, @myacoubian
Senior Adviser, United States Institute of Peace
Moderator:
Peter Bergen, @peterbergencnn
Vice President, New America
6. Russian Nuclear Strategy After the Cold War | Friday, November 16 | 10 am – 11:30 am | CSIS | 1616 Rhode Island Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036 | Register Here
Please join us for a discussion of the external and internal drivers of change in post-Cold War Russian nuclear strategy. Dr. Kristin Ven Bruusgaard will argue that current Russian strategy is reducing the emphasis on nuclear weapons and oriented primarily toward deterring rather than fighting nuclear war. Improved conventional military capabilities are reducing Russia’s need to use nuclear weapons to compensate for conventional inferiority, and the most influential actors formulating nuclear strategy in Russia now argue for enhancing conventional and non-conventional tools to influence the course of conflict.
This event is made possible through generous support from Carnegie Corporation of New York.
FEATURING:
Kristen Ven Bruusgaard,
MacArthur Postdoctoral Fellow, Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford
Olga Olika (discussant),
Senior Advisor and Director, Russia and Eurasia Program, CSIS
Michael Kofman (moderator),
Senior Research Scientist, Russia Studies Program, CNA
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace picks – August 13 – 19
1. Discussion – Indian Railways and coal: An unsustainable interdependency | Monday, August 13, 2018 | 3:30 pm – 5:00 pm | Brookings Institution | Register Here
Coal is a key part of the equilibrium of Indian Railways since passenger fares don’t cover all the costs. Unfortunately, this equilibrium is at risk. Already the average distance of coal travelled has fallen 30 per cent in five years. Raising coal freight fares disproportionately compared to its distance and volume has led to higher cost of coal delivered and therefore to higher electricity costs for consumers – by approximately 10 paise/kWh across India. This is unsustainable.
Even more worryingly for the equilibrium is the rise of renewable energy and improved efficiency of power plants – these will lead to historical growth of coal transport coming down measurably. Indian Railways business model of “overcharging” coal while keeping passenger fares low could lead to coal (and thus thermal electricity) becoming uncompetitive.
This is a public event. RSVP pkamboj@brookingsindia.org to attend.
Speakers:
Moderator: Rahul Tongia – Fellow, Brookings India
Rakesh Mohan – Distinguished Fellow, Brookings India; former Deputy Governor of the Reserve Bank of India; and formerly Chairman, National Transport Development Policy Committee
Vivek Sahai – Distinguished Fellow, Observer Research Foundation; and former Chairman, Railway Board
Girish Pillai – Member (Traffic), Railway Board
2. Iran: Protests, Sanctions, and Regime Viability | Wednesday, August 15, 2018 | 12:00 pm – 1:30 pm | Hudson Institute | Register Here
On August 6, President Trump officially snapped back sanctions on Iran as part of his “Maximum Pressure” campaign on the country. This is the second concrete step taken by the administration this year, following their formal withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in May. The restored sanctions prohibit transactions by countries and private entities involving everything from dollar notes and gold to commercial aircraft. The decision to reimpose these sanctions has drawn opposition from Iran and U.S. allies alike.
Given recent protests in the country over economic woes and ineffective government, the sanctions come at a particularly challenging time for Iran. What remains to be seen is whether new economic pressure will prompt Iran to revive its nuclear ambitions or pressure Tehran into renegotiating a nuclear accord.
On August 15, Hudson Institute will host a panel to discuss Iran, the effectiveness of the U.S. “Maximum Pressure” campaign, the regime’s ability to navigate sanctions, and the country’s widening protests. Panelists will include Michael Pregent, Hudson Institute senior fellow; Alireza Nader, an independent Iran scholar; Behnam Ben Taleblu, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies; and Mariam Memarsadeghi, co-founder and co-director of Tavaana.
3. Brazil’s Election Takes Shape | Thursday, August 16, 2018 | 10:00 am – 10:45 am | Atlantic Council | Register Here
Note: Conference call dial-in information will be sent to participants two days prior to the event.
Latin America’s largest democracy officially kicks off one of its most consequential presidential contests on August 16. Over 14 candidates are vying for the presidency, with five standouts. How might the campaign take shape in the lead-up to the first round on October 7?
Join us via conference call on the day that the campaign officially begins—Thursday, August 16—for a conversation from 10:00 to 10:45 a.m. EDT, in partnership with the Brazilian Center for International Relations (CEBRI), on what to look for during the campaign and how Brazil’s next president may tackle some of the key issues necessary for Brazil to enter a new era of growth and stability.
For a preview of our conversation, keep an eye out for Ricardo Sennes’ Spotlight publication, to be launched on August 9, where he dissects the potential implications of political and economic reform, foreign direct investment, and security policies laid out by Jair Bolsonaro, Marina Silva, Ciro Gomes, Geraldo Alckmin, and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva as the PT nominee.
Speakers:
Roberta Braga – Associate Director, Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, Atlantic Council
Ricardo Sennes – Nonresident Senior Brazil Fellow, Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, Atlantic Council; Co-Founder, Prospectiva Consulting
Roberto Teixeira da Costa – Member, Board of Trustees, Brazilian Center for International Relations (CEBRI)
Henrique Rzezinski – Member, Board of Trustees, Brazilian Center for International Relations (CEBRI)
4. Turkey Sanctions – Navigating a Historic Bilateral Crisis | Thursday, August 16, 2018 | 12:00 pm – 2:00 pm | The Washington Institute for Near East Policy | Register Here
Earlier this month, the Trump administration issued sanctions against Turkey for its continued detention of American pastor Andrew Brunson. Ties between the two governments have been under strain for years, but the latest incident has seemingly touched off the most severe crisis in recent memory, including a plunge in Turkish economic indicators. As the historic dispute unfolds, what are the future prospects and pitfalls for the bilateral relationship?
To discuss these issues, The Washington Institute is pleased to host a Policy Forum with Amanda Sloat, Max Hoffman, and Steven Cook, moderated by Institute senior fellow Soner Cagaptay.
Amanda Sloat is a Robert Bosch Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Center on the United States and Europe. Previously, she served as deputy assistant secretary for Southern Europe and Eastern Mediterranean affairs at the State Department.
Max Hoffman is the associate director of national security and international policy at the Center for American Progress, focusing on Turkey, the Kurdish regions, and U.S. defense policy, among other issues.
Steven Cook is the Eni Enrico Mattei Senior Fellow for Middle East and Africa Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. An expert on Turkish politics, he has appeared in numerous international media outlets, including as a columnist with Foreign Policy magazine.
This event will be held at The Washington Institute, 1111 19th Street NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC, 20036. It will also be broadcast live on our website.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace picks July 2 – 15
1. Mexican Ambassador Discusses the Evolving U.S.-Mexico Relationship | Tuesday, July 3, 2018 | 11:30 am – 12:30 pm | Hudson Institute | Register Here
On July 3rd, Hudson Institute will host Gerónimo Gutiérrez Fernández, Ambassador of Mexico to the United States, for a discussion about the current state of U.S.-Mexico relations. The conversation will be moderated by Hudson Distinguished Fellow Walter Russell Mead.
The U.S.-Mexico relationship has recently faced new challenges. Immigration enforcement has intensified along the shared border; NAFTA renegotiations have progressed slowly, leading some in the Trump Administration to consider bilateral trade deals as an alternative approach with its North American partners; and new tariffs imposed on Mexican steel and aluminum have triggered retaliatory measures. Yet Mexico has long served as a strong regional trade ally and critical partner in efforts to combat narcotics trafficking. Voters in Mexico’s presidential elections on July 1st will likely be influenced by the rapidly evolving relationship between these two countries.
Gerónimo Gutiérrez Fernandez was named Ambassador of Mexico to the United States on January 13, 2017 by President Enrique Peña Nieto. During a more than 15-year career as a public servant, Ambassador Fernandez has served under four Mexican presidents. Prior to his most recent appointment, he was the Managing Director of the North American Development Bank (NADB).
Speaker:
His Excellency Gerónimo Gutiérrez Fernández, Ambassador of Mexico to the United States
Moderator:
Walter Russell Mead, Distinguished Fellow, Hudson Institute
2. Stabilizing Sino-Indian Security Relations: Managing Strategic Rivalry After Doklam | Tuesday, July 10, 2018 | 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM | Carnegie Institute for International Peace | Register Here
The Doklam standoff between Indian and Chinese troops in the summer of 2017 coincided with an ongoing deterioration in bilateral relations, and accelerated pre-existing military competition. Frank O’Donnell provides a detailed analysis of Indian and Chinese nuclear and conventional ground force posturing, and illustrates darkening rival perceptions of these actions and their underlying strategic intentions. Join Carnegie for a discussion with O’Donnell on his new paper, Stabilizing Sino-Indian Security Relations, which proposes new measures to limit the recurrence of future Doklam-like episodes and their inherent risk of escalation. Copies of the paper will be available.
Speakers:
Sameer Lalwani: senior associate and co-director of the South Asia program at the Stimson Center.
Tanvi Madan: director of the India Project and fellow in the Project on International Order and Strategy in the Foreign Policy program at the Brookings Institution.
Frank O’Donnell: Stanton junior faculty fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University, and a nonresident fellow in the South Asia program at the Stimson Center.
George Perkovich: Ken Olivier and Angela Nomellini chair and vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
3. Senator Jeff Merkley on Violence and Humanitarian Response in Africa | Wednesday, July 11, 2018 | 9:00 am – 10:00 am | US Institute of Peace | Register Here
Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR) recently returned from a five-country visit to Somalia, South Sudan, Djibouti, Kenya, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo to assess the region’s humanitarian crises while seeking to better understand their root causes. He held over 35 meetings with civil society, refugees living in camps, aid workers, government officials, and U.N. peacekeepers. During his visit, it became clear to Senator Merkley that U.S. diplomatic leadership, development aid, and humanitarian response are critical to addressing the root causes of conflict, climate change and corruption.
Senator Merkley will speak about Congress’ priorities on humanitarian- and conflict-related issues in Africa.
Speaker:
Senator Jeff Merkley, US Senator from Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Multilateral International Development, Multilateral Institutions, and International Economic, Energy, and Environmental Policy.
Moderator:
Nancy Lindborg, President, U.S. Institute of Peace.
4. Rethinking globalization: How do we rebuild support? | Wednesday, July 11, 2018 | 10:00 am – 11:30 am | American Enterprise Institute | Register Here
The Trump administration’s America First approach to economic policy has brought into stark relief the declining support among a growing number of Americans for what has come to be called “globalization.” But anti-globalization sentiment in the United States has broader support than the Trump base alone and reflects deeper social and economic drivers that policymakers have failed to address over time. Increasingly, Americans wonder what is in “globalization” for them. In today’s hyper-divisive environment, how can policymakers cut through the fractious political discourse and improve our understanding of the impact of an increasingly interconnected world on the American people?
Join AEI and the Brookings Institution for the launch of “Reconceptualizing Globalization,” a joint project to address globalization, anti-globalization, and the importance of engagement for all Americans.
Agenda:
9:45 am – Registration
10:00 am – Discussion
Participants:
Jared Bernstein, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Daniel W. Drezner, Tufts University
Stephen J. Hadley, RiceHadleyGates
Merit Janow, Columbia University
Moderators:
Joshua Meltzer, Brookings Institution
Neena Shenai, AEI
11:10 am – Q&A
11:30 am – Adjournment
5. War or Deal? The Impact of Trade on the East Asian Economies | Thursday, July 12, 2018 | 12:00 pm – 1:30 pm | Stimson Center | Register Here
Whether a trade war or trade deal, U.S.-China trade disputes are guaranteed to have a spillover effect on the East Asian regional economies. The Trump administration’s recent escalation of tariffs on Chinese goods – with immediate reciprocation from Beijing – is already rippling through the global economy, but U.S. allies and partners in East Asia could be among the hardest hit. Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea have significant exposure to Chinese production, both as importers and exporters in the regional value chain. How does the ongoing trade war – or potential deals in the future – impact the interests of Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea? Join us for a panel discussion with Dr. Liu Shih-Chung, Vice Chairman at the Taiwan External Trade Development Council, Troy Stangarone, Senior Director at the Korea Economic Institute of America, Matthew Goodman, Senior Vice President at the Center for Strategic & International Studies (invited), and Yun Sun, Co-Director of the East Asia Program at Stimson (moderator). A light lunch will be served.
6. Beheading Dragons: Streamlining China’s Environmental Governance | Thursday, July 12, 2018 | 2:00 pm – 4:00 pm | The Wilson Center | Register Here
In March, China’s National People’s Congress passed sweeping reforms to streamline environmental governance in order to more rapidly mitigate China’s crushing air, water, and soil pollution. Natural resource and pollution regulation have long been fragmented and managed by overlapping bureaucracies in China, leading to infighting and buck passing. The Chinese idiom “nine dragons rule the waters” (jiu long zhi shui) aptly captures how nine different government agencies have competed to regulate water. Under today’s reforms, China’s lead environmental watchdog—newly renamed Ministry of Ecological Environment (MEE)—will share water regulation with the Ministry of Water Resources, decreasing nine dragons to two. Another major dragon-slaying reform was to grant most regulatory power over climate change to MEE, a move that will require this newly reconfigured agency to become significantly more powerful than its earlier incarnation.
On July 12, CEF has invited three speakers to unpack the drivers and impacts of this major reform in China. Liu Zhuoshi (Environmental Law Institute) will detail how legal and regulatory authorities around pollution and climate issues are changing. He will also reflect on hurdles Chinese government faces to expand these reforms at the subnational level. Hu Tao (WWF – U.S.) will explore how the new MEE could act more holistically to manage complex pollution issues, like a better coordination on the joint management of air pollution and carbon emission regulations. Liu Shuang (Energy Foundation China) will reflect on the implication of China’s recent governance reforms on efforts to create a national carbon emissions trading systems and what other policies and institutional changes are needed to make it succeed.
Speakers:
Zhuoshi Liu, Staff Attorney at Environmental Law Institute.
Tao Hu, Director of the China program at World Wildlife Fund – US.
Shuang Liu, Director of the Low Carbon Economic Growth Program at Energy Foundation China.
Moderator:
Jennifer L. Turner, Director, China Environment Forum & Manager, Global Choke Point Initiative.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
What Iranians want to know
Mohammed Ataei of the Iranian Republic News Agency last week asked some questions. I answered. The interview was published in Farsi today:
1. President Trump asserted that his decision to abandon the JCPOA had already changed Iran’s regional policies. Do you think his statement is based on any factual evidence or is it just a political statement in response to internal and international criticisms of his withdrawal from the Iran nuclear agreement?
A: I know of no factual evidence for this. Iran remains forward deployed and engaged in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and Bahrain. Much as I might hope that Tehran would pay more attention to the welfare of Iranians and less to its military adventures in the region, I don’t think it is happening.
2. Since the election of President Trump, we have seen many reports about Israeli and Saudi lobbying campaign to undermine the Nuclear Agreement with Iran. They openly welcomed President Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the agreement. To what extent was Trump’s decision influenced by Benjamin Netanyahu and Bin Salman?
A: I think both Netanyahu and MbS were influential, even if I don’t understand what either one gains from the withdrawal.
3. President Obama always said that he had been able to create an international consensus against Iran. Now some observers argue that President Trump’s unilateral policies have unwittingly brought Russia, China and India closer together. How would you see the efficiency of the US sanctions on Iran in the context of the US unilateralism in international affairs? Do you think Secretary Pompeo can persuade the international community to rebuild the sanctions coalition against Iran?
A: In a word: no. Even if the Europeans are compelled by secondary sanctions to observe the U.S. restrictions, China, Russia, India and others will not. There will be no voluntary international consensus, as there was in the lead-up to the JCPOA.
4. President Trump said that he would target any third party which violates the US sanctions against Iran. There are reports that the EU has threatened to take the US to the World Trade Organization. Don’t you think that Trump is isolating the US rather than isolating Iran?
A: He is definitely isolating the U.S. more than he is isolating Iran, as you saw yesterday at the G7 Summit. But the WTO is a slow mechanism and big European companies are not likely to defy the U.S.
5. How would you explain the challenge of the US extraterritorial sanctions to international agreements and the UN Security Council’s resolutions such as 2231?
A: I’m not a lawyer, but I do think the U.S. has the right to limit use of its own financial system. It just isn’t wise to do so. The U.S. is clearly in violation of UNSC res 2231. But who is going to enforce it?
6. The EU vowed to stop European companies from leaving Iran despite the renewed threat of U.S. sanctions. However, major European companies have already announced that they would end business with Tehran. Do you think that the European leaders have done enough to save the JCPOA?
A: Not yet. They will have to be very tough with the U.S. to save it. Iran will also need to be flexible.
7. How does the US withdrawal from the JCPOA affect the worldwide nuclear disarmament? How would you see the future of NPT?
A: U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA undermines nuclear non-proliferation efforts worldwide. We’ll have to wait and see what Iran does, but if it proceeds now with its nuclear program without restraints, we could also see quite a few other countries proceed in the same direction.
PS: Mohammed followed up with a phone call in which he asked about the differences between a treaty and other executive agreements, how the Europeans might maneuver around secondary sanctions, as well as a few other things.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Balderdash
Secretary of State Pompeo today tried to fill the gaping hole of Iran strategy, which the Trump Administration has neglected despite its frequent Tehran-bashing. Here are the American objectives Pompeo outlined:
First, Iran must declare to the IAEA a full account of the prior military dimensions of its nuclear program, and permanently and verifiably abandon such work in perpetuity.
Second, Iran must stop enrichment and never pursue plutonium reprocessing. This includes closing its heavy water reactor.
Third, Iran must also provide the IAEA with unqualified access to all sites throughout the entire country.
Iran must end its proliferation of ballistic missiles and halt further launching or development of nuclear-capable missile systems.
Iran must release all U.S. citizens, as well as citizens of our partners and allies, each of them detained on spurious charges.
Iran must end support to Middle East terrorist groups, including Lebanese Hizballah, Hamas, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
Iran must respect the sovereignty of the Iraqi Government and permit the disarming, demobilization, and reintegration of Shia militias.
Iran must also end its military support for the Houthi militia and work towards a peaceful political settlement in Yemen.
Iran must withdraw all forces under Iranian command throughout the entirety of Syria.
Iran, too, must end support for the Taliban and other terrorists in Afghanistan and the region, and cease harboring senior al-Qaida leaders.
Iran, too, must end the IRG Qods Force’s support for terrorists and militant partners around the world.
And too, Iran must end its threatening behavior against its neighbors – many of whom are U.S. allies. This certainly includes its threats to destroy Israel, and its firing of missiles into Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. It also includes threats to international shipping and destructive – and destructive cyberattacks.
This giant wish-list is to be achieved by “the strongest sanctions in history.”
I certainly understand why the Administration wants these things. But sorry, but no way. There is no reason at all to believe that China, Russia, or India will join in those sanctions, which means Iran will be able to export oil to its main customers and obtain required technology–admittedly not the world’s best–from one of the world’s largest oil and gas producers. Europe is also moving to set up mechanisms to circumvent any secondary US sanctions by avoiding the US financial system. That’s been tried before without much success, but this time there are giant incentives to make it work so that European companies can deal with Iran.
Pompeo also said, apropos of uranium enrichment:
So we’re not asking anything other than that Iranian behavior be consistent with global norms, global norms widely recognized before the JCPOA. And we want to eliminate their capacity to threaten our world with those nuclear activities.
This is just false. There is no global norm against enrichment, which can be done by dozens of countries that aren’t pursuing nuclear weapons.
And he openly appealed for regime change, strangely suggesting it should come from the top:
Iran’s leaders can change all of this if they choose to do so. Ali Khamenei has been supreme leader since 1989. He will not live forever, nor will the Iranian people abide the rigid rules of tyrants forever. For two generations, the Iranian regime has exacted a heavy toll on its own people and the world. The hard grip of repression is all that millions of Iranians have ever known.
Now is the time for the supreme leader and the Iranian regime to summon the courage to do something historically beneficial for its own people, for this ancient and proud nation.
Pompeo concluded with a bizarre appeal to Iran based on Administration policy vis-a-vis North Korea, which is visibly failing:
If anyone, especially the leaders of Iran, doubts the President’s sincerity or his vision, let them look at our diplomacy with North Korea. Our willingness to meet with Kim Jong-un underscores the Trump administration’s commitment to diplomacy to help solve the greatest challenges, even with our staunchest adversaries. But that willingness, that willingness has been accompanied by a painful pressure campaign that reflects our commitment to resolve this challenge forever.
The US would need virtually universal support from others to do even one-tenth of what Pompeo has outlined. The goals are clear. The means are inadequate, based on an over-estimate of US power vis-a-vis both Iran and North Korea. Balderdash.
RSS - Posts
