Tag: Iraq
Engagement with armed groups is necessary, “good” or “bad”
The Crisis Response Council and the Brookings Institution’s Initiative on Nonstate Armed Actors June 3 convened a discussion on challenges posed by armed groups to security sector reform (SSR) in the Middle East and beyond. Panelists agreed that SSR too frequently views armed groups from a unidimensional perspective. Militias are not inherent spoilers whose power is limited to the security sector. They are more often politically or socially embedded potential power brokers. State monopolies on violence are an anomaly in post-conflict states. Armed groups can contribute positively to SSR and governance.
The speakers were:
Vanda Felbab-Brown
Director – Initiative on Nonstate Armed Actors; Co-Director – Africa Security Initiative; Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for Security, Strategy, and Technology
Brookings Institution
Frederic Wehrey
Senior fellow, Middle East Program
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Bernadetta Berti
Head of Policy Planning in the Office of the Secretary General
NATO
Yaniv Voller
Senior Lecturer in the Politics of the Middle East
University of Kent; Stanford University
Ranj Alaaldin (moderator)
Visiting Fellow – Brookings Doha Center; Nonresident Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for Middle East Policy
Brookings Institution
The present: thriving and misunderstood
Vanda Felbab-Brown highlighted the Corona pandemic’s effect on armed groups around the world. The associated economic downturn has pushed some states to their limits. 200 million people have been pushed into poverty, and many of those will be forced to engage in criminal activities to scrape together a living. Under these conditions, armed groups thrive. Hundreds of millions of people already live under total, partial, or shared control by armed groups. As state spending on social welfare, but also security provision, shrunk, armed groups moved in to fill the gaps.
Wehrey discussed the case of Libya, where armed groups have thrived in part because they were misunderstood by outsiders. Emerging after the fall of Gadhafi, they were useful security providers, but politicized and prone to state capture and corruption. The Libyan case could have ended more positively if the ‘prizes’ for militias had been placed under better oversight. Oil revenues, ministerial positions, ports, airports were targets for militia competition. Protection of such prizes could have prevented the militia growth that Libya has seen.
Multiple efforts to “train and equip” a Libyan army from scratch have failed. Such an effort takes years and the security vacuum that exists before its completion is sure to be filled up by someone. Furthermore, in Libya new armies have often recruited from specific tribal, communal, or political backgrounds. These are less national armies and more new militias. This is something Wehrey sees happening now with Turkish support for the Tripoli-based armed forces. The current effort to defer security issues while working on political unity is reminiscent of 2012. The outcome might be similar: a relapse into violence.
The panel agreed that armed groups are not anomalies and they will not go away. Ahram suggested states do not necessarily want to be centralized. There are many examples of leaders deliberately fragmenting power. Militia fighters are not unlucky souls whose dream is to join the regular army and leave the militia life behind them. These groups are an embedded part of their communities and not easily fixable aberrations.
What makes an armed group “good” or “bad”?
The exact drivers of armed groups are poorly understood by academia and policy makers. Voller focuses his research on the question of why certain pro-government militias act predatorily, while others do not. Rather than an inherent inclination to violence, he believes that a core determinant is whether an armed group acts in a theater where its constituency is present. The predominantly Shia PMF in Iraq became predatorial when they entered the Sunni northwest in the fight against ISIS, while the Kurdish Peshmerga refrained from doing so as they always operate among their Kurdish communities. Felbab-Brown countered that other factors must also be important, as there are plenty of examples of armed groups acting predatorily among their own communities. She posits that any armed group gets feedback from its community, even if it is only by means of resistance to violence. If a community lacks social cohesion, this feedback can be unclear or weak, allowing greater predatory behavior.
Wehrey warned against an overly economic focus when it comes to controlling militias. Paying off armed groups to steer them, or turning off their incomes to force their hand, only treats part of the reality. These groups are embedded in and motivated by communal identity, religion, and history. Ahram agreed. He added that armed groups are also not merely political, as there are many cases of armed groups engaging in negotiations or elections and still continuing their armed struggles. Normative motivations are also part of the equation, as local norms, national laws, and even international law (and the fear of a Hague tribunal) are all considered by militias. Ahram believes that the onus is on researchers to identify which of these different levers matter under which circumstances, and how they can be used effectively.
Berti joked that she would enjoy this academic exercise, but that the policy maker in her called for a different course of action. She warned that all of these tools are highly context specific. What works best in practice is a willingness to enter a long-term commitment to a peace building effort. An intervening power needs to engage in a dynamic relationship with local power brokers and be willing to deal with new actors and change course when the situation calls for it.
Policy makers’ task: flexibility and pragmatism
The panel agreed that thinking in terms of “good” or “bad” militias is a fruitless exercise. Voller emphasized once more that militias are embedded in their communities. He used the example of Syrian militias that might align with Assad and engage in repression in order to protect their own constituencies. We might not call these actors “good”, but we can understand what motivates them. Felbab-Brown explained that it is better to think in pragmatic terms of available alternatives. An armed group might be odious, yet be the best option in terms of service provision, behavior, and accountability. Local populations as a rule adapt to harsh and illiberal actors if they provide stability and security.
The task that faces policy makers is a daunting one, as current tools and theories are poorly equipped to deal with the realities. The key is to be flexible and to accept militias as an embedded part of society. Berti and Ahram underlined this. We often speak of ‘allowing’ armed groups to exist or participate in a society. In practice, however, we usually have little influence over their existence. Voller emphasized that engaging with a militia directly as the state, rather than condemning and ignoring it, is usually the best way to have a positive influence on its behavior. Using the example of the Lebanese Hezbollah, however, Berti warned us to beware of who’s steering whom in these dynamics.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, June 5
NYT says Iranian proxies are using drones against US in Iraq.
WSJ reports problems among US drone operators.
FP says Taiwan has lots of problems.
FT’s numbers man, Tim Harford, has wise comments about groupthink.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Deal likely, but can it go any farther than rollback?
This discussion of the possible return of the US to the Iran nuclear deal was convened by the Middle East Institute May 26, as US-Iranian talks in Vienna entered their fifth round. Participants analyzed the prospects for a deal between the US and Iran and its implications for the region’s security. The panel discussed the possibility of expanding on the original JCPOA, as well as broader regional security dynamics and specifically their implications for Iraq. They agreed a new JCPOA seems to be imminent. However, the question remains whether it can be used to reduce Iranian influence in the region and if it should.
The speakers were:
Amb. (ret.) Rend al-Rahim
Co-founder and President
The Iraq Foundation;
former Iraqi Ambassador to the US
Michael Rubin
Resident Scholar
American Enterprise Institute
Ali Vaez
Iran project Director
International Crisis Group
Alex Vatanka (moderator)
Director, Iran Program
Middle East Institute
A mutually beneficial deal?
All speakers agreed that a deal appears imminent. Ali Vaez pointed out that sequencing will remain an issue, but that the largest problems will likely be solved at the 11th hour. Iranian or Israeli brinkmanship is unlikely to derail the negotiations. This was shown by their continuation after the attack on the Natanz facility and Iran’s announcement that it would start enriching to 60%. Rubin believes Congress should be asked to ratify the agreement. Congress might prove more concerned about brinkmanship than the negotiators in Vienna. Ali Vaez expects that the deal will be announced right after the Iranian presidential elections. In this way, the result will not influence the popularity of conservative candidates. At the same time, Rouhani would still be responsible for the deal’s implementation, meaning he can serve as a scapegoat for any of its shortcomings: a win-win for conservatives in Iran.
The speakers disagreed on whether more than the original JCPOA should be on the table. Ali Vaez argued that a return to the original deal is needed to build trust after the unwarranted American abandonment of the deal under president Trump. Ambassador al-Rahim, however, said she does not believe that any further progress can be made after this deal. Just like after the initial JCPOA’s conclusion, no further deals – for example on ballistic missiles – will be forthcoming. Michael Rubin argued that some important issues need to be addressed. In this ‘JCPOA+’ framework, attention needs to be paid to the role of the IRGC in Iran’s economy. Rubin emphasized that any easing of sanctions could go to the IRGC’s economic wing, rather than benefiting the Iranian people in dire need of economic relief. In fact, lifting sanctions without addressing the IRGC’s entanglement in the economy would only aid in its projects throughout the region.
Thinking about a new Middle Eastern security arena
This brought the discussion to the second point of disagreement: the level of Iranian influence that is desirable. Ambassador al-Rahim outlined the difference in strategic visions between Iran and the US. According to her, the US fails to use its potential in the region (for example through the Iraqi Strategic Dialogue). Instead it focuses on disengaging and setting up a post-US strategic order. The US needs to consider whether it is content with leaving Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon under Iranian influence, with an Israeli-Gulf alliance hegemonous over the rest of the region. Iran, as Rubin pointed out, meanwhile sees itself as a pan-regional power, not merely Shia. It is unlikely to accept such a limited sphere of influence. He emphasized that there are ways of resisting Iranian influence without major US investments. Regional countries need to be armed to do so themselves.
Ali Vaez also sees these problems, but challenges the US to consider how much Iranian influence is acceptable. If the US and its allies are content only when Iranian influence in Iraq is zero, then the goal is simply unrealistic. Should we consider influence in a country like Iraq as zero-sum, as Israel and the Gulf appear to do? Also, can we expect Iran to disarm while we are arming its neighbors to the tune of billions of dollars? A regional détente with concessions from all sides is his preferred means of lowering tensions. Ambassador al-Rahim contends that Tehran sees its influence as zero-sum too. If it is allowed to have any influence, it will aim for total influence. Furthermore, she contends that Iran did have zero influence in Iraq before 2003. Its entanglement in Iraqi power structures is not unavoidable she thinks. She and Vaez agree that both Washington and Tehran should agree that Iraq needs to be allowed to be its own sovereign country. Recent Shia protests in Iraq show that the population shares this desire.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks | May 10-14, 2021
Notice: Due to public health concerns, upcoming events are only available via live stream.
- What does the future hold for NATO in the MENA region? | May 10, 2021 | 9:00 AM ET | Middle East Institute | Register Here
The Middle East Institute (MEI) Frontier Europe Initiative in collaboration with the Arab News Research and Studies is pleased to host an online Briefing Room Conversation to discuss the future of NATO in the Middle East-North Africa region.
Speakers:
Luke Coffey
Director, Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, The Heritage Foundation
Iulia Joja
Senior fellow, Frontier Europe Initiative, MEI; adjunct professor, Georgetown University
Tarek Ali Ahmad (Moderator)
Head, Arab News Research and Studies
2. Iraqi-US Relations Under Changing Administrations | May 10, 2021 | 10:00 AM ET | Brookings Institute | Register Here
As President Joe Biden completes the first 100 days of his presidency, Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi nears his one-year anniversary in office. Iraq and the United States held their first strategic dialogue under the Biden administration in early April, discussing bilateral security cooperation, economic development in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, and protection of democracy and freedom of speech, among other topics. These two new administrations will now have to set the course for the future of Iraqi-U.S. relations.
Speakers:
Suzanne Maloney (Introduction)
Vice President and Director of Foreign Policy, Brookings Institute
Joey Hood (Keynote)
Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, US Department of State
Abbas Kadhim
Iraq Initiative Director and Resident Senior Fellow, The Atlantic Council
Marsin Alshamary
Post-Doctoral Fellow in Foreign Policy, Brookings Institute
Louisa Loveluck (Moderator)
Baghdad Bureau Chief, The Washington Post
3. Border Battle: Assessing the Kyrgyzstan-Tajikistan Clashes | May 10, 2021 | 12:00 PM ET | Atlantic Council | Register Here
The death and destruction wrought by the recent violence between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan in the Ferghana Valley is a tragedy, with scores of victims on both sides of the border. Worryingly, the clashes might yet have broader implications for both countries and their Central Asian neighbors. How might the confrontation affect the rights of ethnic minorities, particularly in the various exclaves throughout the region? How can Bishkek and Dushanbe avoid a security dilemma that might further destabilize an already tense situation?
Speakers:
Dr. George Gavrilis
Fellow, University of California-Berkeley’s Center for Democracy, Toleration, and Religion
Jonathan Henick
Deputy Assistant Secretary at the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs, US Department of State
Akylai Karimova
Kyrgyz civil activist based in Osh
Dr. Jennifer Brick Murtazashvili
Nonresident Senior Fellow, Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center
Anahita Saymidinova
Dushanbe-based journalist for Iran International TV
Ambassador John Herbst (Moderator)
Director of the Eurasia Center, Atlantic Council.
4. Restricted Data: The History of Nuclear Secrecy in the United States | May 10, 2021 | 4:00 PM ET | Wilson Center | Register Here
The American atomic bomb was born in secrecy. From the moment scientists first conceived of its possibility to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and beyond, there were efforts to control the spread of nuclear information and the newly discovered scientific facts that made such powerful weapons possible. Drawing on troves of declassified files, including records released by the government for the first time through Wellerstein’s efforts, Restricted Data traces the complex evolution of the US nuclear secrecy regime from the first whisper of the atomic bomb through the mounting tensions of the Cold War and into the early twenty-first century.
Speakers:
Alex Wellerstein
Stevens Institute of Technology
Christian F. Ostermann (Co-Moderator)
Director, History and Public Policy Program; Cold War International History Project; North Korea Documentation; Nuclear Proliferation International History Project, Woodrow Wilson Center
Eric Arnesen (Co-Moderator)
Former Fellow, Professor of History, The George Washington University
Kathleen M. Vogel
Former Wilson Center Fellow; Arizona State University
Matthew Connelly
Former Fellow; Columbia University
5. Addressing Security Concerns in the Eastern Mediterranean | May 11, 2021 | 9:00 AM ET | CSIS | Register Here
As a vital partner for the United States in the Eastern Mediterranean, Greece is witnessing significant shifts in its regional security environment. Minister Panagiotopoulos will discuss the reasons behind growing instability in the region and Greece’s initiatives to advance security and stability in the Eastern Mediterranean, working closely with regional partners. As NATO prepares to update its Strategic Concept starting this summer, Minister Panagiotopoulos will also reflect on Greece’s priorities for the updated concept; discuss how NATO can enhance its political cohesion and address new challenges; and outline ideas for expanding and deepening the U.S.-Greece strategic defence partnership. The conversation will be moderated by Heather A. Conley, CSIS Senior Vice President for Europe, Russia, and the Arctic, and Rachel Ellehuus, Deputy Director and Senior Fellow with the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia program.
Speakers:
Nikolaos Panagiotopoulos
Minister of National Defence, Greece
Heather A. Conley
Senior Vice President for Europe, Eurasia and the Arctic; and Director, Europe, Russia and the Eurasia Program, CSIS
Rachel Ellehuus
Deputy Director, Europe, Russia and Eurasia Program
6. Nonviolent Action and Minority Inclusion | May 11, 2021 | 10:00 AM ET | United States Institute of Peace | Register Here
Mass movements employing nonviolent action have a demonstrated track record of improving democracy. But how deep and meaningful are these changes? Does nonviolent action merely change political institutions, or can it also address deeper drivers of social and political conflict, particularly for the most marginalized?
To better understand the intersection of nonviolent action and peace processes, join USIP for the final event in our series on people power, peace and democracy. The event series highlights multiple groundbreaking research projects and features insights from activists, international practitioners and policymakers that provide viewers with actionable takeaways.
This USIP event features lessons learned from cutting-edge research showing how nonviolent action affects political and economic inequality — particularly for historically excluded social and ethnic groups — using a cross-national statistical study and in-depth case studies from recent political transitions in Nepal and Indonesia. The research also specifically examines how movements can employ dialogue, negotiation and mediation to better ensure that political transitions following nonviolent action campaigns lead to greater inclusion for marginalized groups. This event will explore the important implications for both policy and practice in ensuring more inclusive democratization processes in the aftermath of nonviolent action.
Speakers:
Jonathan Pinckney (Moderator)
Senior Researcher, Nonviolent Action, U.S. Institute of Peace
Mohna Ansari
Member, National Human Rights Commission of Nepal
Subindra Bogati
Founder and Chief Executive, Nepal Peacebuilding Initiative
Titik Firawati
Ph.D. Candidate in Political Science, Northern Illinois University
Rosa Emilia Salamanca
Director, Institute for Social and Economic Research and Action
Deepak Thapa
Director, Social Science Baha
Ches Thurber
Assistant Professor, Northern Illinois University
7. Developments in Iran: Scandal, Schism and US-Iranian Relations | May 11, 2021 | 10:00 AM ET | Middle East Institute | Register Here
Foreign Minister Javad Zarif has sensationally admitted that the Foreign Ministry in Tehran has no power to shape strategic policies. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei has also scolded Zarif for questioning Tehran’s regional policies, which are designed and implemented by the Revolutionary Guards. This deep schism inside the Islamic Republic raises some important questions at a time when the US is engaged in direct talks with the Iranians in Vienna.
What is the balance of power between elected and unelected centers of powers in Tehran? How certain can the United States be about the ability of the Iranian state to collectively adhere to any nuclear agreement reached in Vienna? Where does this political reality in Tehran mean for Washington’s Iran policy that continues to impose sanctions on key entities in Iran, including the Revolutionary Guards?
Speakers:
Kenneth Katzman
Senior analyst, Congressional Research Service
Barbara Slavin
Director, Future of Iran Initiative, Atlantic Council
Reza Vaisi
Editor, Iran International TV
Alex Vatanka (Moderator)
Director, Iran Program, MEI
8. China-Russia Relations at the Dawn of the Biden Era | May 12, 2021 | 9:00 AM ET | Carnegie Endowment: Center for Global Policy | Register Here
While U.S.-China and U.S.-Russia relations have steadily deteriorated, China-Russia cooperation has grown in its stead. On the heels of the contentious U.S.-China Alaska summit, Chinese and Russian foreign ministers met in Guilin to discuss bilateral cooperation on a range of issues and even published a joint statement promoting a shared vision for global governance.
However, it is unclear to what extent Russian and Chinese interests will continue to converge. Although both nations have found a common adversary in the United States, any divergence of Russian or Chinese interests could create roadblocks to the two countries’ warming relations. Given China’s increasing economic and political clout, how will Russia manage the relationship in a way that concurrently maintains cooperation with China and protects its own national interests? Will China continue to view Russia as a security and economic partner? And how does the United States view and approach strong China-Russia ties?
Speakers:
Paul Haenle (Moderator)
Maurice R. Greenberg Director Chair, Carnegie-Tsinghua Center, Beijing China
Andrew S. Weiss
James Family Chair and Vice President for Studies, Carnegie Endowment
Guan Guihai
Associate Professor and Executive Vice President, Institute of International and Strategic Studies, Peking University
Vita Spivak
Analyst, Control Risk
9. Middle East Security Establishments and Social Reform | May 12, 2021 | 2:00 PM ET | Belfer Center, Harvard Kennedy School | Register Here
Across the Middle East, the security sector has exercised substantial influence over media, education, and religious institutions, often to the detriment of their societies and American interests. Could they instead become a force for positive reform, and what role might their American allies play in helping them? Please join the Intelligence and Defense Projects for a seminar with Middle East expert Joseph Braude, who will discuss these issues and provide a number of policy suggestions.
Speakers:
Joseph Braude
President of the Center for Peace Communications
10. Czechmate? Russia’s Relations with Czechia go up in Smoke | May 13, 2021 | 10:00 AM ET | Atlantic Council | Register Here
As the Czech Republic and Russia spar over groundbreaking reports of Russian intelligence operations in Czechia, key lessons emerge about the Kremlin’s tactics, goals, and the ability to exploit openings from foreign governments to attempt operations with impunity. Importantly, these operations were not just designed to harm Czechia—the 2014 destruction of arms depots holding weapons bound for Ukraine link these attacks to the Kremlin’s broader hybrid war against Kyiv, and show an early operation carried out by the same officers responsible for some of the most high-profile Kremlin attacks on foreign soil in recent years. With diplomatic expulsions and talk of further measures to hold Moscow accountable for killings on Czech soil, this crisis is fast becoming the latest significant flashpoint in Russia’s relations with Europe.
Speakers:
H.E. Jakub Kulhánek (Keynote)
Minister of Foreign Affairs for the Czech Republic,
Ambassador Daniel Fried
Weiser Family Distinguished Fellow at the Atlantic Council
Jakub Janda
Director of the European Values Center for Security Policy
Ambassador Jaroslav Kurfurst
Special Envoy for the Eastern Partnership at the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Laure Mandeville
Senior Reporter at Le Figaro and nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Europe Center
Ambassador John Herbst (Moderator)
Director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks | May 3 – May 7, 2021
Notice: Due to public health concerns, upcoming events are only available via live stream
1. Rebalancing security and governance in the Sahel: Possible avenues for German intervention | May 3, 2021 | 9:30 AM – 10:30 AM ET | European Council on Foreign Relations | Register Here
Speakers
Andrew Lebovich: Policy Fellow, ECFR
Heike Thiele: Director, Civilian Crisis Prevention and Stabilisation, Federal Foreign Office (TBC)
Denis Tull: Africa and Middle East Fellow, SWP
Theodore Murphy (moderator): Africa Programme Director, ECFR
In the past several years, Germany has repeatedly expressed its strong commitment to stabilisation in the Sahel, and pushed for approaches encouraging political reform and improvements in governance and in internal security provision in the region. However, ongoing insecurity and international critiques of European approaches in the region show the need for continued rebalancing in international approaches. This panel will examine Germany’s approaches to stabilisation in the Sahel and how new approaches and policies could help improve the region’s tumultuous conflicts and political uncertainty.
2. Report launch—The impact of Western sanctions on Russia | May 3, 2021 | 11:00 AM ET | Atlantic Council | Register Here
Speakers
Anders Aslund: Resident Senior Fellow, Eurasia Center
Maria Snegovaya: Nonresident Fellow, Eurasia Center
Sergey Aleksashenko: former deputy chairman, Central Bank of Russia
Elina Ribakova: deputy chief economist, the Institute of International Finance
Ambassador Daniel Fried (moderator): Weiser Family Distinguished Fellow, Atlantic Council
Since 2014, the US and its allies have countered the Kremlin’s growing “hybrid warfare” with sanctions. Moscow’s malign activities have included military aggression in Ukraine, election interference, cyberattacks, assassinations, and disinformation. Western sanctions have imposed serious costs on the Russian economy and President Vladimir Putin’s cronies, though the Kremlin and some others question the efficacy of sanctions on Russia. How successful have the sanctions been in altering Putin’s actions? How can future sanctions become more effective in imposing costs on the Kremlin?
3. New START: The Future of Arms Control Diplomacy and U.S.-Russian Relations | May 3, 2021 | 4:00 PM – 5:00 PM ET | Belfer Center | Register Here
Speakers
Rose Goettemoeller: Frank E. and Arthur W. Payne Distinguished Lecturer, Stanford University
Matthew Bunn: Professor, Harvard University
Ambassador Paula Dobriansky: Senior Fellow, Future of Diplomacy Project
Ambassador Doug Lute: Senior Fellow, Future of Diplomacy Project
Nicholas Burns: Professor, Harvard University
The extension of New START – the last remaining treaty limiting U.S. and Russian nuclear forces — sustains verifiable limits on Russian nuclear weapons that can reach the United States for the next five years. Can that time be used to negotiate a follow-on accord that serves both sides interests? With the collapse of the INF Treaty following Russian cheating and U.S. withdrawal, what can be done to address threats to U.S. and Russian security posed by INF-range missiles? What other key issues need to be addressed in strategic stability talks – with Russia, with China, or with others? How can the world community best address the danger of nuclear proliferation – especially when ongoing nuclear modernization in all of the nuclear-armed states is adding to long-standing tensions between nuclear haves and have-nots? Could the United States and Russia revive their past cooperation to control proliferation and prevent nuclear terrorism? Given the challenging relationship between Russia and the United States, Russia’s violations of some arms control agreements, its annexation of Crimea and military and cyber incursions and provocations along its border and beyond – and Russia’s equally long list of complaints about the United States – what might strategic arms diplomacy look like in the future? How can the proposed U.S.-Russia Summit advance arms control, nonproliferation, and a broader working relationship between the two countries?
4. Negotiating New START | May 4, 2021 | 3:00 PM – 4:00 PM ET | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace | Register Here
Speakers
Rose Gottemoeller: nonresident senior fellow, Nuclear Policy Program
Peter Baker (moderator): chief White House correspondent, New York Times
In February, the Biden administration extended the New START treaty with Russia for another five years, buying time and space for future arms control with Russia. Secretary of State Blinken promised to use future arms control efforts to address all of Russia’s nuclear weapons and reduce dangers from China’s modern and growing nuclear arsenal. As the United States embarks on this new arms control approach, what can we learn from the negotiations of the last remaining strategic arms control treaty?
Join us for the launch of Rose Gottemoeller’s new book, Negotiating the New START Treaty, and a discussion with Peter Baker on the New START negotiations with Russia and the biggest hurdles, challenges, and insights that can serve as a window to the future of U.S.-Russia arms control.
5. They call it diplomacy: A conversation on the broader Middle East and the critical role of diplomats | May 5, 2021 | 2:00 PM – 3:15 PM ET | Brookings Institution | Register Here
Speakers
Suzanne Maloney (moderator): Vice President and Director, Foreign Policy
Bruce Riedel: Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy
Sir Peter Westmacott: Former British Ambassador to the US
In his new memoir “They Call it Diplomacy,” former British Ambassador to the United States Peter Westmacott looks back on 40-years of service as a diplomat for the United Kingdom. Over the course of his distinguished career, Ambassador Westmacott served in many important roles, including as ambassador to Turkey, ambassador to France, and most recently, as ambassador to the United States. His career spanned the end of the Cold War to the post-9/11 era. And as second secretary in Tehran, Ambassador Westmacott spent four years as a diplomat in Iran in the lead up to the 1979 revolution. As the Biden administration develops its strategy for U.S. foreign policy and charts a way forward in arms control and nuclear policy, it is a critical time to evaluate the importance of diplomats and the role they play in engaging on the ground with communities in key regions across the globe.
6. Report Launch | Russia in the Middle East: National Security Challenges for the United States and Israel in the Biden Era | May 5, 2021 | 9:30 AM – 11:00 AM ET | Wilson Center | Register Here
Speakers
Major General Amos Gilead: Executive Director, Institute for Policy and Strategy
James F. Jeffrey: Chair, Middle East Program
Matthew Rojansky: Director, Kennan Institute
Udi Evental: Senior Researcher, Institute for Policy and Strategy
Ksenia Svetlova: Senior Researcher, Institute for Policy and Strategy
Michael Kimmage: Professor, Catholic University of America
Susan Glasser (mooderator): Founding Editor, Politico Magazine
As U.S.-Russian tensions continue to escalate, Russia’s role in the Middle East is of urgent concern both to Israel and the United States. Potential flashpoints include Syria and Iran, new spheres of Russian engagement from Afghanistan to North Africa, and sensitive cybersecurity issues. Russia is also moving in tandem with China to push back against U.S. dominance, including in the Middle East. Leading experts from Israel and the United States address these challenges in a new report published by the Kennan Institute and the Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya. In an upcoming discussion moderated by Susan Glasser, the report’s contributors will address the challenges Russia poses in the region and the decisions that policymakers in the U.S. and Israel face.
7. Transatlantic relations after President Joe Biden’s first 100 days in office | May 5, 2021 | 8:00 AM – 8:45 AM ET | European Council on Foreign Relations | Register Here
Speakers
Jeppe Kofod: Minister for Foreign Affairs, Denmark
Mark Leonard: Director, ECFR
Lykke Friis (moderator): Director, Think Tank Europa
President Joe Biden has come into office with the promise of restoring alliances and having the US reengage in global issues like climate, tax and fighting the covid-19 pandemic. At the top of the new administration’s agenda is also the approach to China. Where does this leave the EU and transatlantic relations? How central is the EU to the US and its interests in Europe?
8. The Post-Cold War Middle East: Iran, Iraq and International Politics in the 1980s | May 6, 2021 | 11:00 AM – 12:30 PM ET | Wilson Center | Register Here
Speakers
Timothy Nunan: Freigeist Fellow, Center for Global History
Katelyn Tietzen: Military Historian, US Army Center for Military History
Samuel J. Hirst (moderator): Associate Director, Bilkent CRS
Barin Kayaoglu: Professor, American University of Iraq
The fourth event of the Global Middle East Seminar Series, organized in partnership with the Center for Russian Studies at Bilkent University, features Timothy Nunan and Katelyn Tietzen. They will be joined by Barin Kayaoğlu, who will act as discussant. The panelists will discuss Iranian and Iraqi foreign policies in the 1980s, and they will look beyond the Iran-Iraq War to questions about the transformation of the international politics of the Middle East in a formative decade. Among other issues, they will examine the Iranian and Iraqi pursuit of influence abroad, including through the activities of transnational actors in Lebanon and Libya. Situating Iranian and Iraqi politics in these terms highlights a moment that transcended Cold War divisions and reshaped regional politics in ways that remain significant today.
9. What’s Next for U.S.-Taiwan Economic Relations? | May 6, 2021 | 7:00 PM ET | Hoover Institute | Register Here
Speakers
Evan A. Feigenbaum: vice president for studies, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Kharis Templeman: Research Fellow, Hoover Institute
Innovation has been a source of comparative advantage for Taiwan—and an important basis for American firms, investors, and government to support Taiwan’s development while expanding mutually beneficial linkages. Yet Taiwan’s innovation advantage is eroding in the face of technological change and strategic risk. What should the next phase of U.S.-Taiwan economic cooperation look like? And how can the new U.S. administration work with Taiwan not just to build on legacy advantages, like in semiconductors, but also to invest in the emerging fields that are rapidly reshaping the future of work, industry, service delivery, and defense?
10. Fragility in Chad and counterterrorism strategies in West Africa | May 7, 2021 | 2:00 PM – 3:30 PM ET | Brookings Institution | Register Here
Speakers
Kamissa Camara: Senior Visiting Expert for the Sahel, United States Institute of Peace
John Mukum Mbaku: Nonresident Senior Fellow, Global Economy and Development
Joseph Siegle: Director of Research, Africa Center for Strategic Studies
Vanda Felbab-Brown (moderator): Director, Initiative on Nonstate Armed Actors
The April 20 death of the President of Chad, Idriss Déby, and the subsequent military coup have profoundly destabilized the country and other parts of West Africa. Likewise, over the past year, the security situation has deteriorated significantly in Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, and northern Nigeria. The region is facing many severe challenges from climate change and desertification, poverty, and inequality to poor governance, militancy, and terrorism, precipitated by a diverse set of local militants and international terrorist groups. During President Déby’s three decades of authoritarian rule, Chad came to be seen as a crucial lynchpin of counterterrorism in the region and a key ally of the United States and France. Yet President Déby’s death once again highlights the dangers of building counterterrorism strategies around authoritarian leaders and the struggle to find effective policy alternatives.
On May 7, Foreign Policy at Brookings will host a panel of experts to examine the latest developments in Chad, as well as the regional implications and deeper policy dilemmas of counterterrorism, stabilization, and good governance.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, April 26
– What’s Biden’s media strategy? In class, we talk about how government officials try to manipulate the news media. Jonathan Chait says Biden’s strategy is to be boring.
– Who’s in charge in Iran? Leaked comments by Foreign Minister Zarif says it’s the military.
– What’s the future of Navy and Marine Corps? New documents suggest unmanned.
-Who are the new nominees for national security positions? And don’t forget SAIS Prof Mara Karlin at DOD. See the Post’s nominee tracker.
-Why did US fail to build Afghan and Iraqi air forces? WOTR reviews two books on the topic.
– How has Congress changed? Cong. David Price [D-NC] explains.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
RSS - Posts
