Tag: Jordan

Arab uprisings fail to satisfy the street

From Tunisia to Egypt new transitional leadership has yet to address the economic, security and structural grievances that triggered the Arab spring uprisings.  The concerns that triggered the revolutions continue to pull the people into the streets.

Why have the new political leaders failed to address these concerns? According to University of California professor Laurie Brand, the desire to consolidate power in the face of new challenges and constraints, rather than domestic mass politics, drives current post-revolutionary leaders’ behavior.  In her paper Arab Uprisings and Mass Politics: Possibilities, Constraints, and Uncertainty discussed this week at the Wilson Center, Brand examines the mass politics of Egypt and Jordan to understand the effects of increased popular political mobilization on Arab states’ regional behavior.

Egyptian President Morsi’s commitment to the peace treaty with Israel is an example of his continuation of domestically unpopular policies.  Morsi’s approach to the Gaza tunnels has proven even tougher  than Mubarak’s. Morsi’s confidence after his mediating role between Israel and Gaza led him to assume extra-constitutional powers, causing the greatest domestic uproar of this presidency and showing how disassociated he has become from mass sentiment.  The economic crisis and Egypt’s IMF requests make this an inopportune moment for the Egyptian president to risk alienating the US by giving in to domestic anti-treaty sentiment.  An “uncomfortable marriage of convenience” between the Muslim Brotherhood and the military ties Morsi’s hands on corruption, a main popular grievance. Several articles in the new constitution protect key military interests at the expense of transparency. The $1.3 billion in annual US military aid keeps Morsi from stepping on the military’s toes.

The real differences between Morsi and Mubarak’s foreign policies occur at the regional level, not in relation to the US.  Under Morsi, Egypt entertains closer relations with Muslim Brotherhood-sympathising Qatar than with Mubarak’s preferred Saudi Arabia. Morsi’s visit to Iran also represents a significant break with the previous regime. These shifts in regional alignment did not result from mass political pressures, but rather from an attempt to reassert Egypt’s independent regional role.

Much like Morsi, Jordan’s King Abdullah has remained steadfast in the face of mass protests, even as young East Bankers have mobilized in the Harika movements and directly criticize the government, calling for its removal.  Jordan’s relations with the US have remained unchanged, while its relations with Egypt have chilled. Military exercises between the US and Jordan testify to the continued relationship, while Jordan’s domestically unpopular containment of the Muslim Brotherhood renders relations with the Egyptian government difficult.

Since the beginning of the Arab spring, popular demands have focused on domestic issues like unemployment, inflation, insecurity and the rule of law. These mass demands have not however shaped the current Arab leaders’ behavior.  They are far more interested in solidifying their power in the face of  regional and international challenges and constraints.  The growing gap between the people of Arab Spring countries and their governments will probably become a source of renewed conflict in the future. Marginalization of the youth and labor movements – what Brand calls the “footmen of the revolution”—resulted in the their failure to produce charismatic leaders with legitimate revolutionary credentials. Instead of new, young leaders coming to the fore, long suppressed, exiled or co-opted opposition leaders attained political power.  Once in charge, these leaders did not find serious disagreement with their predecessors’ international alignments and presented no remedy for the countries’ domestic issues.

Tags : , , , ,

Nowruz/Passover/Easter: better than expected

I did not anticipate how well President Obama’s visit to Israel, Palestine and Jordan would go last week.  I was not alone.  In Washington, pre-roadtrip skepticism prevailed:  differences over Iran and Palestine were anticipated to overshadow any cosmetic improvements in the President’s often tense personal relations with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.

It may still turn out that way in the longer-term.  Whatever new castles Obama built in the Mediterranean sand could be quickly swept away.  But for those who think the US is decline and can no longer influence events in the Middle East, this trip should sow doubt.  And for those who thought Mitt Romney would do better with the Israelis than Obama, this trip suggests the contrary.

The President went out of his way to establish his bona fides with Israelis:  praising their democracy, admiring their courage, recalling their idealism, remembering their history, sharing their losses, ensuring their security.  But he at the same time spoke bluntly of the need to make peace with the Palestinians, who will have enjoyed his performance less but still got a blunt and unambiguous defense of their right to a state of their own.  The well-crafted statement brought the president ample applause also from Israelis.  Presumably there were not a lot of West Bank settlers in the audience.  It was a virtuouso performance.

So much for the flash.  What about the substance?  The big issues for the trip to the Middle East were three:

Iran:  The President and Netanyahu sounded more united on preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons.  In fact, there are differences, with Israel concerned that the Americans will agree to allow Iran to hold on to a substantial quantity of 20% enriched uranium, which could be further enriched quickly with more advanced centrifuges that Iran is now installing.  The Iranians are slowing their accumulation of enriched material while increasing their capacity to move quickly if they decide to develop nuclear weapons.  Obama made it clear he would not stand in the way of Israel taking military action, but only the US can cause serious damage to the Iranian nuclear program. Netanyahu seems now to accept that the Americans will draw the redline, albeit closely consulting with the Israelis.

Syria:  Secretary Kerry has been leaning forward on bringing an end to the civil war in Syria, but President Obama is still wanting it to be done without US military intervention or lethal supplies to the opposition.  Israel is increasingly concerned about more advanced arms flowing to Hizbollah and about the buildup of more radical Sunni Islamists on its Golan Heights boundary with Syria.  The apparent use during the week of chemical weapons–the regime says by the revolutionaries, the revolutionaries say by the regime–is a big problem for President Obama, who side-stepped the issue during his trip by saying he would await a determination on whether they were really used or not.  Still, he said their use would be a game changer, whatever that may mean.

Palestine:  The US and Israel need to keep the Palestinian Authority afloat, even as they discourage it from seeking further international recognition, taking Israeli officials to the International Criminal Court and reconciling with Hamas.  This is a delicate dance, and Obama was less than clear on next steps.  He is downplaying settlements per se and wants direct negotiations on borders, which of course would limit the extent of Israeli settlements.

Obama also has to be concerned about other issues:

Jordan:  The big problem is the burgeoning flow of refugees from Syria, who are getting close to half a million.  Amman just doesn’t have the capacity to welcome many more and needs help to manage the burden of those who have already arrived.  The presidential visit will buck up King Abdullah, but the public relations effect is likely to be short-lived.  He needs financial help (Obama pledged $200 million more for Syrian refugees in Jordan) and some good advice on carrying forward political reform.  He is getting most of the former from the Saudis, who aren’t likely to give him much of the latter.

Egypt:  The Israelis will have expressed concern about instability in Egypt, even though Muslim Brotherhood President Morsi has so far not undermined the peace treaty.  The presence of Islamist extremists in Sinai appears still to be growing.  The difficulties Egypt is having in establishing its new regime and maintaining legitimate governance throughout the country will be of concern to both Israel and the US.

Turkey:  The big surprise of the President’s trip was his successful mediation of a Netanyahu apology for an attack on an aid flotilla to Gaza that killed nine Turks in 2010.  This comes along with Turkish success in convincing imprisoned Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan to agree to a ceasefire in the decades-long rebellion.  Both moves will help to shore up Turkey in its continuing confrontation with Bashar al Asad and restore some confidence in an Ankara whose “zero problems with neighbors” policy had been in tatters.

I have my doubts Obama will succeed where other presidents have failed:  on Palestine and Iran in particular.  But he did well last week, and for that we should all be thankful.  The Nowruz/Passover/Easter season is proving better than expected.

 

Tags : , , , , ,

Syria seen from Venus and Mars

I enjoyed yesterday two events on Syria, back to back and less than a block from each other.  An all-women panel at the Stimson Center co-sponsored by the Middle East Institute was upbeat and optimistic.  An all-men panel at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) was anything but.  Commentators on both panels were keen observers, including several with recent experience in and near Syria.

With Mona Yacoubian moderating, the Stimson/MEI panel focused on “Syria Beyond Assad: Building a New Syria from the Grassroots.”  Rafif Jouejati, spokesperson for the Local Coordinating Committees and leader of FREE Syria (a nongovernmental organization) underlined that the mood among Syrians, who are seeking freedom, dignity and democracy, is far more optimistic than the Western press would lead you to believe.  The revolution is determined to build civil society and protect minority rights.  There are still upwards of 300 peaceful demonstrations every Friday.  Fear of an Islamist takeover is exaggerated.  A hijab may be necessary to meet some people, but they quickly forget if it slips off your head.  Civil society training for Syrians in Turkey is accomplishing a lot, as they go back into Syria and train others.

Honey al Sayed, a former Syrian anchor now associated with ROYA Association for a Better Syria and the internet radio station SouriaLi emphasized the importance of rebuilding from the grassroots, as Syrian society has collapsed.  The challenges are enormous, but Syrians  believe in “unity in diversity” and will meet them.  Elizabeth O’Bagy of the Institute for the Study of War focused on the relationship between the civilian local councils and armed groups, which she said are not anxious to provide basic services or govern because they are still fighting the regime.  Warlordism is not the problem portrayed in the Western press–there is lots of room to empower civilians.  There has been some abuse of regime prisoners, looting and exploitation of aid shipments, but no major massacres.  Islamist fighters have no difficulty dealing with a Western woman asking questions.  Al Qaeda-linked Jabhat al Nusra keeps its distance, but most other armed groups do cooperate with each other.

Only Leila Hilal of the New America Foundation clouded the Venusian horizon.  The situation is complex and fluid.  There are a lot of questions about local legitimacy and authority.  Who is really in charge?  Elders?  Religious leaders? Fighters?  Technocrats?  What will their relationship be to the Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces (SOC in Washington parlance)?  Will the local councils provide aid?  Will they also govern?  Are they political bodies or technical ones?  What will the role of minorities and women be?  How will Western preferences for inclusivity be met?  Should we even express them?

The clouds thickened at WINEP, where staff reported on recent travel in the region.  With Patrick Clawson moderating, Andrew Tabler described Syria as melting down and spilling over.  Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan are facing serious refugee challenges.  Jordan has seen 100,000 enter in the last 60 days, many of them running a regime gauntlet to get out of Syria.  Fighting has spilled into Lebanon.  Hizbollah and Sunni fighters are spilling back from Lebanon into Syria.  In addition to refugees, Turkey is seeing a big buildup of displaced people inside Syria along the border.  There is a concentration of Islamist extremists (including Jabhat al Nusra) along the border with Israel, which is concerned about the transfer of “strategic” weapons (chemicals, anti-aircraft and missiles) to Hizbollah and to Sunni extremists.

The food and medical supplies that the US has announced it will provide to the Coalition will not help to bring down Bashar al Asad.  Sentiment within the revolution has turned dramatically against the US and the West and towards the Salafists and jihadists.  With no political settlement in sight, the US is unable to influence the armed groups who will decide the outcome.  It would be far better to provide aid to the armed groups:  those taking the shots will soon be calling them.  The SOC, and likely the provisional government to be named this weekend, has little traction inside Syria and risks becoming a Potemkin village.

Jeff White continued in this vein.  Localized fighting is the basis of political legitimacy and power inside Syria.  The revolutionaries are fragmented.  Civilians are marginalized.  The military councils are really in charge.  The Islamists are in the vanguard.  They have cohesion, discipline, leadership and morale.  Jabhat al Nusra is also particularly good at civic action, including securing and distribution of food as well as street cleaning. Their command and control is tight.

The Free Syria Army has more problems with civilian/military relations, jihadists vs. nationalists and regime penetration.  A revolution that began in the name of freedom and democracy has turned definitively in the direction of an Islamic state.  Antipathy to the West, in particular the US, and the international community in general is strong. Conspiracy theories are common, most notably the notion that the US, Iran and Israel are collaborating against the revolution.

Though better equipped now with antitank weapons, the revolutionaries still suffer shortages and maldistribution of weapons.  Logistics are ad hoc.  There is a security vacuum in the south–a kind of no man’s land.  No two revolutionary units are alike and numbers are hard to come by.  The rebels are nevertheless gaining territory.

Though losing control, the regime remains cohesive, with good supplies from Russia and Iran.  Hizbollah’s fighting role is increasing, as is the role of irregular regime forces (Shabiha).  The army is being hollowed out, losing 40 or more dead per day and several times that in wounded.  The Syrian air force is a wasting asset.

Simon Henderson talked about Gulf attitudes, where there is strong support for the Syrian opposition because of the prospect of a strategic setback for Iran.  But competition among the Gulf states is proving stronger than their distaste for Iran.  Saudi Arabia and Qatar are both supporting the revolution, but they are also competing for influence.  The competition is trumping concern about the outcome, leaving the GCC divided in the absence of strong US leadership.  Qatar is far less willing than Saudi Arabia to be seen bucking Iran, as it shares hydrocarbon resources in the Gulf with Tehran.

Are these views from Venus and Mars reconcilable?  My heart is on Venus.  I hope the women are right.  My head is on Mars.  What the men are seeing is all too real.

Tags : , , , , , , ,

Reform or else

Laurentina Cizza reports on last week’s discussion at the Middle East Institute:

Jordan’s King Abdullah had three main objectives for the January 23 election: to increase the integrity of the election process in response to heavy criticisms of the previous one, increase voter turnout in the face an Islamist boycott, and to usher in reform, or at least give Jordanians that impression. A Middle East Institute discussion last week on the challenges ahead suggested that the King made some progress on the first two counts but fell short of meaningful reform.  The upheavals in Egypt, Syria and Libya have bought King Abdullah some time, but he needs to deliver more substantive reform before his luck runs out.

Recently returned National Democratic Institute election observer, Leslie Campbell argued the January 23 election was better run than last time.  An Independent Election Commission (rather than the Ministry of the Interior) used a pre-printed standardized ballot.  This was a significant improvement over the previous blank pieces of paper, which opened the door to fraudulent practices. The standardized, numbered ballots made cheating more difficult. For the first time authorities assigned voters to polling stations, making tracking of individuals easier.  The improved technical organization of the elections increased the credibility of the results.

However, the King’s failure to deliver on more profound reforms reduced these technical adjustments to little more than cosmetic changes. The combination of unequally sized districts and the single non-transferable vote in multiple-member constituencies served to prevent ideological cohesion and to amplify family, clan and tribal cleavages. Candidates in Jordan run as individuals, not on party lists.  This renders political parties irrelevant. Strong family and ethnic ties compel individuals to vote for the candidate with shared family ties, not shared ideology.

In addition, The West Bank origin portion of the Jordanian population is disadvantaged relative to the King’s traditional East Bank powerbase. Campbell offered an extreme example: while a candidate running in the 1st district of Amman (majority Palestinian-origin population) needed 19,000 votes, a candidate running in the rural, tribal area of Ma’an needed a mere 1,600 votes to be elected.

A truly national legislative body cannot develop under these conditions. The unequal distribution of districts and the single-vote system over-represent the rural areas, amplify ethnic divisions, and hinder the development of ideologically cohesive political actors. A parliamentary system with no ideological blocks does not lead to effective coalition building, but rather to a system that sees the King fully in charge as the parliamentarians squabble for something to unite over.

Campbell remained optimistic nevertheless. Improvements in the process could move Jordan in the right direction. This round of elections 34 candidates of Palestinian origin made it to Parliament versus 19 last time. Only 33 incumbents made it back into parliament this time around.

Election observer Danya Greenfield of the Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East focused on what new insights the elections could provide. Islamic Action Front (IAF) appeals to boycott the elections fell flat. Only 2,000 people showed up to protest, and only 2-5% of Jordanian voters refrained from voting with the express purpose of boycotting the elections. Turnout was better than in the last elections, though the statistics indicate that Jordanians still feel apathetic about politics. Turnout of registered voters was 56%, but only 40% of the eligible voter population.  This is low in comparison to the rates of electoral participation in neighboring Egypt and Libya.

The IAF remains popular.  Since family ties motivated people to go to the polls, voters may have been reluctant to boycott. Studies indicate that in an equitable distribution system the IAF would win 20 to 25% of the parliamentary seats.  The increased turnout is not a good barometer of the King’s popularity. To the contrary, the low turnout compared to neighboring countries suggests disappointment with the reforms the King is offering.

The conflict in Syria has frightened Jordanians, but they are unlikely to remain quiescent.  Upcoming IMF-mandated food and fuel price spikes, and the continued influx of refugees from a hemorrhaging Syria, are increasing political pressure in the Kingdom.

Both Campbell and Greenfield came to the same conclusion: the King must demonstrate his commitment to reform to boost Jordanian confidence in the future. Perhaps the King’s abstention from tampering with the Parliament’s upcoming selection of the Prime Minister will represent the perfect opportunity.

Tags :

Peace picks this week

 1. The Nuclear Issue: Why is Iran Negotiating?

Date and Time: January 28, 9 am-11 pm

Address: Woodrow Wilson Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20004

Speakers: Michael Adler, Bijan Khajehpour, and Alireza Nader

Description: Three top experts in the field will discuss Iran’s domestic, foreign policy, and nuclear challenges.

Register for this event here: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/the-nuclear-issue-why-iran-negotiating

2. America’s Quest for Arab-Israeli Peace:  POSTPONED

Date and Time: January 28, 11 am-1 pm

Address: US Institute of Peace, 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, D.C.

Speakers: Daniel Kurtzer, William Quandt, Shibley Telhami, and Lucy Kurtzer-Ellenbogen

Description: As President Barack Obama is sworn in for his second term, and in the wake of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s reelection, many warn that time is running out for the two-state solution. On the occasion of its publication, David Ignatius will join three of the authors of ‘The Peace Puzzle: America’s Quest for Arab-Israeli Peace’ and USIP’s Lucy Kurtzer-Ellenbogen to discuss their own views on whether and why that door is closing, and what the next Obama administration can do to keep it open. 
’The Peace Puzzle’ was written by Daniel C. Kurtzer, Scott B. Lasensky, William B. Quandt, Steven L. Spiegel, and Shibley Z. Telhami and co-published by USIP Press and Cornell University Press. It offers a uniquely objective account and assessment of the American role in the peace process over the last two decades, concluding with 11 recommendations for the next administration to strengthen its role in resolving the conflict. While the tone of the book remains optimistic, the authors question whether the ‘determined, persistent, creative, and wise’ American diplomacy and leadership that have ushered in breakthroughs in the past can be recaptured and whether the lessons learned from two decades of failures will be embraced. 
Please join us for this discussion with David Ignatius on the prospects for a breakthrough in the peace process and the lessons offered in ‘The Peace Puzzle.’

Register for this event: http://www.usip.org/events/americas-quest-arab-israeli-peace

This event will be webcast live beginning at 11:00am on January 28, 2013 at www.usip.org/webcast.

3.    The Rise of Islamists: Challenges to Egypt’s Copts

Date and Time: January 28, 4:30pm – 6:00pm

Address:  Institute of World Politics, 1521 16th Street NW Washington, DC

Speakers: Nina Shea (Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Religious Freedom 
Hudson Institute) and Samuel Tadros (Research Fellow, Center for Religious Freedom 
Hudson Institute)

Description: This event is sponsored by IWP’s Center for Culture and Security. 
An international human-rights lawyer for over thirty years, Nina Shea joined Hudson Institute as a Senior Fellow in November 2006, where she directs the Center for Religious Freedom. Shea has served as a Commissioner on the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom for 13 years. Her many writings include widely-acclaimed reports on Saudi Arabia’s curriculum of hatred and the book Silenced: How Apostasy & Blasphemy Codes are Choking Freedom Worldwide (Oxford University Press, 2011). She co-authored the forthcoming book, Persecuted: The Global Assault on Christians (Thomas Nelson, March 2013). 
Samuel Tadros is a Research Fellow at Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom and a Professorial Lecturer at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies. Prior to joining Hudson in 2011, Tadros was a Senior Partner at the Egyptian Union of Liberal Youth, an organization that aims to spread the ideas of classical liberalism in Egypt. His many articles have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, Current Trends in Islamist Ideology, National Review, World Affairs, and the Weekly Standard. He is the author of the forthcoming book: Motherland Lost: The Egyptian and Coptic Quest for Modernity.

Register for this event here: http://iwp.edu/events/detail/the-rise-of-islamists-challenges-to-egypts-copts

4.      Legal and Political Reforms in Saudi Arabia

Date and Time: January 29, 12:00 to 1:00 pm

Address: Middle East Institute, Boardman Room 1761 N Street, NW, Washington D.C. 20036

Speaker: Dr. Joseph A. Kéchichian

Moderator: Kate Seelye

Description: At a time when many wonder how the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia will adapt to challenging regional crises, confront exacerbating internal problems, and manage sensitive ties with leading world powers, Riyadh is on the docket to also ensure a smooth royal succession.  Critics of the Kingdom’s reform policies allege that Riyadh is ill-suited to face the massive social, economic and political challenges it faces, some even anticipating its total collapse.  Joseph A. Kéchichian argues, however, that serious reforms are under way, including changes in the judicial sector, a genuine “National Dialogue,” and an inclination within the royal family to expand the boundaries of political debate. Kéchichian will also examine relations between the Al Sa’ud and the conservative clerical establishment, and offer an assessment of the legacy of King ‘Abdallah bin ‘Abdul ‘Aziz as prospects for a passing of power to a new generation become clearer.

Register for this event here: https://www.mei.edu/civicrm/event/info?reset=1&id=295

5.      Al Qaeda Country: Why Mali is Important

Date and Time: January 29, 2013 
1:00 PM – 2:00 PM

Address: Lindner Family Commons, Room 602
1957 E Street, NW

Speakers: Peter Chilson (Associate Professor of English, Washington State University ) and 
David Rain (Associate Professor of Geography and International Affairs, George Washington University)

Description: Prizewinning author Peter Chilson is one of the few Westerners to travel to the Mali conflict zone. There he found a hazy dividing line between the demoralized remnants of the former regime in the south and the new statelet in the north – Azawad – formed when a rebellion by the country’s ethnic Tuareg minority as commandeered by jihadi fighters. 
In this inaugural lecture of the African Research and Policy Group of the Institute for Global and International Studies, Chilson will lay out the lines of conflicting interest in Mali as some of the world’s great forces take notice. He is the author of the recent book, We Never Knew Exactly Where: Dispatches from the Lost Country of Mali.

Register for this event here: https://docs.google.com/a/aucegypt.edu/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGQ3bHk0eW5SSHNDSzRpUHdrQ0tieUE6MQ

6.      Should the United States Save Syria?

Date and Time: January 30, 5:00pm – 6:30pm

Address: The U.S. Navy Memorial Burke Theater

701 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20004

Speakers: Robert Kagan (Brookings Institution), Leon Wieseltier (The New Republic), Joshua Landis (University of Oklahoma), Aaron David Miller (The Wilson Center)

Moderator: Elise Labott (CNN)

Description: In the best American tradition of open inquiry, spirited discussion and practical action, the McCain Institute is introducing a series of structured, reasoned foreign policy debates aimed at developing practical policy options. The debates will include seasoned experts and practitioners of varying affiliations and perspectives. They will be distinctly non-partisan, aiming to look forward at future policy choices, not to look backward to criticize. Audience participation is strenuously encouraged.

Register for this event here: http://mccaininstitute.org/events/mccain-debate-and-decision-series2

7.      After the Jordan Elections: Challenges Ahead for the Hashemite Kingdom

Date and Time: February 1, 12:00-1:00 pm

Address: Middle East Institute, Boardman Room 1761 N Street, NW, Washington D.C. 20036

Speakers: Leslie Campbell and Danya Greenfield

Moderator: Kate Seelye

Description: The Middle East Institute is proud to host Leslie Campbell, senior associate and regional director for the Middle East, and Danya Greenfield, deputy director of the Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East at the Atlantic Council, for an assessment of the Jordanian elections and an examination of the political challenges ahead for Jordan’s King Abdullah II. Both Campbell and Greenfield monitored the parliamentary elections on January 23rd and return to Washington from Amman with fresh insights about the implications of Jordan’s democratic reform efforts and the  pressures faced by King Abdullah II as he seeks to address growing frustration with his rule.

Register for this event here: After the Jordan Elections: Challenges Ahead for the Hashemite Kingdom | Middle East Institute.

Tags : , , , , , ,

This week’s peace picks

Our suggested events begin and end with Egypt, but on Tuesday there are four overlapping discussions of Afghanistan.  Thoughtless think tanks?

1. Revolution in Progress:  Will There be a Democratic Egypt?, Monday December 10, 1:00 PM – 2:30 PM, U.S. Capitol Visitor Center

Venue:  U.S. Capital, U.S. Capitol Visitor Center, Congressional Meeting Room North, Washington, DC 20510

Speakers:  Nancy Okail, Steven Cook, Charles Dunne

With President Mohammad Morsi claiming widespread new powers leading to massive public protests the future of Egyptian democracy remains in the balance. Bitter fights continue over the distribution of authority. NGO workers, including those of Freedom House, continue to face prosecution for their work. The role of human rights, women, and religion in the new Egypt remain unclear. And these defining struggles are taking place in a near-institutional vacuum, in which the law, the constitution, and the relations between branches of government are all up for grabs.  How these issues are settled will determine Egypt’s future— and its relationship with the United States.

Register for this event here.

 

2.  Muslim-Majority Constitutions and the Right to Freedom of Religion or Belief, Monday December 10, 6:00 PM – 7:30 PM, Karamah

Venue:  Karamah, 1420 16th Street NW, Washington, DC 20036

Speakers: Elizabeth Cassidy, Mohamed Abdel Aziz Ibrahim, Knox Thames

A representative from the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) and an expert on Muslim constitutions will present and discuss USCIRF’s recent report entitled, “The Religion-State Relationship and the Right to Freedom of Religion or Belief: A Comparative Textual Analysis of the Constitutions of Majority Muslim Countries and Other OIC Members.” At this time when many nations are rewriting their foundational documents, the report provides a comparative analysis of religious freedom provisions in the constitutions of majority Muslim countries and other members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

Register for this event here.

 

3. Is America Still Exceptional? Foreign Policy over the Next Four Years, Monday December 10, 8:00 PM – 9:30 PM, Marvin Center Ampitheater

Venue:  Marvin Center Ampitheater, 800 21st Street NW, Washington, DC 20037

Speakers:  Henrey Nau, Daniel Deudney, James Goldgeier

This event features a debate between Henry Nau (GWU) and Daniel Deudney (JHU) on the future of American foreign policy. Moderated by James Goldgeier, Dean of AU’s School of International Studies.

Register for this event here.

 

4. Syria in Transition:  An Insider’s View, Tuesday December 11, 12:15 PM – 1:30 PM, New America Foundation

Venue:  New America Foundation, 1899 L Street NW, Washington, DC 20036, Suite 400

Speakers:  Mohammed Ghanem, Ilhan Tanir, Leila Hilal

While fears of chemical weapons and of an impending “failed state” dominate discussions on Syria, a narrative is being largely lost: civil leaders inside Syria who are taking matters into their own hands.

Civilian administrative councils have emerged throughout Syria in so-called “liberated zones.” Civilians are organizing for purposes of administering basic municipal services and law and order as they prepare for a post-Assad future.

What do these pockets of self-governed territory look like and how can they be sustained? What is the relationship between the civilian councils and the military brigades? How can the United States most effectively help civilian units prepare for a post-Assad future?

Please join the New America Foundation’s Middle East Task Force for a conversation with Ilhan TanirWashington correspondent for Vatan, and Mohammed A. Ghanem, senior political advisor at the Syrian American Council, who has just returned from Syria. Ghanem and Tanir will discuss how Syrian civilians are creating a government of their own and how this movement may impact the country’s future.

Register for this event here.

 

5. Elections, Reconciliation, and the Final Two Years of Afghanistan’s Transition:  Perspectives from the International Community, Tuesday December 11, 1:00 PM – 4:30 PM, USIP

Venue:  United States Institute of Peace, 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20037

Speakers: Steve Coll, Jim DeHart, Thomas Lynch, Clare Lockhart, Thomas Ruttig, Francesc Vendrell, Scott Warden, Scott Smith, Andrew Wilder

As the clock winds down on the final two years of Afghanistan’s security transition, where does the accompanying political transition stand?

The main elements of the political transition are the 2014 presidential elections and the attempt to forge a political reconciliation with the Taliban. These issues are interrelated. Some say that there can be no effective elections unless a reconciliation process can first ensure adequate security conditions. Others say that reconciliation is impossible until there is a newly elected government in Kabul.

Both processes are affected by Afghanistan’s many uncertainties. Yet some recent developments have settled some questions and opened new opportunities. The re-election of President Obama has settled the question of who is responsible for US policy. The recent release of Taliban leaders by Pakistan could indicate a willingness on the part of Islamabad to play a more active role in supporting a negotiation. The consolidation Salahuddin Rabbani as the Chairman of the High Peace Council may yield greater progress in talks with the armed opposition. The setting of the election date by the Independent Election Commission fulfilled a longstanding demand by the political opposition, but also raised questions about the feasibility of holding elections.

The press of time will force the international community to take a number of positions on a number of complex issues in Afghanistan. Please join USIP for two panel that will look at both processes of the political transition.

Register for this event here.

 

6. Afghanistan: Endgame or Persisting Challenge with Continuing Stakes?, Tuesday December 11, 2:00 PM – 3:30 PM, Brookings Institution

Venue:  Brookings Institution, 1775 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Saul/Zilkha Rooms

Speakers:  Martin Indyk, Vanda Felbab-Brown, Ronald E. Neumann

After more than a decade of great effort and sacrifice by the United States and its allies, the Taliban still has not been defeated, and many Afghans believe that a civil war is coming. In 2014, foreign forces will complete the handover of security responsibility to their Afghan counterparts, international financial flows will radically decrease, and Afghanistan’s presidential elections will intensify political uncertainties. These challenges are mounting at a time when Afghanistan is dealing with rising insecurity, dysfunctional governance, rampant corruption and ethnic factionalization, while the regional environment is not easily conducive to stability in the country. With the U.S. and international publics tired of the war, fundamental questions about any remaining stakes in Afghanistan and the efficacy of any persisting stabilization efforts are increasing.

On December 11, Foreign Policy at Brookings will host the launch of a new book, Aspiration and Ambivalence: Strategies and Realities of Counterinsurgency and State-Building in Afghanistan (Brookings, 2012), by Brookings Fellow Vanda Felbab-Brown. Aspiration and Ambivalence analyzes the past decade of U.S. and international efforts in Afghanistan and offers detailed recommendations for dealing with the precarious situation leading up to the 2014 transition and after. In her book, Felbab-Brown argues that allied efforts in Afghanistan have put far too little emphasis on good governance, concentrating too much on short-term military goals to the detriment of long-term peace and stability. Felbab-Brown will be joined by Ronald E. Neumann, president of the American Academy of Diplomacy and former U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan (2005-07). Vice President Martin S. Indyk, director of Foreign Policy, will provide introductory remarks and moderate the discussion.

After the program, panelists will take questions from the audience.

Register for this event here.

 

7. The United States and South Asia After Afghanistan, Tuesday December 11, 3:30 PM – 5:00 PM, Carnegie Endowment

Venue:  Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Root Room A/B/C

Speakers: Alexander Evans, Husain Haqqani, Karl F. Inderfurth, Cameron Munter, Wendy Chamberlin

U.S. interests in South Asia are evolving.  An intense focus on counterterrorism and Afghanistan since 9/11 is giving way to a broader range of interests. Washington takes India’s global status seriously and is working closely with New Delhi on a range of regional and global issues. China’s rise, often neglected as a factor in South Asia policy, is encouraging a more strategic U.S. approach to Asia policy as a whole. As a result, a significant opportunity now exists to rethink U.S. South Asia strategy.

An upcoming report by Asia Society Bernard Schwartz Fellow Alexander Evans draws on over 90 interviews with a range of current and former U.S. policy practitioners from the State Department, National Security Council, Congress, and the intelligence community to consider how the United States can achieve an integrated South Asia policy following the 2014 military drawdown in Afghanistan. The report, which benefits from the expertise of the Asia Society Advisory Group on U.S. Policy toward South Asia, includes recommendations for better incorporating expertise into policy planning.

In conjunction with the report’s release, please join us for a discussion on the prospects for achieving a strategic U.S. approach to South Asia and the hard choices an incoming Administration will need to make to get there. An event will also take place in New York on December 12, Islamabad, Pakistan on December 18, and New Delhi, India on December 20.

RSVP for this event to AsiaDC@AsiaSociety.org.

 

8. Prescriptions for Peaceful Transitions:  Is Democracy Mandatory?, Tuesday December 11, 4:00 PM – 5:30 PM, Johns Hopkins SAIS

Venue:  Johns Hopkins SAIS, Bernstein-Offit Building, 1717 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Room 500

Speakers:  Carl Gershman, Cynthia Irmer, Marina Ottaway, William Zartman

Carl Gershman, president of the National Endowment for Democracy; Cynthia Irmer, special assistant in the Office of the Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy and Humans Rights at the U.S. Department of State; Marina Ottaway, senior associate in the Middle East Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; and I. William Zartman, SAIS professor emeritus, will discuss this topic.

RSVP for this event to RSVP@ipsinstitute.org.

 

9. Finish the Job:  Jump-Start Afghanistan’s Economy – A Handbook of Projects, Tuesday December 11, 5:30 PM – 7:00 PM, Johns Hopkins SAIS

Venue:  Johns Hopkins SAIS, Nitze Building, 1740 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Kenney Auditorium

Speakers:  S. Fredrick Starr, Adib Faradi, Geoffrey Pyatt,

S. Fredrick Starr, CACI chairman; Adib Faradi, CACI visiting scholar and former deputy minister of Commerce for Afghanistan; and Geoffrey Pyatt, principal deputy assistant secretary of the U.S. Department of State’s South and Central Asia Affairs Bureau, will discuss CACI’s new report, “Finish the Job: Jump-Start Afghanistan’s Economy.” Note: A reception will precede the event at 5 p.m.  Members of the media who want to cover this event should contact Felisa Neuringer Klubes in the SAIS Communications Office at 202.663.5626 or fklubes@jhu.edu.

RSVP for this event to saiscaciforums@jhu.edu.

 

10. Egypt on the Brink (Again), Friday December 14, 12:30 PM, Washington Institute for Near East Policy

Venue:  Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 1828 L Street NW, Washington, DC 20036, Suite 1050

Speakers:  Steven Cook, Shalom Cohen, Eric Trager

Nearly two years after throngs filled downtown Cairo to demand the ouster of Hosni Mubarak, tens of thousands are back demanding the ouster of his elected successor, Muhammad Morsi. For the ruling Islamists, winning the planned December 15 national referendum on a new constitution would be the turning point that ends the current crisis; for their opponents, the hastily scheduled referendum only stokes more fury at a democratic transition gone terribly awry.

To discuss the fast-moving events in Egypt and their implications for U.S. policy and regional security, The Washington Institute invited Steven Cook, Shalom Cohen, and Eric Trager to address a Policy Forum luncheon in Washington, DC, on Friday, December 14, 2012, from 12:30-2:00 p.m. EST.

Register for this event here.

 

Tags : , , , , , , , , ,
Tweet