Tag: Israel/Palestine

Peace picks July 14-18

Posted in Uncategorized - July 14, 2014 - 0 Comment

1. Ending Wars to Build Peace: Conflict Termination Workshop Monday, July 14 | 8:30 am – 1:00 pm United States Institute of Peace; 2301 Constitution Ave NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND Designing a conflict termination strategy is an essential but often overlooked component of warfighting. Improperly planned or incorrectly implemented, a failure to effectively terminate a conflict will leave open the original issues that brought on the war and likely create the conditions for future conflict.  The U.S. Institute of Peace, U.S. Military Academy’s Center for the Study of Civil-Military Operations and RAND Corporation invite you to an event featuring notable experts sharing their observations and concerns about the issue of war termination, its planning, transition and challenges.  SPEAKERS: Gideon Rose, Author, How Wars End, Amb. Jim Jeffery, Former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Hon. James Kunder, Former Deputy Administrator, USAID, Lt General Mark Milley, Commander, U.S. Army III Corps, and Dr. Rick Brennan Senior Political Scientist, RAND.

2. Ukraine: The Maidan and Beyond Monday, July 14 | 12:00 pm – 2:00 pm National Endowment for Democracy;1025 F Street NW, Suite 800, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND The forthcoming July 2014 issue of the Journal of Democracy will feature a cluster of eight articles on Ukraine. Please join NDI as four of the contributors elaborate on the subjects discussed in their articles. Serhiy Kudelia analyzes the evolution of Ukraine’s political system during the past four years and why it led to the downfall of President Viktor Yanukovych. Lucan Way assesses the role that civil society played in bringing down Yanukovych and the challenges that it will now face. Anders Aslund examines the “endemic corruption” that has long plagued Ukraine and goes on to suggest how the new government can rebuild the country’s economy. Finally, Nadia Diuk considers the longer-term significance of the Maidan Revolution.

3. Doing Business in Burma: Human Rights Risks and Reporting Requirements Tuesday, July 15 | 8:15 am – 10:00 am Center for Human Rights & Humanitarian Law; 500 8th St. NW, Washington D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND In 2012, the U.S. lifted economic sanctions on resource-rich Burma, sanctions that had been in place for over a decade. American businesses are required to publicly report to the State Department on the potential human rights, environmental, and political impacts of their investments if they exceed $500,000. Some of the questions that will be addressed: How can the Reporting Requirements guide companies and their attorneys in assessing and managing the risks that accompany new investment in Burma? Why is the information contained in the reports valuable to the State Department and other organizations? SPEAKERS: Amy Lehr, Attorney, Foley Hoag LLP, Jason Pielemeier, Esq., U.S. Department of State/DRL, Genevieve Taft, Global Manager of Workplace Rights, Coca-Cola, and Jennifer Quigley, Executive Director, U.S. Campaign for Burma.

4. New Story Leadership for the Middle East Congressional Forum Tuesday, July 15 | 10:00 am – 2:00 pm New Story Leadership; Cannon House Office Building, 200-299 New Jersey Ave SE, Washington D.C.
 REGISTER TO ATTEND New Story Leadership for the Middle East is presents their class of 2014, featuring presentations from young Israeli and Palestinian leaders who are living, working, and learning together this summer in Washington, DC. Young voices throughout the world have decisively spoken up for change, demanding new leadership, greater freedom, and the right to choose their own futures. Now a new generation of Israelis and Palestinians wants to engage you in an emerging conversation by sharing their stories and their hopes for peace.

5. For the Least of These: A Biblical Answer to Poverty Tuesday, June 15 | 2:00 pm – 3:30 pm Heritage Foundation;214 Massachusetts Ave NE, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND While much progress has been made toward poverty alleviation, many well-intentioned efforts have led Christians to actions that are not only ineffective, but leave the most vulnerable in a worse situation than before. Is there a better answer? Combining biblical exegesis with proven economic principles, For the Least of These: A Biblical Answer to Poverty equips Christians with both a solid biblical and economic understanding of how best to care for the poor and foster sustainable economic development. With contributions from fourteen leading Christian economists, theologians, historians, and practitioners, For the Least of These presents the case for why markets and trade are the world’s best hope for alleviating poverty. SPEAKERS: Dr. Anne Bradley, Dr. Art Lindsley, Michael Craven, and Derrick Morgan.

6. The Madrid 3/11 Bombings, Jihadist Networks in Spain, and the Evolution of Terrorism in Western Europe Tuesday, June 15 | 2:00 pm – 3:50 pm Brooking Institute; 4801 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND Ten years after the terror attacks in Madrid, Professor Fernando Reinares, a senior analyst within Elcano Royal Institute, has published a definitive account of the attacks. Reinares provides evidence showing that the decision to attack Spain was made in December 2001 in Pakistan by Moroccan Amer Azizim and that the Madrid bombing network began its formation more than one year before the start of the Iraq war. Spain battles the challenge of jihadist radicalization and recruitment networks that are sending fighters to join the wars in Syria and elsewhere. On July 15, the Intelligence Project at Brookings will host Professor Reinares for a discussion on his book’s revelations, the empirical data on the evolution of jihadism in Spain and the future of terrorism in Western Europe.

7. Forgotten, but Not Gone: The Continuing Threat of Boko Haram Tuesday, June 15 | 2:00 pm – 3:00 pm International Institute for Strategic Studies; 2121 K Street NW, Suite 801, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND The furor of the #BringBackOurGirls movement has faded rapidly and Boko Haram’s insurgency, now in its fourth year, has again been largely forgotten by the international media, despite the fact that violence has continued in the form of mass killings, attacks in the capital, Abuja, and new abductions. Virginia Comolli will be discussing the implications of Boko Haram’s insurgency for Nigeria, repercussions for other West African countries and the role of non-African partners in dealing with the security challenges the group presents. Comolli is the Research Fellow running the newly established IISS Security and Development Programme.

8. Petrocaribe, Central America, and the Caribbean: Who Will Subsidize the Future? Wednesday, July 16 | 8:30 am – 10:30 am Atlantic Council of the United States; 1030 15th St. NW, 12th Floor, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND US Vice President Joe Biden used his recent trip to Latin America to announce a new initiative to promote energy security in the Caribbean. Is it enough? Join the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center for a timely discussion on the future of Petrocaribe.  The huge Venezuelan oil subsidy enters its tenth year, and continues to provide Caracas with political support from its closest neighbors – but at what cost to the region? Given Venezuela’s economic demise, will Petrocaribe continue delivering into the future?  Now is the moment to examine energy alternatives for the Caribbean and Central America. This event will launch the Atlantic Council’s new report, Uncertain Energy: The Caribbean’s Gamble with Venezuela, authored by Arsht Center Senior Nonresident Energy Fellow David L. Goldwyn and his associate, Cory R. Gill.

9. The Resurgence of the Taliban Wednesday, June 16 | 10:30 am – 12:00 pm Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND In autumn 2001, U.S. and NATO troops were deployed to Afghanistan to unseat Afghanistan’s Taliban rulers. Yet, despite a more than decade-long attempt to eradicate them, the Taliban has endured—regrouping and reestablishing themselves as a significant insurgent movement. Hassan Abbas, author of The Taliban Revival: Violence and Extremism on the Pakistan-Afghanistan Frontier, will examine how the Taliban not only survived but adapted to regain power and political advantage. Carnegie’s Frederic Grare will moderate.

10. Citizens, Subjects, and Slackers: Polish, Russian, and Ukrainian Attitudes Toward Paying Taxes Wednesday, June 16 | 3:30 pm – 5:00 pm Woodrow Wilson Center; 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND Marc Berenson’s unique surveys of Poles, Russians, and Ukrainians, conducted from 2004 to 2012 regarding their attitudes towards paying taxes, illustrate that Polish citizens express a far greater willingness and support for paying taxes than Russian citizens, who, in turn, are more willing taxpayers than Ukrainian citizens.  Unlike Poles, whose compliance is related to their trust in the state, and Russians, whose compliance is related to their fear of the state, Ukrainians, showing the lowest support for tax obedience, have reacted to state efforts to increase compliance with less fear and little trust. This suggests that post-transition governments must find ways to create and build up levels of trust on the part of citizens in their state, but that bridging the exceptionally high and long-held levels of distrust in the Ukrainian state will remain an extreme challenge for those seeking a new rule-of-law Ukraine. Kennan Institute Global Fellow, Amb. Kenneth Yalowitz, will provide discussion.

11. Fixing the US Department of Veterans Affairs: Prospects for Reform Thursday, June 17 | 10:00 am – 11:30 am American Enterprise Institute; 1150 17th Street, NW, Washington D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND Recent scandals at medical centers for veterans have trained a spotlight on longstanding inefficiencies within the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). In the case of the VA’s disability system, a nearly century-old approach to wounded veterans still prevails. The widespread consensus is that the problem goes much deeper than falsified waiting lists and delayed access to care, and necessitates a global overhaul. What would a renewed vision of veteran care look like, and how should we clarify the objectives of the VA’s disability system? In the interim, what short-term reforms are practical? Join AEI as House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs Chairman Jeff Miller presents a blueprint for reform, followed by a discussion with experts in health care, disability, and public administration. Other speakers include Michael H. McLendon, Joseph Antos, Richard V. Burkhauser, Peter Schuck, and Sally Satel.

12. Beyond Air-Sea Battle: The Debate Over US Military Strategy in Asia with Professor Aaron Friedberg Thursday, June 17 | 2:00 pm – 3:00 pm IISS; 2121 K Street NW, Suite 801, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND China’s military build-up, particularly the expansion of its long-range nuclear forces and its development of ‘anti-access/area-denial’ (A2/AD) capabilities, poses a serious threat to both the American position in East Asia and the security of other regional powers. The growth of these forces challenges Washington’s ability, and perhaps its willingness, to project power into the region. This could call American security guarantees into question, eventually undermining the United States’ place as the dominant Asia-Pacific power. Left unchecked, perceived shifts in the regional military balance away from the US and its allies towards China could also raise the risks of miscalculation and deterrence failure. Professor Aaron Friedberg of Prince University will be launching his new Adelphi series book, Beyond Air-Sea Battle: The Debate Over US Military Strategy in Asia.” He will be joined by discussant Elbridge Colby, the Robert M. Gates Fellow at the Center for New American Security.

13. Putting Military Personnel Costs in Context: Analysis by AEI and BPC Friday, July 18 | 9:00 am – 10:00 am Russell Senate Office Building; Constitution Avenue and 1st Street, NE, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND According to a new study by the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the per capita cost of military personnel on active duty increased by 42 percent over the last decade. Overall, growth in cost was much faster than growth in the number of people serving. AEI and BPC invite you to a conversation about the cost trends impacting America’s professional volunteer force and their implications for the future. SPEAKERS: Linda Bilmes, Charlie Houy, Scott Lilly, Ann Sauer, and Charles Wald.

Tags : , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Two states or else

Posted in Uncategorized - July 10, 2014 - 0 Comment

In the last week, Israel has cratered Gaza with dozens of airstrikes. Hamas has fired hundreds of rockets into southern Israel. Following on the murders of four teenagers, Palestine could be on the cusp of a third intifada. At the Wilson Center Monday, moderator David Aaron Miller joined panelists Hussein Ibish, Shibley Telhami, and Robert Danin to discuss recent events.

Telhami noted a number of parallels between 1987, the eve of the First Intifada, and today. In the 1980s, the Iran-Iraq war dominated the headlines, and Israel-Palestine had ceased to command much attention. With the world focused on Syria and Iraq, this is also the case today. He also pointed to the weakness of Palestine’s leaders. In 1987, much of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)  leadership was living in exile. At present, they might as well be. Unable, or unwilling, to administer much of Gaza and the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority (PA) is wholly disconnected from the people who elected them.

The political landscape in Palestine is marred by inaction and despair, said Danin. Hamas and the PA are reacting to, rather than leading, events. With the last election more than five years ago, both lack political legitimacy. Indeed, the increasing irrelevance of the two factions was crucial to the formation of the Hamas-PA unity government.

PA leader Mahmoud Abbas has been branded a traitor for cooperating with Israelis to apprehend the men who kidnapped and murdered three Israeli teenagers. Meanwhile, 50,000 government workers have not been paid in the last month. Hamas is also in a difficult position, as they need to reign in militants while not appearing to placate Israel.

The panelists agreed that Hamas’s leadership is not inclined to intensify the conflict. Some Israeli leaders, including Netanyahu, are equally reluctant to escalate. Israel looks to Hamas to enforce order in Gaza, and is concerned with the rise of more radical movements like Islamic Jihad. Hamas is willing to play this role, but needs a political out.

The good news, said Ibish, is that if a majority of Palestinians wanted an intifada, there would be one. On the Israeli side, many are aware that if a two-state solution doesn’t happen now, it may never happen. In a political climate that has Netanyahu looking like a moderate, however, a return to negotiating table appears unlikely. Still, both sides are terrified of the rising chaos in the region. With one eye towards Syria and Iraq, they are aware that things could be much worse.

Danin noted that the current bout of violence didn’t come out of nowhere, and is not simply a product of a failed peace process. There has been an uptick in so-called “Price Tag” attacks in last few years. John Kerry is not to blame for this. Still, there is a diplomatic vacuum right now, and the US doesn’t have a strong hand to play.

If it is too late for a two-state solution, Telhami said, then one state, with equal citizenship, is the only morally acceptable alternative. This scenario is unlikely, however. In fact, Kiryat Arba and other settler groups have already taken advantage of the chaos to establish new outposts in the West Bank. Danin countered that a one-state “solution” does not exist. Ultimately, there is no smorgasbord of outcomes. The possibilities are binary: a two-state solution, or unremitting bloodshed.

Since 1967, Israelis have wielded the power of the strong, while Palestinians have wielded the power of the weak. It is within this context that children become targets, and diplomacy gives way to blood debt. There is only one way out of this cycle of violence, and that is through a two-state solution.

If the peace process can be revived, Netanyahu might yet have a role to play. After all, the history of peacemaking is a history of transformed hawks.

Tags : ,

Peace picks July 7-11

Posted in Uncategorized - July 7, 2014 - 0 Comment
  1. Transitional Justice in Colombia: What Lessons Can Be Learned from Other Countries? Monday, July 7 | 12:00 pm – 1:00 pm Washington Office on Latin America; 1666 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 400, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND Since peace talks commenced in October 2012, the Government of Colombia and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) have reached agreements on three key points—land, political participation, and drug policy—further than any prior peace process. Yet while hope for an agreement is growing, significant obstacles remain. Professor Jo-Marie Burt, Senior Fellow at WOLA, has closely followed transitional processes throughout Latin America, including most recently in Guatemala and Peru. In conversation with Senior Associate Gimena Sanchez, she will provide lessons learned from those experiences that could help shape the debate in Colombia.
  2. Whither the Palestinians Monday, July 7 | 4:00 pm – 5:15 pm Woodrow Wilson Center, Sixth Floor; 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C.  REGISTER TO ATTEND Iraq and Syria may be dominating the headlines, but the Israeli-Palestinian issue remains a volatile and unpredictable piece of the Middle Eastern puzzle. Hussein Ibish, Senior Fellow at American Task Force on Palestine, Shibley Telhami, Peace and Development Professor at the University of Maryland, and Aaron David Miller, Vice President for New Initiatives, will discuss the Palestinians and their politics, including the recent unity agreement, the impasse in the peace process, and the prospects for elections in the West Bank and Gaza.
  3. Facing a Revisionist Russia: Discussion from Carl Bildt Tuesday, July 8 | 9:00 am – 10:30 am Atlantic Council of the United States; 1030 15th Street, NW, Twelfth Floor, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND Europe must find a way of dealing with the new, revisionist Russia, even as it faces the growth of political forces with ties to Moscow and seeks to lessen its own energy dependence. Sweden’s Foreign Minister Carl Bildt has long been at the center of European efforts to develop a coherent EU foreign policy, including towards Russia.  One of the initiators of the EU’s Eastern Partnership, he has been keenly involved in EU relations with Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova.  He will discuss his views on European Union and transatlantic relations with Russia, as well as recent developments within the EU and the impact on EU foreign policy.
  4. Countering Violent Extremism: A Peacebuilding Lens Tuesday, July 8 | 9:30 am – 11:00 am Johns Hopkins University- SAIS; 1740 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND Georgia Holmer, senior program officer in the Center for Gender and Peacebuilding at the U.S. Institute of Peace; Mike Jobbins, senior program manager for Africa at Search for Common Ground; Irfan Saeed, senior policy advisor in the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security; and Haroon Ullah, member of the U.S. Secretary of State’s Policy Planning Staff at the U.S. Department of State, will discuss violent extremism in the twenty-first century that threatens world stability.
  5. Iran Sanctions: What the U.S. Cedes in a Nuclear Deal Tuesday, July 8 | 9:30 am – 11:00 am US Institute of Peace; 2301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND The panelists will address the complex questions and challenges of sanctions in the Iran nuclear talks. It’s the last of three discussions hosted by an unprecedented coalition of eight Washington think tanks and organizations to coincide with the last three rounds of negotiations. SPEAKERS Suzanne Maloney, Brookings Institution, Kenneth Katzman, Congressional Research Service and former CIA analyst, Elizabeth Rosenberg, Center for New American Security, and Robin Wright, USIP and Woodrow Wilson Center.
  6. Modern Day Slavery: What the U.S. Government and the International Community Can do to Combat Migrant Labor Abuses and End Human Trafficking in the Gulf Tuesday, July 8 | 3:00 pm – 4:00 pm United States Capitol Visitor Center, Room 268, Washington, D.C. Sarah Leah Whitson, Human Rights Watch, James Lynch, Amnesty International, James Suzano, Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain, as well as Shawna Bader-Blau, Solidarity Center of the AFL-CIO, examine the legal and customary systems in the Gulf that govern migrant labor, as well as the status of migrant and trafficked workers in GCC countries, and what Congress can do to combat migrant labor abuses and end the suffering of victims of human trafficking.
  7. Afghanistan’s Future: Politics, Prosperity, and Security Under New Leadership Wednesday, July 9 | 2:00 pm – 3:30 pm Asia Society; 1526 New Hampshire Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND Across the country, millions of Afghans have cast their ballots to select the next president. The second round of elections was held on June 14, 2014, with two candidates, Abdullah Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani. While Afghans await the results of the election, Ambassador Omar Samad, Senior Central Asia Fellow at New American Foundation, Clare Lockhart, Director of the Institute for State Effectiveness, and Hassan Abbas, Senior Advisor at Asia Society, will explore from different perspectives what Afghans and Americans can expect in each of these areas in the new Afghan administration and with the U.S. military drawdown.
  8. Voices from the Middle East: The Israeli and Palestinian Narratives of New Story Leadership Thursday, July 10 | 9:00 am – 12:00 pm Johns Hopkins SAIS, Nitze Building; 1740 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND Ten students from Israel and Palestine will share their stories and projects on this topic.
  9. Ethiopia’s Democratic Transition: One Step Forward, Two Steps Back Thursday, July 10 | 3:00 pm – 4:30 pm National Endowment for Democracy; 1025 F Street, NW, Washington D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND Despite the introduction of a new constitution in 1995, the Ethiopian Peoples’ Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) has suppressed meaningful democratic change during its two decades in power. The resulting gap between popular expectations and Ethiopia’s political reality has increased frustrations among citizens, and ongoing violence, indicating the depth of unresolved tensions. Merera Gudina Jefi will evaluate the EPRDF regime’s performance by outlining the contours of the country’s political development and identifying major democratic setbacks. He will offer recommendations for domestic actors, including the Ethiopian government and opposition parties, and for the international community, including the diaspora.
  10. BRICS Summit 2014: Agenda and Implications Friday, July 11 | 10:00 am – 12:00 pm Brookings Institution; 1775 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND Brazil hosts the leaders of Russia, India, China, and South Africa for the 2014 BRICS Summit on July 15-17, days after the end of the World Cup. This BRICS summit will take place against the backdrop of Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, the Russia-China gas deal, the election of Narendra Modi in India, the likely establishment of a BRICS Bank, and the Rousseff-Biden talks to improve U.S-Brazil relations. The panel will discuss the summit and examine its implications for U.S. foreign policy and the broader international order. Bruce Jones, senior fellow and director of the Project on International Order and Strategy (IOS), will lead the conversation, which will feature Brookings Foreign Policy scholars Fiona Hill, Kenneth Lieberthal, Harold Trinkunas, Tanvi Madan and Thomas Wright.
  11. The Many Faces of Tyranny: Why Democracy Isn’t Always Possible Friday, July 11 | 12:00 pm – 1:00 pm Heritage Foundation; 214 Massachusetts Ave., NE, Washington D.C. REGISTER TO ATTEND History has not ended. Across the world today, we are witnessing both a heroic struggle for democracy and reform and the disturbing strength of tyrannical regimes and movements. Whether it be the Arab Spring, the Syrian civil war, the aggressiveness of Putin’s Russia or the increasing bellicosity of China, the forces of democracy and the forces of tyranny are in a dead heat. Waller R. Newell, Political Science Professor at Carleton University, asks how should the West respond? How should we make the difficult choice between better and worse kinds of non-democratic authority when overthrowing today’s dictatorship may only bring about a much worse totalitarian alternative tomorrow?
Tags : , , , , , , , ,

Flipping SecState the bird

Posted in Uncategorized - June 25, 2014 - 0 Comment

It’s been a bad few days for Secretary of State Kerry, on top of many bad weeks.  On Sunday, he expressed the hope Egypt would take advantage of a critical moment in its transition to turn towards democracy. Then an Egyptian court popped that bubble with a trumped up verdict in a trumped up trial on trumped up charges against three Al Jazeera  journalists. By Tuesday, SecState was pressing Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki and Kurdistan President Barzani to proceed quickly to formation of an inclusive government. By today, Maliki said he had no such intention and Barzani is talking secession, more seriously than ever before.

This comes on top of the failed Middle East (that is, Israeli/Palestinian) peace process and Russian rejection of Ukrainian President Poroshenko’s proposed ceasefire. Not to mention the mess in Syria, where the President’s reluctance to intervene is all to obviously not pleasing to John Kerry. He has said repeatedly that a political settlement depends on changing the military situation on the ground. I won’t even mention the Asia Pacific, where China is again daring its neighbors.

It is hard to avoid the conclusion that things are going badly for the Obama Administration in foreign policy. That’s precisely what the American people have decided, even if they support some of the President’s decisions on what to do and not do.

Daniels Larison and Drezner have been engaged in the why of this puzzle. Larison thinks it is due to the failure of the President to provide the resources needed to achieve his goals. Drezner thinks it is double think on the part of Americans:  they want the country in general less engaged abroad (the outcome) but don’t like the specific consequences (the outputs).

I’ll leave the other Daniels to resolve that puzzle. I’m interested in what John Kerry is thinking. His behavior strikes me as out of keeping with past Secretaries of State, who have either been far more cautious in what they say or far more determined to get foreign leaders to salute when they say it. Most days, a lot of the State Department is engaged precisely in trying to line up “yes” from foreign leaders, in advance of a SecState “ask.” Secretaries don’t ask if they are not guaranteed a positive reply.

Kerry seems displeased but not angered when Maliki or Sisi says “no.” His attitude strikes me as more like that of a Senator than a Secretary of State. Senators are used to colleagues disagreeing. They are also used to being taken seriously for what they say, rather than for what they can do. There is always another day to try to win over opponents. Senators state their case but try not to burn bridges.

Hillary Clinton of course was also a senator before she was SecState, but she was notably more cautious in what she said. I don’t recall her ever hinting that she supported arming the Syrian revolutionaries, even though it is now known she did in secret. Kerry has been particularly bold in what he says publicly, but shy in deed, perhaps because there is so little Secretaries of State can actually do on their own authority other than speak. I guess that puts me more in the Larison than the Drezner camp about what is going on.

But whatever the reason, it is not good when other countries flip SecState the bird.

Tags : , , , , ,

Survey says

Posted in Uncategorized - June 12, 2014 - 0 Comment

Tuesday Jay Leveton presented the results of the 2014 ASDA’A Burson-Marsteller survey at the American Security Project.  It focuses on Arab youth perspectives, concerns and aspirations throughout the region. The survey consisted of 3,500 face-to-face interviews conducted over the past year across sixteen countries in the Middle East. The sample was split equally between males and females ranging from 18 to 24 years old. Leveton highlighted the top ten findings:

  1. Arab youth are embracing modern values. 46% of Arab youth believe that traditional values are outdated and belong in the past. This number has risen from only 17% in 2011, demonstrating a shift away from traditional values. This change is also reflected in the decreasing influence of parents, family, and religion on Arab youth.
  2. They remain confident in their national government’s abilities. Arab youth show approximately 60% confidence in the government’s ability to address living standards, economic stability, war, unemployment and terrorism. There is great surprise in this confidence, specifically in countries that have suffered from economic hardship or political instability following the Arab Spring. Approval of the impact of the Arab Spring has declined from 72% in 2012 to 54% in 2014, most likely due to the continuous civil unrest and political instability in countries such as Egypt and Syria.
  3. They are increasingly concerned about the rising cost of living and unemployment. 63% of Arab youth are concerned about growing living expenses, while 42% expressed significant worry over unemployment. Approximately half are apprehensive about their own national economy. However, 55% of youth in countries outside of the GCC are concerned about unemployment, while only 39% within the GCC. This is due to the GCC’s proven ability to assist in job creation, while countries in North Africa and the Levant struggle with their youth unemployment rates.
  4. Arab youth believe that the biggest obstacle in the Middle East is civil unrest. 55% believe that the recent uprisings and instability are the greatest impediments to the advancement of the region. 38% believe that the lack of democracy is the greatest issue, while some believe it is the threat of terrorism.
  5. They are increasingly looking towards entrepreneurship as a source of opportunity. 67% feel that the younger generation is more likely to start a business than in previous generations. This entrepreneurial spirit hints at the perceived opportunities in starting one’s own business, specifically in response to some governments’ inability to provide jobs for their youth.
  6. The country that the younger Arab generation would most like to live in is the United Arab Emirates. 39% said that the UAE is the ideal country they would move to, while 21% said the United States, and 14% said Saudi Arabia. The UAE is the model country for Arab youth in terms of the right balance of governmental responsibility, national economy, foreign relations, etc. The United States has remained high in favor in Arab youth perspectives.
  7. Arab youth see their country’s biggest allies to be Saudi Arabia and the UAE. 36% believe that Saudi Arabia is their country’s biggest ally and 33% said the UAE. This was followed by Qatar, Kuwait, and lastly the United States, which marks a shift away from Western countries as the largest allies.
  8. They have a new concern for obesity and rising health issues. Over the past year, there has been a sharp increase in the percentage of youth concerned about obesity from 12% in 2013 to 26% in 2014. An increasing number of the younger generation is worried about diabetes, cancer and heart disease. Among all countries, 52% of youth feel as though the healthcare in their country has remained the same over the past year, while 34% believe that it has improved.
  9. They believe that the government should subsidize energy costs and aren’t too concerned about climate change. 74% believe that energy, electricity, and transport fuel should be subsidized by the government. This comes from the rising concern about the cost of living in each respective country. While this is the greatest worry among youth, concern for climate change and the environment is a very low priority at only 6%.
  10. There has been a great increase in daily news consumption, specifically through online media and social networking sites. Television has been the most popular source of news for the sixth year in a row with 75% of Arab youth using it as their most frequent news source. However, a declining number of youth see the television as the most trusted source of news– 39% now view social media as the most reliable source, rising from 22% in 2013.

While the 2014 survey ranges across sixteen countries that vary in political, economic, and social characteristics, there is nonetheless a great sense of continuity in the hopes, concerns, and priorities of Arab youth in the region.

Tags : , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Do Arabs like Obama?

Posted in Uncategorized - June 4, 2014 - 1 Comment

Five years ago, President Obama promised in a landmark speech in Cairo to usher in a new chapter in America’s relationship with the Muslim world. On Tuesday, June 3, the Middle East Institute and the Arab American Institute co-hosted a discussion on how Arab attitudes have evolved in the five years following the speech. The panel included James Zogby, Marwan Muasher, Barbara Slavin, and Paul Salem, who moderated. The consensus:  while expectations for the Obama presidency did not live up to reality, his policy of non-intervention remains popular in the region.

The discussion was based on the results of a May 2014 Zogby poll, which was conducted across seven countries in the Arab world. The survey examined a host of issues, including the Arab-Israeli conflict, US policy on Syria, and the Arab world’s view of Iran. Unsurprisingly, Palestine was seen as the key obstacle to stability in the Middle East, followed by a perception of American over-interference in the region. The US approval rating did not break 50% in any of the countries surveyed, but Zogby noted a considerable increase from 2011. All three panelists attributed the uptick in American popularity to Obama’s retreat from the military interventionism of his predecessor.

There was one notable exception in the trend: Saudi attitudes towards the US have fallen sharply since 2011, largely because of America’s perceived ambivalence towards the conflict in Syria. Likewise, support for Iran has also fallen, due its support of the Assad regime.

Obama’s favorability ratings were higher that the US’s favorability ratings.  While the President’s lighter footprint in the world has softened Arab attitudes towards the US, America’s previous exploits in Iraq and Afghanistan have not been forgotten.

In every country polled, strong majorities said that maintaining good relations with the US is important. This suggests that there is no inherent ideological opposition to America. The majority of the Arab world’s qualms are with American policy.

Outside of the Gulf countries polled (Saudi Arabia and the UAE), Iran was not seen as a major destabilizing factor in the region. In fact, the President’s attempt to find a negotiated solution to the Iran nuclear impasse found a great deal of support outside the Gulf. According to Slavin, the insignificance of the Iranian nuclear issue in Arab public opinion is unsurprising, as Iran was never seen as a direct threat in much of the Arab world. In fact, she suggested that some derive a perverse satisfaction from the idea that a Middle Eastern country other than Israel might acquire nuclear weapons.

Muasher noted that the results of the survey highlighted an interesting paradox in Arab public opinion: while the Arab-Israeli conflict is cited as the primary challenge to US-Arab relations, it is followed closely by the perception that the US is overly meddlesome in the region. It was thus unclear how the respondents expected the conflict to be resolved, as an American-led resolution would necessitate American intervention. He also noted that support for US foreign policy was at its highest when it refrains from interfering in the region.

While an earlier poll found that in most Arab countrie, 65% or more opposed President Assad, this survey found little support for US intervention in the conflict, vindicating Obama’s policy of non-interference. Zobgy further suggested that support for Assad could in fact rise if the US chose to pursue a military option in Syria.

While American approval ratings are on the upswing, the poll found that both Iran and Turkey have lost the support they enjoyed earlier in the decade. Iran’s decline began with in 2006 and accelerated with the failed Green Revolution of 2009; however, all three panelists attributed the majority of the decline to Iran’s support of Assad. Turkey, which has dedicated the better part of the last twelve years to mending ties with its Arab neighbors, has seen its popularity fall in the wake of the Arab Spring. It was unclear why this started in 2011, as Erdogan’s heavy-handedness did not begin until 2012.

One unexpected finding was that only 21% of those polled in Lebanon thought the Syrian conflict was a pressing issue. Slavin suggested that this was due to the country’s diverse population, with close to two-thirds identifying as either Shiite or Christian and therefore more likely to sympathize with the regime and discount the conflict’s significance. Lebanon’s support for Iran also far outpaced the other countries in the survey, due to Iran’s generosity towards Lebanon following that country’s 2006 war with Israel.

Of all the countries polled, Palestinians were surprisingly the most likely to say that the US acted evenhandedly towards both Palestinians and Israelis (30%). According to Muasher, this is possibly because Palestinians are simply exhausted by the conflict and are willing to give the Americans the benefit of the doubt. Zogby added that Obama has gone further than other American presidents in emphasizing the importance of recognizing Palestinian rights.

Nonetheless, the speakers noted that if America remains unable or unwilling to negotiate a two-state solution, then it should step aside and allow someone else to take the lead—perhaps the EU, or the UN. America’s window of opportunity in this regard is closing fast. At some point it will taken out of the game, whether it chooses or not.

Ultimately, five years after his Cairo speech the sentiment is that Obama has not lived up to expectations. Nonetheless, public opinion has rebounded somewhat from its nadir in 2011.  This is primarily due to America’s policy of non-interference in the Middle East, and in spite of its failure to mediate a solution to Arab-Israeli crisis.

“We are living in the house that George [W. Bush] built,” Zogby said.  Had America not exhausted its resources and goodwill in Iraq, it might have been able to pursue other issues, including the peace process, more successfully.

 

Tags : , , , , ,
Tweet