Tag: Nagorno-Karabakh
Admire Russia’s provocative statecraft, even if its objectives are odious
Russian President Putin is feeling his oats. He is pushing against the West along a front that extends from the Baltics to Syria and possibly beyond. Here is an incomplete account of his maneuvers:
- The Baltics: Russia has concentrated troops along its border with Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. Moscow is also conducting menacing exercises and violating Allies’ airspace.
- Belarus: Again lots of military exercises, but more inventively Putin has encouraged President Lukashenko to import Kurds from Iraq and try to push them across the border into Poland and thus the EU. This constitutes intentional weaponization of third-country nationals.
- Ukraine: Moscow has (again) concentrated military forces on the border with the apparent intention of threatening an expansion of Russian-controlled territory inside Ukraine beyond Donetsk, Luhansk, and Crimea. Moscow is also raising gas prices and shipping more gas to the West avoiding Ukraine and thus reducing its revenues.
- The Balkans: Russia is giving and selling arms to a vastly re-armed Serbia, is financing the Serb entity inside Bosnia and Herzegovina and encouraging secession talk there, and has gained vastly increased influence through proxies inside Montenegro.
- Turkey: Moscow has sold its advanced air defense system to Turkey, which as a result has lost its role in manufacturing components of the American F-35 fighter and will likely look to Russia for modernization of its fighter fleet.
- Syria: Russian air forces intervened in Syria in 2015, when rebels were seriously threatening the regime in Damascus. Russian forces have occasionally tested their mettle against the Americans and US-supported forces in the northeast.
Russian military forces have also taken on a “peacekeeping” role inside Azerbaijan after its 2020 clash with Armenian-supported secessionists in Nagorno-Karabakh. Moscow’s troops were already stationed inside Armenia. Prior Russian interventions in Georgia and Moldova were explicitly aimed at preventing NATO and EU membership, respectively, and have resulted in separate governance of Russian-controlled territories within those states.
For Putin, not only NATO but also the EU is an enemy. He is right: the EU and NATO are committed to open societies, democratic governance, and the rule of law, which are anathema to Putin. He wants none of their members on Russia’s borders or even nearby. The Eurasian Economic Union is intended as the economic dimension of his fight against the West. He is also seeking to weaken the EU and NATO from within. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban is Russia’s handmaiden within the EU. Montenegro risks becoming one inside NATO.
It is difficult to know how the West should respond to all this. Neither the EU nor NATO is skilled at anticipating and preventing trouble. Nor can they coordinate and focus resources as quickly as an autocrat can. But it is important to recognize that for Russia all these pieces are part of the same puzzle. Obsessed with being surrounded, Russia responds by trying to expand and establish autocratic hegemony in what it regards as its near abroad, even if that designation is no longer so commonly used. You have to admire Russia’s provocative statecraft, even if the objectives are odious.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, Novemberr 27
WaPo reports closure of 10 US bases in Afghanistan.
China escalates trade war with Australia.
Fight in Taiwan parliament over allowing US pork imports.
David Brooks on US political divisions.
Puzzling purge of Defense Policy Board.
Former APSA Fellow Paul Musgrave reviews IR theory in light of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
You don’t have to know details of the Amendment Tree in the Senate, only that it is the way the majority leader can block consideration of any amendments. Here’s a detailed example from last year.
And attached is an excerpt from a CRS paper that shows how often it has been used lately.
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:
Stevenson’s army, November 13
NYT has another deep[ dive on what was wrong with polling this year.
Looks like drones won the war in Nagorno-Karabakh.
NYT sees new cold war in the Arctic.
Outgoing ambassador said US troop numbers in Syria were hidden from Trump.
More bad ideas from McGregor.
Gen. Milley wrongly seems to suggest only US troops don’t take oath to a person. In fact: United States armed forces take an oath to support and defend a piece of paper—the Constitution. The British military take an oath of allegiance to the monarch. German forces swear to defend the law and liberty of the people. The Japanese vow to maintain the nation’s independence and peace. Russians swear loyalty to the Fatherland. Perhaps not surprisingly, the French armed forces, after five republics, two empires, numerous monarchies and several attempted military coups, take no oath.
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:
Peace Picks | October 5 – October 9, 2020
Notice: Due to recent public health concerns, upcoming events are only available via live stream.
1. Oil, Arms, Drones, and Regional Tensions: The Second Berlin Conference on Libya and Crafting a New Interim Government | October 5, 2020 | 2:00 – 3:00 PM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
With the War for Tripoli won in the late Spring by the defenders and a new mutually hurting stalemate taking hold around Jufra and Sirte over the course of the summer, the arena of Libya’s Wars of Post-Gaddafi Succession have shifted to cyberspace and the negotiating table. Amid a flurry of influence operations, attempts to manipulate media optics, and the Prime Minister pledging to go into retirement if a suitable successor is found, the last weeks of September witnessed a flurry of internationally-hosted mediation dialogues on Libya taking place in Morocco, Egypt, Geneva, and Russia. On October 5, a second virtual Berlin Conference is slated to tackle the interlocking issues of oil production, distribution of revenues, the arms embargo, mercenaries and the increasingly polarization among NATO allies with France and Greece on one side and Turkey on the other.
What are the possible trajectories of Libya’s conflict from here? What sort of entity might replace the GNA? What is the future of Libya’s economic system as new mechanisms for the distribution of oil revenues now being debated? How can international actors cooperate to prevent spoilers from scuppering progress?
Speakers:
Deborah Jones: Former US Ambassador to Libya
Wolfgang Pusztai: Former Austrian Military attache to Libya
Jason Pack: Founder, Libya-Analysis LLC; non-resident scholar, MEI
Jonathan Winer, moderator: Non-resident scholar, MEI; former US Special Envoy to Libya
2. Foreign Policy and the 2020 Election: Implications for Europe | October 5, 2020 | 9:00 – 10:15 AM EDT | Brookings Institute| Register Here
With the 2020 election looming amidst a trend of U.S. disengagement with Europe, both the American presidency and the future of Europe are on the ballot in November. What are the implications of the presidential election for the trans-Atlantic relationship and for U.S. foreign policy toward Europe? Would a second Trump administration follow through on threats to abandon the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), leaving Europeans to their own devices on matters of security and defense? Would a Biden administration seek to rebuild bridges with its European partners, reverting even partially to a pre-Trump conception of America’s role in the world? And how would a geo-political Europe react to these changes?
On October 5, the Center on the United States and Europe (CUSE) at Brookings will convene a panel discussion on the implications of the 2020 election for U.S. foreign policy, in particular toward Europe.
Speakers:
Célia Belin: Visiting Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center on the United States and Europe
William A. Galston: Ezra K. Zilkha Chair and Senior Fellow – Governance Studies
Fiona Hill: Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center on the United States and Europe
Thomas Wright, moderator: Director – Center on the United States and EuropeSenior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Project on International Order and Strategy
3. Has Trumpian populism succeeded? | October 5, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | American Enterprise Institute | Register Here
The election of Donald Trump in 2016 brought a populist into the White House. With the president’s first term nearing completion, what is the verdict? Has populism been a force for good in economic policy during the Trump years? Will populism be a force for good in economic policy going forward? And what about populism on the political left?
University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan sees success, as described in his new book, “You’re Hired!: Untold Successes and Failures of a Populist President” (Republic Book Publishers, 2020). AEI economist Michael R. Strain has a different view, presented in his new book, “The American Dream Is Not Dead: (But Populism Could Kill It)” (Templeton Press, 2020). Join them to discuss.
Speakers:
Casey Mulligan: Professor in Economics, University of Chicago
James Pethokoukis: DeWitt Wallace Fellow, AEI
Michael R. Strain: Director of Economic Policy Studies, AEI
4. What Does the Taliban Want? | October 6, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:30 AM EDT | Wilson Center | Register Here
Peace talks have begun between the Afghan government and the Taliban. One major question is how the Taliban, which is often vague about its goals beyond getting foreign troops out of Afghanistan, views key issues related to the peace process. This online-only event, organized by the Wilson Center’s Asia Program in partnership with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, will assess what we know–and don’t know–about the Taliban’s position on political systems, women’s rights, international terrorism, and its relationship with Pakistan; what this all may tell us about the Taliban’s future decisions and actions; and what the implications are for the peace process..
Speakers:
Ibraheem Bahiss: Independent Analyst
Malalai Bashir: Senior Journalist, Radio Azadi, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s Afghan Service
Dr. Orzala Nemat: Director, Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit
Rahimullah Yusufzai: Resident Editor, The News International
Abraham Denmark: Director, Asia Program
Michael Kugelman, moderator: Deputy Director and Senior Associate for South Asia
5. Online Event: Supporting Marginalized Groups amid Lebanon’s Cascading Crises | October 6, 2020 | 9:00 – 10:00 AM EDT | CSIS | Register Here
Lebanon has been home to vulnerable communities for centuries, most recently becoming home to perhaps a million refugees fleeing the Syrian conflict. Now, as the country reels amid compounding economic, public health, and political crises, refugees join expatriate domestic workers and others among Lebanon’s most marginalized communities in facing heightened risk.
Sahar Atrache, Yasmin Kayali, and Banchi Yimer will join us for a discussion of the threats facing Lebanon’s most vulnerable communities, and what stakeholders can do to support and empower them. Throughout the event, participants are encouraged to submit questions to the guests and host, Jon B. Alterman, via the provided link.
Sahar Atrache is the senior advocate for the Middle East at Refugees International. Prior to joining Refugees International, Sahar was the senior advocacy officer at the Syrian American Medical Society (SAMS) and a senior analyst on the Middle East and North Africa at International Crisis Group.
Yasmin Kayali is the co-founder and CCO of Basmeh & Zeitooneh, a non-profit organization launched in 2012 that seeks to empower Syrians in exile to live lives of dignity. Basmeh & Zeitooneh designs and delivers effective relief, education, and livelihood and protection services to marginalized communities from six centers across Lebanon.
Banchi Yimer is a former domestic worker who lived in Lebanon for nearly a decade. Alongside fellow Ethiopian migrant workers, she founded Egna Legna (“Us for Ourselves”), a community-based organization working on migrant domestic workers’ issues and women’s issues in Lebanon and Ethiopia.
Speakers:
Sahar Atrache: Senior Advocate for the Middle East, Refugees International
Yasmin Kayali: Co-founder and CCO, Basmeh and Zeitooneh
Banchi Yimer: Founder and Director, Egna Legna
6. Public Opinion, Annexation, and Normalization: A 2020 Zogby Research Poll | October 7, 2020 | 12:00 – 1:00 PM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
In 2019 and 2020, Zogby Research Services polled in several Arab countries and Israel to assess attitudes on a number of topics related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Arab Peace Initiative, and the desirability of normalization before a final resolution of the conflict. The findings collected were surprising and instructive of a nuanced change in attitudes.
The Middle East Institute (MEI) is pleased to host a panel of experts to discuss the polling data and the potential implications they have on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Speakers:
Khaled Elgindy: Director, Program on Palestine and Palestinian-Israeli Affairs, MEI
Lara Friedman: President, Foundation for Middle East Peace
James Zogby: Managing director, Zogby Research Services; founder and president, Arab American Institute
Paul Salem, moderator: President, MEI
7. Ten Years of Pan-Arab Protests: Understanding the New Dynamics of Change | October 7, 2020 | 2:00 – 3:15 PM EDT | Wilson Center | Register Here
In 2019 and early 2020, the Middle East and North Africa witnessed widespread protest movements in Algeria, Sudan, Lebanon, and Iraq marking a decade since the Arab uprisings started in 2010. As the COVID-19 pandemic spread, these movements largely subsided under strict, temporary lockdowns. However, the coronavirus exacerbated socioeconomic conditions and inequalities, thus provoking renewed street demonstrations in Lebanon and Iraq as well as other countries across the region such as Tunisia, Morocco and Jordan. As MENA governments grapple with the adverse economic impact of the pandemic and the deterioration of public services, more popular unrest is likely to erupt. In this timely discussion, former Wilson Fellow, analyst and journalist Rami Khouri, offers an in-depth comparative analysis of the 2019 protest movements in Algeria, Sudan, Lebanon and Iraq in dialogue with Middle East Program fellow Marina Ottaway and Bard College professor and Jadaliyya co-editor Ziad Abu Rish.
Speakers:
Rami Khouri: Former Public Policy Scholar; Director of Global Engagement, American University of Beirut, columnist, Agence Global Syndicate, USA, and The New Arab, London and Nonresident Senior Fellow, Harvard Kennedy School
Marina Ottaway: Middle East Fellow, Former Senior Research Associate and Head of the Middle East Program, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Ziad Abu-Rish: Co-Director, MA Program in Human Rights and the Arts, Bard College; Co-Editor, Jadaliyya
Merissa Khurma, moderator: Program Manager, Middle East Program
8. From the Sidelines of Nagorno-Karabakh: Georgia, Russia, and Turkey | October 7, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:30 AM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan has faced its largest eruption of fighting since a 1994 ceasefire partially brokered by the United States. Previous escalations between Armenian and Azerbaijani forces have been smothered within a few days. However, the current hostilities continue to escalate and the possibility of a large scale war between the two states is becoming more likely. Russia has historically supported Armenia while maintaining close relations with both former Soviet republics. On the other hand, Turkey has announced its unconditional support of Azerbaijan and appears to be ready to provide military capabilities to the Azeris. Georgia has always maintained close neighborly relations with both Armenia and Azerbaijan and now has expressed its willingness to facilitate a peaceful resolution.
What are the regional consequences of a full out war between Armenia and Azerbaijan? What role do Turkey, Russia, and Georgia play in the conflict? What are the factors that inhibit long-standing peace? Why does the conflict concern the United States?
Speakers:
Neil Hauer: Non-resident scholar, Frontier Europe Initiative, MEI
Victor Kipiani: Chair, Geocase
Maxim A. Suchkov: Non-resident scholar, Conflict Resolution and Track II Dialogues Program, MEI
Gonul Tol, moderator: Director of Turkey Program; senior fellow, Frontier Europe Initiative, MEI
9. Lessons from Africa: Building Resilience through Community-Based Health Systems | October 8, 2020 | 9:30 – 11:00 AM EDT | Wilson Center | Register Here
COVID-19 has revealed shortcomings in the health systems of countries all over the world. In sub-Saharan Africa, the health crisis threatens to severely curtail already limited public health services and exacerbate fragility. Yet, despite immense hurdles, past crises have shown that innovative decision-making and locally-led interventions can go a long way in improving the resilience and responsiveness of health systems. Please join the Wilson Center, in partnership with the Population Institute, for a discussion with experts on the role of trust in enabling crisis response and how a more holistic approach to access to services in addition to healthcare, like girls’ education and maternal health, ultimately increases the resilience of at-risk communities.
Speakers:
Mohammed Abdulaziz: Head of Division, Disease Control and Prevention, Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention
Uzma Alam, PhD: Researcher, Africa Institute for Health Policy Foundation; Senior Program Officer, Africa Academy of Sciences
Juliet Nabyonga-Orem, PhD: Team Lead, Health Financing and Investment, Universal Health Coverage/Life Course Cluster, World Health Organization
Dr. Raj Panjabi: CEO, Last Mile Health; Assistant Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School and the Division of Global Health Equity at Brigham & Women’s Hospital
Ambassador Deborah R. Malac: Former U.S. Ambassador to Uganda and former U.S. Ambassador to Liberia; Career Foreign Service Officer, U.S. Department of State; Senior Fellow, Population Institute
Sarah B. Barnes, moderator:Project Director, Maternal Health Initiative
10. Can Teaching Students Real Debate Reduce Political Polarization? | October 9, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | Brookings Institute | Register Here
In the midst of a highly polarized election, with an already polarized electorate, it may seem there is little hope for bridging the deep divisions in American society.
Brookings Nonresident Senior Fellow Robert Litan argues that teaching middle school and high school students the principles of competitive debate will make for more informed citizens and voters. Litan’s new book, “Resolved: How Debate Can Revolutionize Education and Help Save our Democracy,” makes the case for teaching middle school and high school students how to have reasoned debates where the participants use evidence and reason to constructively engage in civil discourse.
On October 9, Litan will be joined by Darrell West, vice president and director of Governance Studies at Brookings, and Norman Ornstein, AEI resident scholar, to explore how the principles of competitive debate can improve students’ lifelong work skills while making them more informed and demanding voters, and whether an engaged electorate will in turn change the way political candidates campaign for the better, improving–and maybe even saving–our democracy.
Speakers:
Robert E. Litan: Nonresident Senior Fellow – Economic Studies
Norm Ornstein: Resident Scholar – American Enterprise Institute
Darrell M. West: Vice President and Director – Governance Studies, Senior Fellow – Center for Technology Innovation
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Civilians at risk, sovereignty is the objective
Crisis Group’s reporting on the military and diplomatic situation in Nagorno-Karabakh seems to me on the mark. Azerbaijan has the advantage and is pressing it with Turkish assistance and Israeli weapons, despite the mountainous topography, impending winter, and Russia’s alliance with Armenia.
The only real questions are how far Baku and Yerevan are willing and able to go. Will Baku stop short of completely retaking its sovereign territory, or try to go all the way to Stepanakert and even the Armenian border? Will Yerevan throw its main forces into the fight, with or without Russian support?
The implications for civilians could be dramatic. Something like 145,000 people live in Nagorno-Karabakh, almost entirely Armenians at this point. They are unlikely to stick around if Baku presses forward. They might even be called out by Armenia, which regards them as its citizens, if Yerevan decides to put its forces into the fight, in order to clear the battlespace. Self-cleansing of this sort is common. It could well lead to a dramatic demographic shift if Baku were to prevail.
Azerbaijan, a secular autocracy whose population is overwhelmingly Muslim, has long nurtured the ambition of retaking all of its sovereign territory. Baku isn’t likely to be too careful about its wartime obligations to Armenian civilians. It views the Nagorno-Karabakhis and the secessionist republic they have supported for three decades as the enemy, not least because they ethnically cleansed Azerbaijanis in past conflicts. The difference this time is that Baku is far stronger than it was even at the time of the last major clash in 2016.
Whether Azerbaijan is strong enough this time around to re-establish its internationally recognized sovereignty is not yet clear. Few details are coming from the conflict zone. But Baku’s current lack of interest in a ceasefire and Yerevan’s desire for one tell us what we need to know about how the clashes are going. Let’s hope however that Armenian civilians do not end up paying a high price for the failure of negotiations and compromise all these years.
Here is what Azerbaijani President Aliyev has to say. And here is Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan’s version.
RSS - Posts
