Tag: NATO
Amnesty for what?
Rilind Latifi, a Kosovar graduate of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, explains:
The Kosovo parliament last week rejected a draft law on amnesty required as a result of the agreement reached on April 19 between the prime-ministers Hashim Thaçi and Ivica Dačić. The law is intended to facilitate integration of the Serbs in the north. It offers them protection from legal action due to their resistance to Kosovo’s constitutional order since the 2008 declaration of independence, after which they burned customs points and erected multiple barricades blocking free movement (including for the EU rule of law mission, NATO’s KFOR, and the Kosovo police). Serbia views the amnesty law as a tradeoff and precondition dismantling Belgrade’s governing structures in the north. Read more
Meanwhile in the Balkans
I did this interview Wednesday for Bedrudin Brljavac of the Turkish Anadolu agency in Sarajevo:
- In the aftermath of the accession of Croatia to the EU, do you think that the EU doors are still open to other Balkan countries as well, or has an idea about enlargement recently lose popularity among Europeans?
The door doesn’t really open until a country is ready to join. I think it will open for other Balkans countries, but only when they are well prepared.
- Today there has appeared an interview with former Higher representative Paddy Ashdown who said that after Croatia joined the EU and Serbia joins in the future, Bosnia will stay isolated. Do you think that Bosnia can indeed stay isolated and out of the EU in the long run? Do you think that the “process of Palestinisation of Bosnia” is real and possible? Read more
Peace picks June 17-21
1. The Future of Stability Operations: Lessons from Afghanistan, American Security Project, Monday June 17 / 12:30pm – 1:30pm
Venue: American Security Project
1100 New York Avenue, NW · Suite 710W, Washington, DC
7th Floor West Tower
Speakers: Sloan Mann, Eythan Sontag, Frank Kearney III, Howard Clark
The international community has learned a great deal about how to conduct stability operations in the last 12 years. This event will be a fact-based discussion with leading experts on stability operations. The panel will discuss key lessons from the experience in Afghanistan and how they can be applied to future conflict environments.
RSVP through email to:
events@americansecurityproject.org Read more
To Albin and Shpend from Ed
Ed Joseph, my colleague here at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, offers this open memo to our recent visitors from Kosovo, Albin Kurti and Shpend Ahmeti. They lead the “Self-Determination” Movement, which advocates a referendum on union with Albania and opposed the April agreement on normalization of relations with Belgrade. I will of course be prepared to publish their reply, should one be received:
MEMO
To: Albin Kurti; Shpend Ahmeti
From: Edward P. Joseph; Washington, DC
Date: 6 June, 2013
Subject: Five takeaways for Vetevendosje from the Visit to Washington
I’m sure you both have gotten a lot out of your visit. It was good to see you at the event at SAIS; I noted your diligent note-taking and was pleased to see that you saw this public event as a real exchange — both an opportunity for you to voice your views, including to a member of the Serbian Embassy, and as well to listen. Permit me to share five points that I hope you will consider further:
1. Speech may be free; but positions have their costs.
While you are free to voice your opinion on most anything — Serbia’s failure to change; unification with Albania, for example — you should note that free speech has its costs. Harping about Serbia’s internal failures opens the door wider for others to harp about organ or drug trafficking in Kosovo. You may not see an equivalence, and there may not be one; but the more you stray into comments about neighboring countries, the more it will seem to justify unflattering charges about Kosovo. It is your right to complain about unfair Serbian treatment of Kosovo; but it is foolish to wail about all that Serbia needs to change. Let others judge Serbia’s fitness; stick to commenting about the fitness of Kosovo. Read more
Peace Picks, June 10-14
1. Drones and the Future of Counterterrorism in Pakistan, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Monday, June 10 / 5:00pm – 6:30pm
Venue: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20036
Speakers: Frederic Grare, Samina Ahmed
The future use of drones in Pakistan is uncertain after President Obama’s recent speech on national security. Washington has now satisfied some of the demands of Pakistan’s incoming prime minister, Nawaz Sharif. But while drone strikes were seen in Islamabad as a violation of the country’s sovereignty, they were also arguably an effective counterterrorism mechanism. Samina Ahmed will discuss the future use of drones in Pakistan. Frederic Grare will moderate.
Register for the event here:
http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/06/10/drones-and-future-of-counterterrorism-in-pakistan/g7f0
2. Tyranny of Consensus: A Reception with Author Janne E. Nolan, Century Foundation, Monday, June 10 / 5:00pm – 6:30pm
Venue: Stimson Center, 1111 19th Street Northwest, 12th Floor, Washington D.C., DC 20036
Speakers: Janne E. Nolan
In “Tyranny of Consensus,” Nolan examines three cases-the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the proxy war with the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, and the 1998 embassy bombings in East Africa-to find the limitations of American policy-makers in understanding some of the important developments around the world. Assisted by a working group of senior practitioners and policy experts, Nolan finds that it is often the impulse to protect the already arrived at policy consensus that is to blame for failure. Without access to informed discourse or a functioning “marketplace of ideas,” policy-makers can find themselves unable or unwilling to seriously consider possible correctives even to obviously flawed strategies.
Register for the event here:
http://tcf.org/news_events/detail/tyranny-of-consensus-a-reception-with-author-janne-e.-nolan
Banks, Church and government
Son Adam, who spent six of his first eleven years living in Italy, suggested in a Tweet:
Someone needs to do the “no, Italy is actually a healthy, functioning democracy” slatepitch.
That’s because I had suggested something along those lines at dinner Thursday night. He’s right. And I guess I’m the guy to do it.
I served in Italy as an American diplomat 1977-81 and 1987-93, leaving Rome as Charge’ d’affaires ad interim. That means I was a cog in the diplomatic apparatus that prevented the Italian Communist party from coming to power–even as a junior coalition member. But the policy was already fraying when I got to Italy as science counselor in 1977 and joined the cultural and labor attache’s in a palazzo revolt. We could not do our respective jobs without contacts with Communists, which were still reserved for a single political officer within the Embassy.
The revolt was successful in part: two of us were authorized to establish contacts with the Communists. I began talking regularly with the party secretary’s brother, Giovanni Berlinguer. The cultural attache’ (and the Ambassador in secret) started talking with Giorgio Napolitano, now finishing up with distinction his mandate as President of the Republic.
Back in Rome when the Berlin wall fell in 1989, I became deputy chief of mission in 1990 and asked for Washington’s permission to lift all restrictions on the Communist party. The first request was denied, but by 1991 it had been approved. For the first time since World War II, Italy could choose its governments freely without endangering its position within NATO and in Washington.
There ensued more than 20 years of bizarre politics. The left came to power several times to fix the nation’s budget problems, relying in part on competent and tough-minded technocrats. Then Silvio Berlusconi, a populist right winger who captured the imagination of Italy’s many small businessmen, would come to power and end the tough fiscal policies, which naturally had made the left less than well-liked. The net result was a lengthy period of economic stagnation, with Italy’s debt reaching 120% of GDP. Mario Monti, the current prime minister, is the latest in the line of technocrats expected to do the right thing, even though it is not popular.
Monti is struggling in the polls with the buffoonish Berlusconi and Beppe Grillo, a real live comedian whose iconoclasm brings Italians into the piazza. The left, associated with fiscal probity, had been sliding (but polls are prohibited in the final two weeks of the campaign). Italians have had enough of taxes and austerity. They want hard-edged cheer (Grillo is good at that) and growth (which Berlusconi promises but never delivers).
The Italian electoral system is no longer the one that produced revolving door governments during the Cold War. Governments now tend to last a few years. The rules in the lower house favor whichever party gets the largest number of seats with a “premium” of additional seats. But the system in the Senate is different, leading to the possibility of a divided parliament. The European and American press are in a bit of a panic about this, worrying that Berlusconi might return to Palazzo Chigi or that there will be a hung parliament.
But let’s take a step back: what we’ve got here is a free election, if not a fair one since Berlusconi controls most of the private media in the country (and until he left the prime ministry most of the public media as well). Foreigners are certainly interested and even trying to influence the outcome, but no one has a veto. It is a virtue and a privilege to meet financial difficulty through democratic means. I’ll bet Italy manages it as well as Washington, where we already have a divided legislature. Next Friday’s sequester, if it is triggered, will not crown American democracy with glory.
Also concerning are the scandals in two of Italy’s most distinguished institutions: the world’s oldest bank, Monte dei Paschi di Siena (MPS), and its oldest autocracy, the Vatican. MPS is in serious difficulty, having concealed important data from its supervisors at the Bank of Italy (which then had to provide a big secret loan to tide MPS over). The Vatican faces so far unsubstantiated charges that it harbors a cabal of homosexual cardinals, news of which might be implicated in the Pope’s resignation.
A run on Italian banks would be a really serious problem, one that could once again shake the Eurozone to its core and end the slow normalization that has been occurring in European financial markets. It is far too early to imagine where the Vatican scandal may lead, but at the very least the next Pope will have a major rehabilitation job to do. Banks, Church and government in Italy are all facing serious challenges. I for one am pleased that democratic institutions will be the means by which Italians come to terms with them.