Best guesses are a Democratic win in the House, Republicans retaining the Senate. But if 2016 taught us anything it is not to depend on polling. Polls are heavily dependent on assumptions about turnout, which are particularly difficult this time around. There are lots of indications that more people will vote than usual in midterm elections.
What difference will it make? In foreign policy, the President has free rein. He can pretty much do as he likes, unless legislation constrains him. That is unlikely if the Democrats control only the House, not the Senate.
But there are some issues on which sentiment among both Republicans and Democrats in Congress is different from the White House’s inclinations. Support for NATO and understanding of the European Union, opposition to Russian malfeasance worldwide, sympathy for refugees, doubts about the Yemen war and North Korea, interest in bringing US troops home from Afghanistan and the Middle East, and support for open societies and free economies are all more evident in Congress than in the Administration. If they use their oversight responsibilities well, House Democrats could make common cause on at least some of these issues with like-minded Republicans. That would strengthen the professionals inside government and might lead to some modest course corrections.
But on other issues Democratic control of the House is unlikely to make much difference. They would have preferred that the US stay in the Iran nuclear deal, but they aren’t going to speak up, for fear of being tagged as pro-Iranian, against the renewed sanctions the Administration has imposed. Nor will Democrats strongly oppose tariffs, which some of the party’s traditional support base likes. Certainly China has few sympathizers among Democrats. Support for Israel among Democrats is strong, making it unlikely there will be strong dissent from Trump’s heavy lean against the Palestinians. The areas of bipartisan agreement on foreign policy are not as wide as once they were, but there are still some in which Trump can rely on the House Democrats to be uncritical.
Apart from the specific foreign policy issues, the significance of this midterm election lies in the choice of what kind of America its citizens want. In his pursuit of making America great again, President Trump has tried hard to sharpen the lines of difference between Democrats and Republicans, to appeal to racists, anti-Semites, and xenophobes, and to frighten Americans into voting for incumbents. They include people whose ideal is an America that treats dictators as friends, closes itself off from much of the world, treats even allies as threats, and arms itself to deal with a world in which no norms are the norm. The Democrats, while focusing mainly on domestic issues like education and health care, are projecting a more open and optimistic vision of an America more engaged diplomatically and ready to maintain and expand international norms and commitments.
This is a serious choice. Go vote.
PS: A friend sent this:
I write this on the verge of the 2018 by elections in the United States. I implore you to make this a repudiation of the divisive and anti-democratic tendencies of Trump. As many of you might know, I served 25 years in the US Army defending the Constitution that Trump flouts almost on a daily basis. His rants against the media reveals his distaste for the 1st Amendment (freedom of press and expression). His desire to repeal the 14th Amendment with an executive order shows his lack of knowledge about how Amendments evolve. His political theatre of sending US troops to the border area suggests he does not understand that they cannot engage in law and order enforcement as forbidden by the posse comitatus act of Congress. Most importantly, he has the instincts of a dictator and employs many of the same tactics as used by President Orban who has become an authoritarian leader of Hungary that has attained his power by turning segments of the nation against one another, racism and control of the press and justice system. With 16 years serving with the UN in Former Yugoslavia, I have witnessed first hand how such divisiveness and artificially induced hate of the “other” can destroy a nation. Vote and repudiate Trump and his enablers.
Here are just a few of the nonsense claims I am hearing a few days before the American midterm elections, which will decide the January majorities in the House and Senate as well as control of state legislatures and governors:
The migrant caravan in southern Mexico is a threat to the national security of the United States. It is not. The few thousand mostly women and children walking north are still at least a month away from the Texas border. Judging from past “caravans” of this sort, fewer than half will arrive there and present themselves as asylum-seekers, a claim that will be adjudicated on a case-by-case basis in accordance with US law. There is no evidence at all that there are “unknown Middle Easterners” and gang members in the group, as President Trump has claimed.
George Soros and other Democrats financed the migrant caravan. There is also no evidence whatsoever for this claim. In Latin America, Soros’ Open Society Foundation addresses mainly governance and human rights, focused on Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia. I’d guess the program is far more likely to contribute to people staying in their home countries than leaving them, by addressing local grievances and improving government performance.
The US military deployment will protect us. No, because the US military is not allowed to do so inside the US. Nor will it fire, as President Trump has suggested, on stone throwers. The 5000 or so troops he is ordering to the border (supposedly to be increased later) will do support tasks for Customs and Border Protection, which has handled similar caravans in the past without much strain. This is an unnecessary and costly deployment ordered purely for political reasons: to show the President is doing something about the threat he has hyped.
President Trump has negotiated a great nuclear agreement with North Korea. There is no nuclear agreement with Pyongyang, only a one-page statement that is not as strong as previous North Korean commitments to denuclearization. Kim Jong-un has stiffed Secretary Pompeo, who has been trying to convert that very general commitment into a real agreement. The lovefest has produced no offspring. The North Koreans have not even produced a rudimentary inventory of their nuclear program, never mind signed up to the kind of detailed constraints that Obama imposed on Iran in the nuclear deal from which Trump has withdrawn.
The US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) is much better than the lousy North American Free Trade Agreement(NAFTA) and is already having an impact. The two are basically the same, with some updates that include both things the US wanted and things Mexico and Canada wanted. USMCA doesn’t go into effect until 2020. NAFTA governs trade until then.
Trump has been great for the economy. The economy is good, largely due to the almost eight years of growth under President Obama. The employment gains and fall in unemployment since January 2017 are nothing more than continuation of the what was already happening:
But there are storm clouds on the horizon: short-term interest rates and inflation are headed up, the stock market is teetering, and the Trump tariff war is endangering US exports and increasing the price of US imports.
7. The Republicans will provide better health care, with insurance for people with pre-existing conditions. This proposition doesn’t pass the laugh test. The Administration is determined to annihilate the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Without Obamacare, which ensures that healthy people have incentives to sign up for health insurance, there is no way to cover pre-existing conditions except by charging market rates that will eliminate coverage for most people with them. No one should be fooled.
This is the flim flam election: a test of whether Americans can see through the lies and realize that they have been conned. I’m not predicting the outcome, but I will canvas over the weekend in Virginia’s 8th Congressional District and hope everyone I know will be trying to get the vote out.
What Really Works to Prevent Election Violence? | Monday, October 29 | 9:30 am – 11:30 am | United States Institute of Peace | 2301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20037 | Register Here
One in five elections worldwide is marred by violence—from burned ballot boxes to violent suppression of peaceful rallies, to assassinations of candidates. A USIP study of programs to prevent violence suggests focusing on improving the administration and policing of elections. The study, of elections in Kenya and Liberia, found no evidence that programs of voter consultation or peace messaging were effective there. Join USIP to discuss this important new report.
Governments and international organizations invest in many programs—youth engagement, election observation, police training, and civic education—to help poorly governed states or developing democracies hold credible elections. USIP’s new report, “What Works in Preventing Election Violence,” is a piece of the evidence needed to learn which programs work and which do not. Elections experts from Kenya, Liberia and leading U.S. pro-democracy institutions will review the findings of this report against their own experiences. Take part in the conversation on Twitter with #ElectingPeace.
Speakers
Pat Merloe Senior Associate and Director for Election Programs, NDI
Oscar Bloh Chairman, Elections Coordination Committee (ECC, Liberia)
Inken von Borzyskowski Assistant Professor, Florida State University
Jonas Claes, facilitator Senior Program Officer, Center for Applied Conflict Transformation, USIP
Debra Liang-Fenton, facilitator Senior Program Officer, Center for Applied Conflict Transformation, USIP
2. Thinking Strategically About Human Rights Challenges in Negotiations with North Korea | Monday, October 29 | 10 am – 11 am | Heritage Foundation | 214 Massachusetts Ave NE Washington, DC 20002 | Register Here
Prior to the summit between President Trump and Kim Jong-un, the international community underscored the need to raise human rights concerns in negotiations with North Korea. Despite President Trump’s focus on North Korea’s human rights challenges at the State of the Union and notable meetings with North Korean refugees, human rights were seemingly left out of the conversation in Singapore. Since that time, the U.S. government has said little on human rights issues and reports from South Korea indicate that human rights are not a priority there either. The prospect of a second summit between Trump and Kim is an opportunity where the administration can and should express concerns over Kim Jong-un’s egregious human rights track record. Join us for a conversation on how and why raising human rights issues advances U.S. national security objectives.
Featuring
Jung Pak, Ph.D.
Senior Fellow and SK-Korea Foundation Chair in Korea Studies, Brookings Institution
Greg Scarlatoiu
Executive Director, The Committee for Human Rights in North Korea
Dan Aum
Director of the Washington, D.C. Office , National Bureau for Asian Research
Hosted by:
Olivia Enos
Policy Analyst, Asian Studies Center
3. Unraveling the Web: Dismantling Transnational Organized Crime Networks in the Americas | Tuesday, October 30 | 1 pm – 3:35 pm | American Enterprise Institute, Cohosted by Federalist Society | 1789 Massachusetts Avenue NW Washington, DC 20036 | Register Here
The United States and its neighbors face an ever-evolving threat of transnational organized crime. Last year, AEI released a tactical report on how US policymakers and law enforcement can target this threat. The Trump administration has been proactive in confronting threat networks close to home in the Americas. However, there is much more work to be done to dismantle criminal syndicates. How can policymakers bolster regional security cooperation, help local economies affected by these groups, and ensure US agencies have the resources they need for this fight?
Join AEI and the Federalist Society for a discussion on the Trump administration’s options in the fight against transnational organized crime in the Americas. Assistant Secretary for Terrorist Financing Marshall Billingslea will deliver opening remarks, followed by panel discussions.
Agenda
12:45 PM Registration
1:00 PM Opening remarks: Marshall Billingslea, US Treasury Department
1:35 PM Q&A
1:45 PM Panel discussion I
Participants: Douglas Farah, IBI Consultants Emanuele Ottolenghi, Foundation for Defense of Democracies Celina Realuyo, National Defense University Moderator: Roger F. Noriega, AEI
2:20 PM Q&A
2:30 PM Break
2:35 PM Panel discussion II
Participants: William Brownfield, US Department of State (former) Clay R. Fuller, AEI Patrick Hovakimian, Department of Justice Welby Leaman, Walmart
Moderator: James Dunlop, Jones Day
3:25 PM Q&A
3:35 PM Adjournment
4. The Protection of Civilians in U.S. Partnered Operations | Tuesday, October 30 | 3 pm – 4:30 pm | Center for Strategic and International Studies in partnership with the Center for Civilians in Conflict and InterAction| 1616 Rhode Island Avenue, NW Washington DC 20036 | Register Here
Join us for the report launch of “The Protection of Civilians in U.S. Partnered Operations,” a joint initiative between the CSIS International Security Program, the Center for Civilians in Conflict, and InterAction. The event agenda is as follows:
Agenda
3:00 PM – 3:10 PM: Briefing: Report Findings
Daniel R. Mahanty, Director of the U.S. Program, Center for Civilians in Conflict
Jenny McAvoy, Director of Protection, InterAction
3:10 PM – 4:30 PM: Moderated Discussion: Protection of Civilians in U.S. Partnered Operations
Charles “Cob” Blaha, Director, Office of Security and Human Rights, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, U.S. Department of State
Alexandra Boivin, Head of Regional Delegation for the United States and Canada, International Committee of the Red Cross
Amanda Catanzano, Senior Director, International Programs Policy and Advocacy, International Rescue Committee
Mark Swayne, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Stability and Humanitarian Affairs, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, U.S. Department of Defense
Moderator: Melissa Dalton, Senior Fellow and Deputy Director, International Security Program, and Director, Cooperative Defense Project, Center for Strategic and International Studies
5. The China Debate: Are US and Chinese long-term interests fundamentally incompatible? | Tuesday, October 30 | 3:30 pm – 5 pm | Brookings Institution, Cohosted by Yale Law School | 1775 Massachusetts Avenue NW Washington, DC 20036 | Register Here
The first two years of Donald Trump’s presidency have coincided with an intensification in competition between the United States and China. Across nearly every facet of the relationship—trade, investment, technological innovation, military dialogue, academic exchange, relations with Taiwan, the South China Sea—tensions have risen and cooperation has waned. To some observers, the more competitive nature of U.S.-China relations was long in the making; to others, it is the outgrowth of recent decisions made by leaders in Washington and Beijing.
On Tuesday, October 30, Evan Osnos will moderate a public debate about the future of U.S.-China relations. Two teams of distinguished experts will examine whether or not U.S. and Chinese interests are “fundamentally incompatible,” as a recent survey by Foreign Affairs posed. Both sides will consider areas where U.S. and Chinese vital interests converge and diverge, whether each country’s national ambitions are reconcilable with the other’s goals, how the United States can best manage great power competition with China, and how domestic politics factor in within each country.
Moderator:
EvanOsnosP
Nonresident Fellow – Foreign Policy, John L. Thornton China Center
Team Yes:
Evan Medeiros
Penner Family Chair in Asian Studies – Georgetown University
Thomas Wright
Director – Center on the United States and Europe, Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Project on International Order and Strategy
Team No:
David M. Lampton
Hyman Professor and Direcotr of China Studies Emeritus – Johns Hopkins University SAIS
Susan A. Thornton
Senior Fellow – Paul Tsai China Center, Yale Law School, Former Acting Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs – U.S. Department of State
6. Saving Democracy: The Constitutional Dimension | Thursday, November 1 | 9 am – 10:15 am | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace | 1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW Washington, DC 20036 | Register Here
With global democracy facing serious doubts about its basic health and longevity, comparative studies of safeguards and threats to democracy are multiplying. University of Chicago law professor Tom Ginsburg will join Carnegie’s Thomas Carothers to discuss the constitutional dimensions of democratic decay and survival.
In a new book, How to Save a Constitutional Democracy, Ginsburg and Aziz Z. Huq analyze lessons from around the world about how constitutions sometimes help and sometimes hurt democracy, including a hard comparative look at the U.S. Constitution and its role in America’s democratic troubles. In this session, Ginsburg will present the main findings of their study, including proposals for legal and constitutional measures that can help reduce the risk of democratic backsliding in both the United States and younger democracies around the world.
TOM GINSBURG
Tom Ginsburg is Leo Spitz professor of international law, Ludwig and Hilde Wolf research scholar, and professor of political science at the University of Chicago
THOMAS CAROTHERS
Thomas Carothers is senior vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. In that capacity he oversees all of the research programs at Carnegie. He also directs the Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program.
7. Course Change or Full Speed Ahead? Post-Midterm U.S. Foreign Policy’s Impact on Indo-Pacific | Friday, November 2 | 11 am – 12 pm | Stimson Center | 1211 Connecticut Avenue, NW, 8th Floor, Washington DC. 20036 | Register Here
The United States midterm elections may determine whether U.S. foreign policy changes course in 2019 or holds steady. Under the Trump administration, the U.S. foreign policy agenda has undergone some changes, rarely mentioning U.S. values and at times displaying disconnect between rhetoric and policy implementation. Particularly in the Indo-Pacific region, where the Trump administration has discussed disengagement and international cooperation by turns, post-election U.S. foreign policy will impact how current shifts in the security environment play out. After the midterms, will Congress forge a new consensus on how foreign policy should be conducted? Or if there is no course change, what will be the potential consequences for future presidents’ foreign policy agenda? Join Stimson and the Canon Institute for Global Studies for a seminar to discuss these questions, as well as how U.S. foreign policy looks from the outside, and what impact it will have on the Indo-Pacific and beyond.
1. Tunisia: Justice in Transition | Tuesday, October 2, 2018 | 9:30 am – 11:30 am | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace | 1779 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20036 | Register Here
Please join the Carnegie Middle East Program for a screening of the documentary, Tunisia: Justice in Transition. The film tracks the trajectory of Tunisia’s Truth and Dignity Commission, established in 2013 to address the crimes of the Ben Ali and Bourguiba regimes. It includes interviews with victim’s families, human rights activists, and political actors to explain the Commission’s rocky path over the past five years.
Following the screening, Sarah Yerkes will moderate a discussion on the status of transitional justice in Tunisia today with one of the film’s creators, Ricard Gonzalez, and Salwa El Gantri.
Speakers:
Salwa El Gantri is the head of Tunisia Office for the International Center for Transitional Justice. She is an expert in gender and transitional justice, and has more than twelve years of experience in the democracy, human rights, and transitional justice fields.
Ricard Gonzalez is a journalist and political scientist. He has worked as a correspondent in Washington, DC, Cairo, and Tunis for El Mundo, El País, and Ara.
Sarah Yerkes is a fellow is a fellow in Carnegie’s Middle East Program, where her research focuses on Tunisia’s political, economic, and security developments as well as state-society relations in the Middle East and North Africa.
2. Is Russia Becoming Central Asia’s Near Abroad? | Tuesday, October 2, 2018 | 4:00 pm – 5:30 pm | Wilson Center | 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004 | Register Here
Russia’s relationship to Central Asia has always been distinctive and ambiguous, in contrast to its attitude toward both Ukraine and the Caucasus. Only in the twentieth century did it develop a deep sense of mission there, and then only at the hands of a small number of ideologues.
Today, Central Asia is fast recovering its traditional regional spirit, which increasingly impacts its former imperial ruler. As this happens, Russia, while remaining a force to be reckoned with in Central Asia, is also becoming an object of Central Asian geopolitical and cultural influence. Hence the notion of Russia as Central Asia’s “near abroad.”
The talk will be a Distinguished Speaker Lecture with S. Frederick Starr, Founding Chairman of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program and a Professor at John Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies.
3. China’s Alliance with North Korea and the Soviet Union: A Conversation with China’s Leading Historians | Thursday, October 4, 2018 | 3:30 pm – 5:00 pm | Wilson Center | 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004 | Register Here
The Wilson Center’s History and Public Policy Program will be hosting China’s three leading diplomatic historians for a discussion about the history and present day relevance of China’s Cold War-era relations with North Korea and the Soviet Union.A Misunderstood Friendship: Mao Zedong, Kim Il-sung, and Sino-North Korean Relations, 1949–1976, co-authored by Dr. Zhihua Shen and Dr. Yafeng Xia, is the first book-length history of the China-DPRK relationship to appear in English. Shen and Xia draw on previously untapped primary source materials to offer a unique account of the China-North Korean relationship, uncovering tensions and rivalries that shed new light on the ties between these two Communist East Asian nations. They unravel the twists and turns in high-level diplomacy between China and North Korea from the late 1940s to the death of Mao Zedong in 1976, and reveal that the tensions that currently plague the alliance between the two countries have been present from the very beginning of the relationship.
Mao and the Sino–Soviet Split, 1959-1973: A New History, co-authored by Dr. Danhui Li and Dr. Yafeng Xia, synthesizes over 20 years of research on the subject by the authors and offers a comprehensive look at the Sino-Soviet split from 1959, when visible cracks appeared in the Sino-Soviet alliance, to 1973, when China’s foreign policy changed from an “alliance with the Soviet Union to oppose the United States” to “aligning with the United States to oppose the Soviet Union.”
The authors will be joined by commentator Dr. Gregg A. Brazinksy and moderator Dr. Christian Ostermann
Speakers:
Zhihua Shen is the director of the Center for Cold War International History Studies at East China Normal University, Shanghai, and the author of a number of major Chinese-language works on Cold War history.
Danhui Li is Professor of History at Institute for Studies of China’s Neighboring Countries and Regions, East China Normal University, editor-in-chief of two academic journals: Lengzhan guojishi yanjiu (Cold War International History Studies), and Bianjiang yu zhoubian wenti yanjiu (Studies of Borderlands and Neighboring Regions). A leading authority on CCP’s external relations during the Cold War, she has published extensively on Sino-Soviet relations and Sino-Vietnamese relations during the Indochina War (in Chinese, Russian and English).
Yafeng Xia is Professor of History at Long Island University in New York and Senior Research Fellow, Institute for Studies of China’s Neighboring Countries and Regions at East China Normal University in Shanghai. A former Wilson Center fellow and public policy scholar, he is the author of numerous books on Chinese Cold War history.
Gregg A. Brazinsky is professor of history and international affairs at The George Washington University. He is the author of Winning the Third World: Sino-American Rivalry during the Cold War (Chapel Hill: UNC Press, 2017), and of Nation Building in South Korea: Korean, Americans, and the Making of a Democracy (Chapel Hill: UNC Press, 2007).
4. LikeWar: The Weaponization of Social Media (DC Launch) | Thursday, October 4, 2018 | 12:00 pm – 2:00 pm | New America Foundation | 740 15th St NW #900 Washington, D.C. 20005 | Register Here
In an age of livestreamed terrorist attacks and viral misinformation, a new pocket-sized battleground has emerged.
Through the weaponization of social media, the internet has transformed war and politics. Terrorists livestream their attacks, “Twitter wars” produce real world casualties, and viral misinformation alters not just the result of battles, but the very fate of nations.
In their new book LikeWar: The Weaponization of Social Media, authors Peter W. Singer and Emerson T. Brooking study what social media has been doing to politics, news, and war around the world, drawing upon everything from historic cases to the latest in AI and machine intelligence. They track dozens of conflicts in every corner of the globe, studying the spread of YouTube battle clips, a plague of Nazi-sympathizing cartoon frogs, and even enlist in a digital army themselves.
Join New America for a conversation moderated by Anne-Marie Slaughter, President and CEO of the Foundation, with the authors as they tackle the questions that arose during their five years of research: What can be kept secret in a world of networks? Does social media expose the truth or bury it? And what role do ordinary people now play in international conflicts?
5. Yemen’s Path Forward | Thursday, October 4th, 2018 | 1:00 pm – 4:00 pm | Middle East Institute | 529 14th St NW Washington, DC 20045 | Register Here
Three years into Yemen’s civil war, the country continues to see severe humanitarian devastation, widespread food insecurity, and lack of economic access, against the backdrop of an increasingly complex geopolitical environment. An intensification of fighting in Hodeidah and elsewhere in the country has added to the human costs of the conflict and threatens to become catastrophic. Increasingly, Yemenis are war-weary and anxious to see progress on the UN-led negotiating process intended to end the fighting and restore the peaceful transition interrupted three years ago.
The Middle East Institute (MEI) is pleased to host a half-day conference to assess the priorities for ending the conflict and scenarios to move forward. This conference will convene two panels and a keynote address to assess urgent priorities and potential pathways forward for Yemen.
Speakers:
Bruce Abrams assumed duties as deputy assistant administrator in USAID’s Middle East Bureau in January 2017. His portfolio includes USAID programs in Yemen, Tunisia, Morocco, Libya, the technical support team and the Middle East Regional Platform. Abrams joined the Middle East bureau after serving as deputy mission director in USAID Zimbabwe.
Sama’a Al-Hamdani is an independent researcher and analyst focusing on Yemen. She is currently a visting fellow at the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies (CCAS) at Georgetown University and a research fellow at the Sana’a Center for Strategic Studies (SCSS). Al-Hamdani is also the director of the Yemen Cultural Institute for Heritage and the Arts (YCIHA), a nonprofit based in Washington DC dedicated to Yemeni arts and heritage.
Marcia Biggs is a special correspondent for PBS NewsHour, for whom she has recently won a Gracie Allen Award, a First Place National Headliner Award, and a New York Festivals World Medal. Her expertise lies in the Arab world, with over a decade of experience in the Middle East, five years of which were spent living in Lebanon. Most recently, she became one of the few television journalists to cover the crisis in Yemen, which she did in a four part series for PBS, “Inside Yemen.”
Ambassador Ahmed Awad Bin Mubarak assumed his duties as the ambassador of the Republic of Yemen to the United States in August 2015. Formerly, Ambassador Bin Mubarak was the director of the presidential office and chief of staff. Prior to taking up his appointment as the director, Ambassador Bin Mubarak was appointed on January 2013 secretary general of Yemen’s National Dialogue Conference (NDC), leading a team of over 120 staff facilitating the mediation process among the participating 565 delegates, and providing technical assistance to NDC working groups.
Amb. (ret.) Gerald Feierstein is director for government relations, policy and programs at MEI. He retired from the U.S. Foreign Service in May 2016 after a 41-year career with the personal rank of career minister. As a diplomat he served in nine overseas postings, including three tours of duty in Pakistan, as well as assignments in Saudi Arabia, Oman, Lebanon, Jerusalem, and Tunisia. In 2010, President Obama appointed Amb. Feierstein U.S. Ambassador to Yemen, where he served until 2013. From 2013 until his retirement, Amb. Feierstein was principal deputy assistant secretary of State for Near Eastern affairs.
Latifa Jamel is the chairperson of Justice for Women and Children. Originally from Taiz, she is a Yemeni journalist and political activist. She served as board members in Yemen Aid, International Council of Rights and Freedoms, and Yemeni American Coalition. She previously worked as an academic advisor and head of Social Studies department in local schools within Taiz.
Timothy Lenderking is the deputy assistant secretary of state for Arabian Gulf affairs in the Near East Bureau at the U.S. Department of State. He is a career member of the senior Foreign Service. Lenderking served previously as the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, from 2013-2016. He served as the director of the Pakistan office at the Department of State from 2010-2013. From 2008-2010, Lenderking completed two tours in Baghdad, the first as the senior democracy advisor at the US Embassy, and the second as the policy advisor to LTG Charles Jacoby, Commanding General of Multi-National Forces Iraq (MNF-I), based at Camp Victory.
6. The Limits of Punishment: Transitional Justice and Violent Extremism | Friday, October 5th, 2018 | 10:30 am – 12:00 pm | Brookings Institution | 1775 Massachusetts Ave. NW Washington, DC 20036 | Register Here
In countries where jihadi groups have gained control over territory and populations, states face the challenge of dealing with individuals accused of association with those groups. Governments have too often responded in heavy-handed ways, penalizing broad segments of local populations suspected of having supported the group, often on the basis of thin or non-existent evidence. Such excessively punitive and dragnet approaches risk backfiring by exacerbating local grievances, conflating victims with perpetrators, and laying the groundwork for future violence.
On October 5, the Foreign Policy program at Brookings and the United Nations University’s Centre for Policy Research (UNU-CPR) will present a discussion of alternative strategies and justice issues for countries affected by jihadi violence. Experts will present the findings of three fieldwork-based case studies of Nigeria, Somalia, and Iraq, which analyze these states’ approaches to accountability and rehabilitation of Boko Haram, al-Shabab, and Islamic State affiliates. Panelists will also discuss the potential application of transitional justice tools; conditional amnesties; defectors programs; and disarmament, demobilization, and rehabilitation approaches to transitions away from conflict in such settings.
Panelists will include Lana Baydas, an independent human rights expert; Vanda Felbab-Brown, senior fellow with the Center for 21st Century Security and Intelligence at Brookings; and Cale Salih, research officer at UNU-CPR. Landry Signé, a David M. Rubenstein Fellow in the Africa Growth Initiative at Brookings, will provide introductory remarks and moderate the discussion. After the program, panelists will take questions from the audience.
1. The War on Something-ism: 17 Years and Counting | Monday, September 10, 2018 | 12:00 pm – 1:30 pm | Hudson Institute | 1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 400 Washington, DC 20004 | Register Here
The devastating toll of the September 11, 2001 attacks galvanized the global community to fight Islamic extremism and defeat al-Qaeda. What began in Afghanistan, continues in Iraq and Syria, in Yemen and the Horn of Africa, in Europe. 17 years on, the engagement dubbed “the never-ending war” continues, as religious extremism takes new forms and continues to destabilize the Middle East and North Africa, and continues in Southwest Asia.
The Trump Administration has expressed optimism that victory will be achieved once the remaining Islamic State (ISIS) strongholds are eliminated. However, the intelligence community already sees signs of new extremist groups cropping up in Iraq, ISIS emerging in Afghanistan, extremist strongholds in Syria. Pulling the U.S. out too early and declaring victory without a strategy to win will enable old extremist groups to re-establish their hold on the region and allow new groups to compete for territory.
Thomas Joscelyn, Speaker – Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Bill Roggio, Speaker – Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Michael Pregent, Speaker – Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute
Michael Doran, Speaker – Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute
Catherine Herrridge, Moderator – Chief Intelligence Correspondent, Fox News
2. Countering Disinformation: Interdisciplinary Lessons for Policymakers | Monday, September 10, 2018 | 3:00 pm – 4:30 pm | Center for Strategic and International Studies | 1616 Rhode Island Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036 | Register Here
With the growth of social media, disinformation has become an increasingly potent political tool. State and non-state actors from various countries, among them Russia and China, have become adept at manufacturing and spreading disinformation or using covert campaigns to influence public perception and political outcomes in democratic countries around the world. Responding to this threat requires policy makers to integrate insights from different countries and from academic fields that are too often siloed, including communications, computer science, and social psychology.
Speakers:
Joshua Eisenman – Assistant Professor of Public Affairs, Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, The University of Texas at Austin
Jakub Janda – Director, European Values Think Tank (Prague)
Saiph Savage – Assistant Professor of Computer Science and Director, Human Computer Interaction Laboratory, West Virginia University
Tabea Wilke – Founder and CEO, Botswatch
Jeffrey Mankoff – Deputy Director and Senior Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Program, CSIS
3. Weapons of Mass Destruction and Cooperative Threat Reduction: Looking Ahead | Tuesday, September 11, 2018 | 12:00 pm – 1:30 pm | Hudson Institute | 1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 400 Washington, DC 20004 | Register Here
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, preventing weapons of mass destruction (WMD) from falling into the hands of a state or non-state adversary has been a critical priority for the U.S.
A report of a workshop conducted by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences Committee on International Security and Arms Control examines how the U.S. government is managing the threat posed by WMDs through its Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) programs. As argued in “Cooperative Threat Reduction Programs for the Next Ten Years and Beyond,” the cooperative dimension of CTR programs has allowed the U.S. to collaborate with other governments, nongovernmental agencies, and the private sector to reduce WMD threats outside of the United States. However, as the report co-chairs assert, more can and should be done. By tailoring engagement and enhancing the impact of the CTR programs through for example, more government-industry collaborations and better cooperation with multilateral organizations, cooperative threat reduction can continue to improve the long-term security of the U.S. and its allies.
On September 11, Hudson will convene a panel with the co-chairs of the new report to discuss their assessments of Cooperative Threat Reduction programs. Copies of the report will be available.
David R. Franz, Speaker – Board Member, Integrated Nano-Technologies
Elizabeth Turpen, Speaker – President, Octant Associates and Non-Resident Adjunct, Institute for Defense Analyses
Richard Weitz, Moderator – Senior Fellow and Director, Center for Political-Military Analysis, Hudson Institute
Eunjung Lim is an Assistant Professor at College of International Relations, Ritsumeikan University. Before joining Ritsumeikan’s faculty, she taught at Johns Hopkins SAIS (2013-2017). Her areas of specialization are South Korean and Japanese political economy, comparative and global governance, and energy security policies of East Asian countries. More specifically, Dr. Lim has been working on nuclear issues of East Asian countries.
She has been a researcher and visiting fellow at several institutes, including the Center for Contemporary Korean Studies at the University of Tokyo, the Institute of Japanese Studies at Seoul National University, the Institute of Japan Studies at Kookmin University, and Institute of Energy Economics, Japan. She earned a BA from the University of Tokyo, an MIA from Columbia University and a PhD from SAIS, Johns Hopkins University. She is fluent in Korean, Japanese and English.
5. Russia and Arctic Governance: Cooperation in Conflict | Wednesday, September 12, 2018 | 12:30 pm – 1:30 pm | Stimson Center | 1211 Connecticut Avenue, NW, 8th Floor, Washington DC, 20036 | Register Here
Finland, the country currently chairing the Arctic Council, proposed a high-level Arctic summit during a recent bilateral meeting with Russian president Vladimir Putin. While discussion of the summit and a broader suite of Arctic and environmental issues proceeded smoothly, Russian concerns and protests over a large upcoming NATO alliance exercise in Norway, in which Finland will participate, were also raised. All of the Arctic states, including Russia, have long sought to primarily present the circumpolar region as one of peace – and potential wealth. While the question of whether there will be more cooperation or more conflict in the Arctic is a popular and easy one to pose, the more productive question is how cooperation against the backdrop of other, more global tensions has long characterized and continues to shape Arctic governance development. So, how does Russia – the largest Arctic state – engage in the process of pursuing cooperative outcomes and a regional peace conducive to economic gains? How do such cooperative efforts play out against a backdrop of security rivalry between Russia and most of the Arctic states? How robust are circumpolar cooperative venues to worsened relationships between Russia and its partners? Are the solutions produced by the Arctic states so far dimensioned to the challenges facing the region? The Stimson Center discussion will seek to address these key questions as part of a seminar based on Elana Wilson Rowe’s recently published book Arctic Governance: Power in Cross-Border Cooperation (Manchester University Press in the UK/Oxford University Press in the USA).
ELANA WILSON ROWE, Research Professor, the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
Elana Wilson Rowe holds a PhD in Geography/Polar Studies from the University of Cambridge (2006). Her areas of expertise include international relations in the Arctic, science and expert knowledge in global governance, climate politics and Russian foreign and northern policy. She is the author of Russian Climate Politics: When Science Meets Policy (Palgrave, 2009) and Arctic Governance: Power in cross-border cooperation (Manchester University Press, 2018).
YUN SUN, Co-Director, East Asia Program, Stimson Center
Yun Sun is Co-Director of the East Asia Program and Director of the China Program at the Stimson Center. Sun’s expertise is in Chinese foreign policy, U.S.-China relations and China’s relations with neighboring countries and authoritarian regimes. From 2011 to early 2014, she was a Visiting Fellow at the Brookings Institution, jointly appointed by the Foreign Policy Program and the Global Development Program, where she focused on Chinese national security decision-making processes and China-Africa relations. From 2008 to 2011, Sun was the China Analyst for the International Crisis Group based in Beijing, specializing on China’s foreign policy towards conflict countries and the developing world.
MARLENE LARUELLE, Research Professor, Institute for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies, George Washington University
Marlene Laruelle is a Research Professor at the Institute for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies (IERES), at George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs. She is the Director of the Central Asia Program at IERES and co-director of PONARS (Program on New Approaches to Research and Security in Eurasia). She received her PhD from the National Institute of Oriental Languages and Cultures. She has authored Russia’s Strategies in the Arctic and the Future of the Far North (M.E. Sharpe, 2013), and edited New Mobilities and Social Changes in Russia’s Arctic Regions (Routledge, 2016).
6. Election Interference: Emerging Norms of Digital Statecraft | Wednesday, September 12, 2018 | 4:00 pm | the Atlantic Council | 1030 15th Street Northwest, 12th Floor | Register Here
The reemergence of great power politics in a digitalized global security environment has led to new tools of statecraft wielded by nation-states in advancing their foreign policy objectives. During this event, we will engage cybersecurity professionals, journalists and key stakeholders to discuss the development of norms around election influence and interference and lessons learned from the international community’s brief history with these new tools of statecraft. What toolsets will governments wield in the future as they attempt to control media narratives, target dissidents, and influence other states? And how will the toolsets and norms we currently see in play shape the future of state use of technology?
This panel will look into the future of digital statecraft as technology progresses at an unprecedented rate and nation-states consider ways to wield these persuasive and cunning new tools to potent effect. With recent reports of foreign influence and interference in elections around the world calling public trust in institutions into question, it has become imperative that governments work together to establish norms around nation-state behavior across digital borders and have an informed dialogue about future toolsets for political influence. A reception will follow the event.
Ms. Laura Galante, speaker – Senior Fellow, Cyber Statecraft Initiative, Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, Atlantic Council;
Founder, Galante Strategies
Mr. Sean Kanuck, speaker – Director, Cyber, Space and Future Conflict, International Institute for Strategic Studies
Ms. Michele Markoff, speaker – Deputy Coordinator for Cyber Issues, State Department
Ms. Klara Jordan, moderator – Director, Cyber Statecraft Initiative, Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, Atlantic Council
Nearly twenty years after 9/11, extremist ideologies have survived global counterterrorism efforts. What have we learned from the response, and what new approaches are needed? Tony Blair, Farah Pandith, and Frances Townsend discuss challenges in the global response to extremism to date and the evolution in approach necessary to overcome terrorist threats.
Tony Blair, speaker – Executive Chairman of the Institute for Global Change; Former Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Farah Pandith, speaker – Adjunct Senior Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations; Senior Fellow, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
Frances Fragos Townsend, speaker – Executive Vice President, MacAndrews & Forbes, Inc.; Former Homeland Security Advisor, White House
Tom Gjelten, presider – Religion and Belief Correspondent, National Public Radio
8. With Us and Against Us: Counterterrorism Strategy Post-9/11 | Thursday, September 13, 2018 | 5:30 pm – 7:00 pm | American University SIS | Abramson Family Founders Room, 4400 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, DC 20016 | Register Here
In the wake of the September 11 attacks, President George W. Bush drew a line in the sand, saying, “Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists.” Join the School of International Service at American University as we discuss Dr. Stephen Tankel’s new book, With Us and Against Us: How America’s Partners Help and Hinder the War on Terror,and the future of counterterrorism operations in a post-9/11 world more widely in a conversation moderated by Dr. Audrey Kurth Cronin.
Participants:
Bruce Hoffman is a Professor at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service and Shelby Cullom and Kathryn W Davis Senior Visiting Fellow for Counterterrorism and Homeland Security at the Council on Foreign Relations. Dr. Hoffman previously held the Corporate Chair in Counterterrorism and Counterinsurgency at the RAND Corporation and was also Director of RAND’s Washington, D.C. Office. From 2001 to 2004, he served as RAND’s Vice President for External Affairs and in 2004 he also was Acting Director of RAND’s Center for Middle East Public Policy. Dr. Hoffman was appointed by the U.S. Congress in 2013 to serve as a commissioner on the Independent Commission to Review the FBI’s Post-9/11 Response to Terrorism and Radicalization, which concluded its work in March 2015.
Audrey Kurth Cronin is Professor of International Security at the School of International Service, and American University’s Founding Director of the Center for Security, Innovation and New Technology. She was previously founding Director of both the International Security Program and the Center for Security Policy Studies at George Mason University. Dr. Cronin has held a vareity of positions in government, including time as a Specialist in Terrorism at the Congressional Research Service, advising Members of Congress in the aftermath of 9/11. She has also served in the Executive branch, including in the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Policy; the Office of the Secretary of the Navy; and the American Embassy in Moscow. Dr. Cronin is the author of a forthcoming book on terrorism and new technologies, to be published by Oxford University Press in early 2019.
Matt Olsen is an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security and former Director of the National Counterterrorism Center. Appointed by the President to serve as the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Olsen led the government’s efforts to integrate and analyze terrorism information and coordinate counterterrorism operations from 2011 to 2104. Prior to joining NCTC, Olsen was the General Counsel for the National Security Agency, serving as NSA’s chief legal officer and focusing on surveillance law and cyber operations.
Stephen Tankel is an Associate Professor at the School of International Service and Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security. In his recent book, With Us and Against Us: How America’s Partners Help and Hinder the War on Terror, Dr. Tankel analyzes the factors that shape counterterrorism cooperation, examining the ways partner nations aid international efforts, as well as the ways they encumber and impede effective action. His recent work considers the changing nature of counterterrorism, exploring how counterterrorism efforts after 9/11 critically differ both from those that existed beforehand and from traditional alliances.
President Trump’s former campaign manager and his former personal attorney/fixer yesterday became convicted felons. Paul Manafort’s conviction on eight charges confirmed his financial crimes. He was not acquitted on any charges, but the jury failed to come to a conclusion on ten. Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to financial crimes as well as campaign finance violations associated with paying hush money, at Donald Trump’s direction, to women with whom Trump had had affairs. Nothing like this level of corrupt behavior has come so close to a president in at least 100 years, if not since the founding of the republic.
What significance does any of this have, in particular for foreign policy?
Manafort’s conviction brings enormous pressure on him to cooperate with the Special Counsel in the Russia investigation. Manafort, who seems to me to be a Russian agent, presumably knows a great deal about Trump’s dealings with the Russians. To avoid his spilling the beans, Trump may pardon him, but Manafort would remain vulnerable to state prosecution. That is presumably the reason the President has hesitated so far, though he signaled clearly in his reaction to the verdict (Manafort is a “good man” he said) that he might resort to a pardon. If Manafort talks, many of the details of Trump’s relationship with Moscow are likely to become public, with dramatic impacts: Trump may be soft on Russia, but the Congress has been tough and insisted on increasingly draconian sanctions.
Cohen’s conviction makes it virtually certain that he will cooperate with the Special Counsel to get a lightened sentence. He presumably knows the gory details of Russian investments in Trump real estate, which are manifold and the likely cause of much of Trump’s affection for Putin, in addition to Putin’s help in getting him elected. Trump is terrified Putin will block Russian investments in Trump properties. The day of reckoning on that score is near.
So these convictions, while not directly connected to the Russia investigation, do have implications for its future. I doubt Special Counsel Mueller will act decisively before the end of the month, when a pre-electoral moratorium on major judicial moves begins. The question, which won’t be answered until November 6, is whether Americans will be able to read the handwriting on the wall. Trump’s solid 35% or so is likely to stick with him, but 65% is a lot of potential voters. The big question is whether they will go to vote in sufficient numbers to begin to correct the mistake of 2016.
Many tribulations lie ahead. If the Republicans lose control of the House of Representatives, it will have grounds for impeachment (indictment). The Republicans are likely however to continue their control of the Senate, where conviction is unlikely so long as they remain solid in their support of Trump. The process of impeachment and trial will take months, distracting the Administration from other important issues, including foreign policy.
If the Democrats do not gain control of the House or Senate, impeachment is not possible and they will continue in opposition while the Special Counsel pursues his investigation and decides whether to charge the President. That is unlikely as it contradicts Justice Department policy. Mueller will however file a report that could state boldly what laws the President has violated.
That will happen only if Trump doesn’t fire him or neuter the investigation by taking away its staff’s security clearances. Both are possible, but the political risks involved are significant. It would amount to a presidential guilty plea and would not stop state-level prosecutions that could detail presidential malfeasance and lead to prosecution after Trump leaves office.
So no, we are nowhere near the end of the Trump scandals and their consequences. We face at least two more years of painful revelations and judicial maneuvers, while the Russians, Iranians, Chinese, and others test our mettle in cyberspace, on the high seas, and on land in Syria, Ukraine, Turkey, and elsewhere. Our traditional allies in both Europe and Asia are all hedging their bets, because of Trump’s erratic behavior, his attack on NATO, and his cozying up to Kim Jong-un. And the lengthy Obama recovery is showing signs of aging, in part due to Trump’s tariffs, an inflationary budget, and a giant tax cut for the wealthy.
RSS - Posts
