Tag: Nuclear weapons
Peace Picks | October 19 – 23
Notice: Due to public health concerns, upcoming events are only available via live stream.
1. New START and the Future of US-Russia Arms Control | October 19, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | Wilson Center | Register Here
The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) is the last strategic nuclear arms control agreement still in force between the United States and Russia. It will expire in less than 4 months unless extended, and negotiations to that end are now underway. On October 19, Lynn Rusten and Feodor Voitolovsky will join us for a conversation on the American and Russian perspectives on the future of New START and the changing technological and security landscape that will shape the next five years of arms control.
Speakers:
Lynn Rusten: Vice President, Global Nuclear Policy Program, Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI)
Feodor Voitolovsky: Head of Section, Senior Research Fellow, Institute of World Economy and International Relations of Russian Academy of Sciences
Matthew Rojansky, moderator: Director, Kennan Institute
2. RESOLVE Network 2020 Global Forum: Violent Extremism in 2020 and Beyond | October 19, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:15 AM EDT | United States Institute for Peace | Register Here
The year 2020 has ushered in rapid and significant shifts in existing threats to global security. From the COVID-19 pandemic to climate change and longstanding violent conflict, the pressures facing our current global system are increasingly complex and all-encompassing. Among these, violent extremism remains a significant challenge—shifting as actors adapt and take advantage of ongoing and emerging global shocks and sources of instability.
How has the violent extremism landscape changed in the five years since the “fall” of ISIS? How has rising global instability, populism, and disinformation altered violent extremist operations and ideologies, and vice versa? What challenges do we face in addressing violent extremism in the new threat landscape? Can we apply any lessons from past experiences to address emerging threats and dynamics in 2020 and beyond?
Please join the RESOLVE Network and USIP for a discussion about these challenges and more during part one of RESOLVE’s fifth annual Global Forum series. Convened virtually, the forum will bring together leading experts and researchers for thought-provoking conversations on evolving trends and dynamics in the violent extremist landscape.
Speakers:
Dr. Mary Beth Altier: Clinical Associate Professor, Center for Global Affairs, New York University
Dr. Amarnath Amarasingam: Assistant Professor, School of Religion, Queen’s University, member of the RESOLVE Research Advisory Council
Dr. Colin P. Clarke: Senior Research Fellow, The Soufan Center, member of the RESOLVE Research Advisory Council
3. Amid Multiple Crises, a Divided Nation | October 19, 2020 | 1:00 – 2:30 PM EDT | Brookings Institute | Register Here
In the wake of over 210,000 deaths from the coronavirus, massive unemployment, protests over racial justice, the death of a U.S. Supreme Court justice, and unprecedented wildfires in multiple western states, questions remain about who will turn out to vote and what will drive them to the polls. Now, a new and extensive national survey of more than 2,500 Americans reveals a great deal about the public’s views of the presidential candidates and their attitudes toward pressing issues such as health care, the economy, racial justice, immigration, the changing demographics of the nation, climate change, and the fairness and reliability of the elections themselves.
On October 19, Governance Studies at Brookings and PRRI will host the release of PRRI’s eleventh annual American Values Survey (AVS). A panel of experts will discuss the survey results and what they reveal about Americans’ attitudes toward a variety of issues that are sure to shape the outcome of this presidential election. The survey also highlights the impact of media consumption on attitudes, long-term trends in partisan and religious affiliation, and how these changes have produced two starkly contrasting visions for the nation.
Speakers:
E.J. Dionne, Jr., moderator: W. Averell Harriman Chair and Senior Fellow – Governance Studies
William A. Galston, moderator: Ezra K. Zilkha Chair and Senior Fellow – Governance Studies
Karlyn Bowman: Senior Fellow – American Enterprise Institute
Andra Gillespie: Associate Professor of Political Science; Director, James Weldon Johnson Institute – Emory University
Robert P. Jones: CEO and Founder – PRRI (Public Religion Research Institute)
4. Cross-Strait Seminar Series: Taiwan and the future of US-China strategic competition | October 19, 2020 | 1:00 PM EDT | The Atlantic Council | Register Here
As US-China relations continue to deteriorate in the era of COVID-19, the role of Taiwan has received increasing attention from both Washington and Beijing. Chinese leader Xi Jinping has made reunification with Taiwan, peaceful or otherwise, a key objective of his extended tenure, and has overseen a ratcheting up of military exercises, influence operations, and other pressures across the Taiwan Strait in recent years. Meanwhile, the United States has taken a series of concrete steps to demonstrate renewed commitment to its relationship with Taiwan, including recently issuing a joint declaration on 5G security, launching a new bilateral economic dialogue, and sending Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex M. Azar II and Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment Keith Krach – the two highest-profile visits from US officials to Taiwan since 1979.
These major developments raise a number of key questions about Taiwan’s role in the future of US-China strategic competition. What is the long-term vision and strategic goals of the US-Taiwan relations? Where does Taiwan fit into the US Indo-Pacific strategy? Likewise, how do US relations fit into the second Tsai administration’s vision for foreign and economic policy? How are recent developments in US-Taiwan relations shaping cross-strait geopolitics, and how the US and Taiwan can work with other US allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific approaching engagement with Taiwan in light of ongoing developments? What should be Taiwan’s role in a broader network of global democracies on key strategic issues such as 5G, global supply chains, maritime security, defense technology, and countering influence operations? Ultimately, what will the decade ahead hold for the Taiwan Strait as one of greatest geopolitical flashpoints in US-China relations?
Please join the Atlantic Council’s Asia Security Initiative, housed within the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, for a public panel discussion on the changing role of Taiwan amid US-China strategic competition.
Speakers:
Mr. Michael Mazza: Visiting Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
Mr. Dexter Tiff Roberts: Nonresident Senior Fellow, Asia Security Initiative, Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, Atlantic Council
Mr. Randall G. Schriver: Former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Affairs; Chairman, Project 2049
Ms. Bethany Allen-Ebrahimian, moderator: China Reporter, Axios
5. A Fragmented Society: the Internal Dynamics of Libya’s Conflict | October 19, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:30 AM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
While most discussions about the Libyan crisis revolve around geopolitics and international interference, internal divisions within Libya’s civil society and political institutions have also played a fundamental role in destabilizing the country since the fall of Moamar Gaddafi in 2012. Governance in Libya is fragmented with very few truly national actors. It also continues to lack political institutions that are seen by all Libyans as legitimate. The ongoing conflict consists of many contending local and tribal players, including spoilers who have demonstrated opposition to either peace or reconciliation except on the basis of total victory by their group.
What are the major obstacles to stabilization? How can Libya approach the establishment of political institutions? In what ways can the international community support a Libyan-led peace process? The Middle East Institute, the Regional Program Political Dialogue South Mediterranean of the Konrad Adenauer Foundation, and the Policy Center for the New South are pleased to jointly host a group of experts to discuss these questions and more in a closed roundtable format.
Speakers:
Youness Abouyoub: Director, Governance and State-Building Division for the MENA Region, United Nations; former senior political advisor to the Special Representative of the UN Secretary General to Libya
Emadeddin Badi: Nonresident senior fellow, Atlantic Council
Virginie Collombier: Research fellow, European University Institute
Mohamed Dorda: Co-Founder, Libya Desk
Mohamed Eljarh: Co-Founder, Libya Outlook for Research and Consulting
Mary Fitzgerald: Independent researcher
Amanda Kadlec: Founder and director, Evolve Governance
Karim Mezran: Resident senior fellow, Atlantic Council
Tarik Mgerisi: Policy fellow, North Africa and Middle East Programme, European Council on Foreign Relations
Amal Obeidi: Associate professor of Comparative Politics, Department of Political Science; faculty of Economics, University of Benghazi, Libya
Jason Pack: Nonresident scholar, Middle East Institute; founder, Libya-Analysis LLC
Jonathan Winer: Nonresident scholar, Middle East Institute; former United States Special Envoy for Libya
Len Ishmael, moderator: Senior Fellow, Policy Center for the New South
6. Iran and North Korea: Proliferation and Regional Challenges for the Next Administration | October 20, 2020 | 3:00 – 4:00 PM EDT | Brookings Institute | Register Here
Among the numerous and varied foreign policy challenges facing the next administration will be the nuclear proliferation and regional security threats posed by Iran and North Korea. The next administration will need to consider how to build international and domestic support for addressing those threats, whether and when to engage those regimes diplomatically, and the balance between pressure and diplomacy in pursuing U.S. policy objectives.
On Tuesday, October 20, the Foreign Policy program at Brookings will host an online discussion with experts who previously served as Defense and State Department officials, nuclear negotiators, and intelligence community officers.
Speakers:
Suzanne Maloney, moderator: Vice President and Director – Foreign Policy
Jung H. Pak: SK-Korea Foundation Chair in Korea StudiesSenior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for East Asia Policy Studies
Robert Einhorn: Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for Security, Strategy, and Technology, Arms Control and Non-Proliferation Initiative
Matthew Kroenig: Professor – Georgetown UniversityDeputy Director of The Scowcroft Center – Atlantic Council
Eric Edelman: Roger Hertog Distinguished Practitioner-in-Residence – School of Advanced International Studies
7. Women Transforming Peace: Celebrating 20 Years of UNSCR 1325 and Beyond | October 20, 2020 | 9:30 – 11:00 AM EDT | United States Institute for Peace | Register Here
Twenty years ago, the U.N. Security Council sparked a global policy revolution when it recognized, for the first time, the unique experiences of women and girls in violent conflict. Resolution 1325, otherwise known as the Women, Peace, and Security agenda, laid a foundation for governments and civil society to place women at the center of peace processes—not only as victims, but as essential builders of peace. However, despite national action plans and legislation in 84 countries, women remain undervalued in peacebuilding and underrepresented in peace processes. Policymakers and practitioners must look beyond this policy framework first established two decades ago to achieve women’s meaningful participation in peace and security moving forward.
Join USIP and the U.S. Civil Society Working Group on Women, Peace and Security to mark the 20th anniversary of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1325. The discussion will look at how countries are expanding on the Women, Peace and Security agenda by adopting feminist foreign and development policies—and how civil society organizations have invested in masculinities programming as a complementary approach. These and other frameworks may prove more effective in advancing gender equality in peace and security, especially in light of the challenges posed by the coronavirus pandemic.
Ambassador Jacqueline O’Neill: Ambassador for Women, Peace and Security, Government of Canada
Ambassador Bonnie Jenkins: Founder and President, Women of Color Advancing Peace, Security and Conflict Transformation & Member of U.S. CSWG
Rita M. Lopidia: 2020 USIP Women Building Peace Award Recipient & Executive Director and Co-Founder, Eve Organization for Women Development, South Sudan and Uganda
Sanam Naraghi Anderlini, MBE: Founder and CEO, International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN) & U.S. CSWG Member
Anthony Keedi: Masculinities Technical Advisor, ABAAD: Resource Center for Gender Equality, Lebanon
Kathleen Kuehnast, moderator: Director, Gender Policy and Strategy, U.S. Institute of Peace
8. How Crimea’s Tatars are Fighting Occupation and Displacement | October 20, 2020 | 10:00 AM EDT | Atlantic Council | Register Here
Crimea’s indigenous Tatar population has faced persecution and adversity for generations. Today, as Crimea is held under Russian occupation, new hardships have forced Crimean Tatars to make their voices heard. When Kremlin forces illegally seized the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine in 2014, Moscow began rapidly moving hundreds of thousands of Russians to the territory, instituted discriminatory laws that targeted the predominately Muslim Tatars, and displaced approximately one-sixth of the almost 300,000 Tatars in Ukraine.
One of the biggest challenges for Crimean Tatars now is the documentation of violence and rights violations against those living under Russian occupation—a police state, where affiliation with religious groups and the reporting of abuse leads to numerous Tatars being imprisoned by authorities. Crimean Tatars are fighting to be heard—is anyone listening? How can Kyiv and the international community step in to support this marginalized and targeted ethnic minority? How are Crimean Tatars standing against their occupiers?
Speakers:
Ayla Bakkalli: US representative, executive member, World Congress of Crimean Tatars. representative of the Crimean Tatars at the United Nations
Rustem Umerov: member of parliament in the Verkhovna Rada
Terrell Jermaine Starr (moderator): Eurasia Center fellow; senior reporter at The Root
9. Conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia: Scope and Implications | October 21, 2020 | 9:30 – 10:30 AM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
The military conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan has entered its fourth week. The scope of the war has not been limited to the boundaries of the combat zone, resulting in human loss and destruction of civil infrastructure. The region’s important network of energy infrastructure, including oil and gas pipelines, are not immune to this latest round of fighting. The military confrontation is taking place in proximity to the critical energy infrastructure that connects the Caspian basin with the European markets. Can the fighting cause disruption to oil and gas flows to the West? What could potential disruption mean for global markets? Can the Southern Gas Corridor be prevented from being launched by the end of this year as had been planned? What are the interests of regional stakeholders such as Turkey, Georgia, Russia, Iran and others that are either energy exporters, consumers or transit nations for Caspian hydrocarbons. And finally, what are the interests of the United States in this conflict and its impact on the energy markets?
Speakers:
Rauf Mammadov: Scholar, MEI
Mamuka Tsereteli: Nonresident scholar, Frontier Europe Initiative, MEI
Alex Vatanka: Senior fellow and director, Iran program, MEI
10. Tackling the Pandemic in Situations of Fragility, Conflict, and Violence | October 23, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | CSIS | Register Here
Fragility, conflict, and violence (FCV) pose critical development challenges. By 2030, up to two-thirds of the world’s extreme poor will live in fragile and conflict-affected countries, threatening efforts to end extreme poverty and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In recent years we have seen more violent conflicts globally than at any time in the past 30 years, and 79.5 million people have been forcibly displaced by conflict and violence worldwide. FCV therefore has a significant destabilizing impact, and takes a huge toll on human capital, creating vicious cycles that reduce people’s lifetime productivity, earnings and socioeconomic mobility. The Covid-19 crisis has exacerbated these challenges and caused significant health and economic harm to those living in FCV settings, threatening to further hinder stability and progress over the longer-term. This event will address how the international community can work together to (1) mitigate the impact of the pandemic on existing drivers of fragility and conflict through enhanced stabilization efforts, (2) support the most vulnerable, (3) better coordinate bilateral and multilateral responses to Covid-19 in fragile contexts, and (4) rebuild societies and economies post pandemic.
Speakers:
Stephanie Hammond: Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Stability and Humanitarian Affairs
Franck Bousquet: Senior Director of the World Bank’s Fragility, Conflict, & Violence Group
James (Jim) A. Schear: Adjunct Senior Political Scientist at the RAND Corporation
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, October 17
– The national security adviser disagrees with Gen. Milley. Are tweets real policy?
– A federal judge asks the same question and gets confused reply.
–Turkey breaks the law.
Administration rejects Putin call for extension of New START. [By the way, as I read Article XIV of the treaty, an extension will not require a vote by the Senate.]
– NYT notes how similar the cultural splits over face masks look like the 1980s fights over mandatory vehicle seatbelts.
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, October 15
The Army has released its previously secret study of how bases came to be named after Confederates.
Former Time Pentagon correspondent surveys the sad history of procurement reform.
Defense News slams DOD’s OCO slush fund.
Paul PIllar says Tuump continues to politicize intelligence
Administration now wants think tanks to disclose foreign funding.
FP’s China hand says Xi now has key agenda setting power for party meetings.
UK’s Chatham House has backgrounder on Somalia.
Russia says no nuke deal before election.
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 12 – October 16, 2020
1. What Do Africans Think About the Continent’s Future? | October 13, 2020 | 9:00 – 10:10 AM EDT | United States Institute for Peace | Register Here
New data from Afrobarometer’s latest round of public attitude surveys provide important guideposts for U.S. policymakers and Africa analysts. Findings from 18 countries offer insights on Africans’ aspirations for sovereignty, self-sufficiency, and democratic and accountable governance—as well their inclination toward open borders and free trade rather than protectionism. They also reveal a continued preference for the United States over China as a development model, their rejection of “debt diplomacy,” and their belief that English, rather than Chinese, remains the international language of the continent’s future.
These findings come amid wide recognition that progress on democratic governance in Africa has stalled, with many African governments falling back to authoritarian practices. The effectiveness of U.S. policy has been questioned as a result, and analysts have argued that U.S. policy toward Africa needs to be updated and revitalized. This is especially true in the context of a global pandemic that has undermined African economies and livelihoods, raised threats to governance and the rule of law, and revealed the potential global implications of access to health services.
Join USIP and Afrobarometer for a first look at Afrobarometer’s latest survey research and results, as well as a discussion on how the data can help guide U.S. government policy in Africa and provide key insights for policymakers on trends and potential threats to peace and security in Africa.
Speakers:
Ambassador Johnnie Carson: Senior Advisor, U.S. Institute of Peace
Dr. E. Gyimah-Boadi: Interim CEO, Afrobarometer
Dr. Carolyn Logan: Director of Analysis, Afrobarometer; Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Michigan State University
Josephine Appiah-Nyamekye Sanny: Regional Communications Coordinator/Anglophone West Africa, Afrobarometer and Ghana Center for Democratic Development
Susan Stigant, moderator: Director, Africa Program, U.S. Institute of Peace
2. COVID-19 and the Futures of Conflict in the Middle East | October 14, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
Ongoing analysis in the Middle East Institute’s (MEI) Strategic Foresight Initiative is examining scenarios of what conflict in the region could look like in 2025 based on different combinations of factors related to the COVID-19 pandemic. MEI is pleased to bring together experts to pose two important questions: What signals do we see of the pandemic’s impacts affecting foreign policy and conflict behaviors of key actors in the region? How are long standing social dynamics in the region being affected by the pandemic and in turn influencing conflict dynamics?
Speakers:
Alexandra Clare: Co-founder and CEO, Re:Coded
Nancy Ezzeddine: Research Fellow, Clingendael Institute
Ross Harrison: Senior Fellow and Director of Research, MEI
Steven Kenney, moderator: Non-resident scholar, MEI; founder and principal, Foresight Vector LLC
3. The Impact of COVID-19 on Local Peacebuilding in the Middle East | October 14, 2020 | 9:30 – 11:00 AM EDT | United States Institute for Peace | Register Here
The outbreak of COVID-19 in conflict zones was regarded by many as an opportunity for peace. But today, the stark reality in many conflict zones has shown that the opportunity may have been missed. Cease-fires are being ignored, and the politics of the pandemic have enabled conflict and violence rather than deterred them. The past few months have shown that while the COVID-19 health crisis will eventually subside, its economic, social, and political implications will unfortunately outlive it. In the face of these challenges, how are local peacebuilding efforts in the Middle East coping with the far-reaching effects of the pandemic in both the short- and long-term?
Join USIP and the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) for a panel discussion featuring peacebuilding experts and practitioners from the Middle East. The online conversation will look at the implications of COVID-19 on peacebuilding at the local level in three particular Middle Eastern contexts—Yemen, Syria, and Iraq—as well as how regional and international actors should engage in the Middle East to support local peace actors as they try to preserve the gains they’ve made over the past few years.
Speakers:
Dr. Elie Abouaoun, opening remarks: Director of Middle East and North Africa Programs, U.S. Institute of Peace
Dr. Sultan Barakat: Founding Director, Center for Conflict and Humanitarian Studies
Dr. Kathryn Nwajiaku-Dahou, opening remarks: Director of Politics and Governance, ODI
Mrs. Nadwa Al-Dawsari: Non-resident Fellow, The Middle East Institute
Mrs. Noor Qais: Program Officer, Sanad for Peacebuilding, Iraq
Dr. Sherine Taraboulsi-McCarthy, moderator: Interim Senior Research Fellow, The Politics and Governance Program (ODI)
4. Conversation on a ReSTART for U.S.-Russian Nuclear Arms Control | October 14, 2020 | 11:30 AM—12:30 PM EDT | Carnegie Endowment for Peace | Register Here
The last remaining U.S.-Russian nuclear arms control agreement, New START, is rapidly approaching its end. President Trump seeks a new agreement that includes China and covers all nuclear warheads. But is this approach feasible? If not, what provisions should be included in a successor to New START?
Please join us for a conversation with James Acton and Pranay Vaddi from Carnegie’s Nuclear Policy Program, as they share insights from their new report: “A ReSTART for U.S.-Russian Nuclear Arms Control: Enhancing Security Through Cooperation.” They will be joined by Alexei Arbatov, and Rose Gottemoeller as moderator.
Speakers:
James M. Acton: Jessica T. Mathews Chair and co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program; senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Pranay Vaddi: Fellow in the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Alexey Arbatov: Head of the Center for International Security at the Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations.
Rose Gottemoeller: Distinguished Lecturer at the Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford University. Previously served as deputy secretary general of NATO.
5. Obstacles to a Free and Fair Presidential Election in Syria | October 14, 2020 | 16:00—17:30 EEST | Carnegie Endowment for Peace | Register Here
Syrian presidential elections are scheduled for 2021. President Bashar al-Assad and his close confidants have said that they will go ahead with the elections without a new constitution and irrespective of whether they meet the standards of the political process outlined in Security Council Resolution 2254.
Holding a fair presidential election would require many legislative changes, and new mechanisms to allow internally displaced persons and refugees to vote en masse. Adding to the complications at a practical level are the opaque and questionable voter rolls and a lack of appropriate voting procedures. Additionally, the political and security environment inside Syria would need to change significantly. Voters would need to feel that the election process is safe, fair, and legitimate. These conditions do not presently exist and achieving them requires far more than minor amendments to the electoral law and voting mechanisms. There is also a need to consider the role of elections as part of a successful peace or transition process. Legitimizing elections prematurely would likely do more harm than good.
What precisely would a fair election in Syria look like? What are the voting options available for those residing outside Syria? What are the practical tasks and timelines required for achieving a free and fair election in Syria—decoupled from arbitrary timelines? Join us on Wednesday, October 14 from 4:00–5:30 p.m. Beirut (3:00-4:30 p.m. CEST) to discuss the upcoming presidential election in Syria. The discussion will be held on Zoom in English with simultaneous interpretation to Arabic. To join, please register for the event here.
Speakers:
Assaad Al-Achi: executive director of Baytna Syria.
Sead Alihodzic: senior programme manager with the Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.
Dima Moussa: member of the Syrian Opposition Coalition.
Vladimir Pran: senior technical adviser for the International Foundation for Electoral Systems.
Emma Beals: senior advisor at the European Institute of Peace and is an independent consultant focused on Syria.
6. Why Denouncing White Supremacy Creates Safety, Security, and Racial Equity | October 14, 2020 | 2:00 – 3:00 PM EDT | Brookings Institute | Register Here
During the first presidential debate, President Donald Trump avoided an explicit denouncement of white supremacists and instead asked them to “stand down and stand by.” These remarks were reminiscent of his statement after the deadly 2017 white supremacist rally in Charlottesville when he said that there were “very fine people on both sides.” Racist rhetoric from government officials, including calls to incite voter intimidation and promote civil unrest, are sadly not unprecedented in American history. In fact, the increasing use of social media among white supremacists for hate speech, along with the racial and ethnic tribalization surfacing over the last few years, have stifled the country’s attempts to combat racism and systemic inequalities.
While white supremacist groups are finding a geopolitical landscape that has grown more supportive of their rhetoric and activities, Black Americans are also exercising resistance and resilience in light of recent alarming statements. Like the historic civil rights movement, Black Lives Matter has drawn Americans to grapple with contemporary nationalism. America is now in fragile times that deserve the attention of federal, state, and local policies to confront white supremacy and other historical vestiges standing in the way of racial healing and reconciliation.
On October 14, Governance Studies at Brookings will host a conversation on the roots of white supremacy, the impact of racist rhetoric during critical moments in history, and how Black Americans, as well as other people of color, have responded and continue to respond. Panelists will also offer policy recommendations for how the country can promote racial empathy and redress the symptoms of power, race, and privilege, which will be critical issues facing the next administration.
Speakers:
Nicol Turner Lee, moderator: Senior Fellow – Governance StudiesDirector – Center for Technology Innovation
John Allen: President – The Brookings Institution
Keisha N. Blain: Associate Professor of History – University of Pittsburgh2020-2021 Fellow, Carr Center for Human Rights Policy – Harvard University
Fredrick C. Harris: Nonresident Senior Fellow – Governance Studies
Darrell M. West: Vice President and Director – Governance StudiesSenior Fellow – Center for Technology Innovation
7. Examining the EU-Iran-US Triangle | October 15, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
Since the US withdrawal from the Iran nuclear agreement in May 2018, France, Germany and the UK (the E3 countries) have been under pressure from both Washington and Tehran. The Trump administration has tried unsuccessfully to gain E3 support for its sanctions-based maximum pressure policy, including the extension of the arms embargo on Iran resulting in tensions at the UN Security Council. Tehran has been pressuring the bloc for economic aid and sanctions relief while lobbying the E3 to save the JCPOA and defend Iranian interests. Within Iran, leaders including Supreme Leader Khamenei have been particularly critical of the E3 and called for Iran to build stronger ties with more dependable states like China.
Frustrated by Tehran’s destabilising regional activities and escalation of its uranium enrichment program and Washington’s unilateral approach, the E3 has maintained unity on its JCPOA strategy. It has not however been able to provide meaningful political and economic solutions, resolve differences between Tehran and Washington, or address the many outstanding bilateral issues on the table.
In this webinar, organized by the Middle East Institute and Chatham House’s MENA Programme, speakers will discuss and unpack the triangular challenges and opportunities for Washington, Tehran, and the E3 and consider how the US presidential election might impact dynamics going forward.
Speakers:
Clément Therme: Post-doctoral research fellow, Nuclear Knowledges Program, Sciences Po; research associate, School for Advanced Studies in Social Sciences
Sanam Vakil: Deputy director and senior research fellow, Middle East and North Africa Programme, Chatham House
Azadeh Zamirirad: Deputy head, Middle East and Africa Division, German Institute for International and Security Affairs
Alex Vatanka, moderator: Director, Iran Program, Middle East institute
8. Lessons for Afghanistan from Colombia’s Peace Process | October 15, 2020 | 9:00 – 10:30 AM EDT | United States Institute for Peace | Register Here
Formal talks are underway between the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the Taliban to end over four decades of violent conflict and instability. At this vital phase of the Afghan peace process, it’s important to draw lessons from recent negotiated settlements. The comprehensive settlement between the Colombian government and the FARC has become one of the most widely recognized examples of how a comprehensive peace process can address the root causes of violence and result in a political settlement. While the Colombian and Afghan conflicts are distinct in many ways, Colombia is an important reference point that could provide some valuable insights and an imperfect roadmap for Afghanistan.
There isn’t a single standard model for negotiations—but analyzing historical processes, understanding their application, and identifying opportunities to adapt to specific contexts can serve countries who seek to resolve and transform seemingly intractable conflicts.
Join USIP and the Embassy of Afghanistan for a discussion on important lessons from the Havana Process with the FARC, highlighting both the successes and shortcomings of the negotiation and its implementation. This is the first discussion in an ongoing series launched by the Embassy of Afghanistan that examines peace processes around the world. Panelists will explore the importance of political consensus building, how to address continued violence, the role of neighboring countries and third-party facilitators, among other pressing issues.
Speakers:
Scott Worden, welcoming remarks: Director of Afghanistan and Central Asia Programs, U.S Institute of Peace
Her Excellency Roya Rahmani: Ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan to the United States
Bernard W. Aronson: Founder and Managing Partner, ACON Investments. Former U.S. Special Envoy to the Colombian Peace Process
Humberto de la Calle: Former Colombian Government Chief Negotiator, Former Vice President of Colombia
Sergio Jaramillo: Senior Advisor, European Institute of Peace. Former Colombian High Commissioner for Peace
Dag Nylander: Director, Section for Peace and Reconciliation, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Former Norwegian Special Envoy to the Colombia
Alejo Vargas Velásquez: Director of the Center on the Peace Process, Vice Dean on Research, Faculty of Law, Political and Social Sciences, National University
Belquis Ahmadi, moderator: Senior Program Officer, U.S. Institute of Peace
Paula Garcia-Tufro, moderator: Project Director, U.S. Institute of Peace
9. Russia and China: Common interests and rivalry in South Caucasus and Central Asia | October 16, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
Russia’s recent Kavkaz 2020 military exercises have demonstrated the scale and scalability of Russian military capabilities in the broader Caspian region. A number of other states, including China and Iran, also took part in Kavkaz 2020, which was an impressive show of military force. The recent renewed fighting between Armenia and Azerbaijan have underlined the fluid power politics of the region where Moscow’s once dominant position is under question.
Is such multilateral military cooperation a signal of a genuine deepening of Russian-Chinese understanding and cooperation in this part of the world that Moscow has for so long considered to be its “near abroad”? What is the nature of the Russian-Chinese relationship overall in and around the Caspian region; what are the areas of complementarity and how much of the joint Russian-Chinese efforts are aimed at countering American and other Western interests?
Speakers:
Mark Galeotti: Non-resident scholar, Frontier Europe Initiative, MEI
Bruce Pannier: Senior Central Asia correspondent, RFE/RL; editor, Qishloq Ovozi blog
Niva Yau: Resident researcher, OSCE Academy in Bishkek; fellow, Foreign Policy Research Institute
Alex Vatanka, moderator: Director, Iran Program; senior fellow, Frontier Europe Initiative, MEI
10. Russia’s War in Donbas: Ripe for a Resolution? | October 16, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:15 AM EDT | United States Institute for Peace | Register Here
More than six years after Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and invasion of eastern Ukraine, there is little evident movement toward a peaceful resolution of the conflict. The implementation of a package of measures dubbed the “Minsk II” process—which calls for a cease-fire, troop withdrawal, the return of border control to Kyiv, and local elections—is bogged down. Both Ukraine and the international community are looking for new solutions that would bring about a long-awaited peace.
Join USIP and prominent experts and policymakers for a discussion on possible solutions for resolving the ongoing conflict. The event will look at the current status of peace negotiations, as well as what a settlement might look like, the war’s political and social consequences and how COVID-19 has exacerbated its effects, and how regional dynamics—including instability in neighboring Belarus—have the potential to influence Ukraine’s security situation.
Speakers:
Ambassador William B. Taylor: Vice President, Office of Strategic Stability and Security, U.S. Institute of Peace
George Kent: Deputy Assistant Secretary, European and Eurasian Bureau, U.S. State Department (to be confirmed)
Orysia Lutsevych: Research Fellow and Manager, Ukraine Forum, Chatham House
Oleksii Reznikov: Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine, Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine
Ambassador Volodymyr Yelchenko : Ambassador, Embassy of Ukraine to the United States
Donald Jensen, moderator: Director, Office of Strategic Stability and Security, U.S. Institute of Peace
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The emerging tetrapolar mad world
Pantelis Ikonomou, former nuclear IAEA inspector, writes:
Nuclear weapons are a vital but latent dimension of the growing geopolitical competition. Nuclear capabilities continue to constitute a prime source of power in shaping global power relations amid dangerous non-nuclear conflicts and military confrontations. New power balances are forming.
The main emerging poles are two well-established ones, the United States and Russia, and two emerging ones, China and Europe (led by France as the EU’s last remaining nuclear power post-Brexit). The US and Russia have failed in efforts to engage China in new nuclear and ballistic missile agreements. France is trying to exercise leadership in Europe and the Mediterranean. French President Emmanuel Macron has offered to open a “strategic dialogue” with willing European states prepared to accept the central role of France. He pointed out that “Europe should reinforce its strategic autonomy in the face of growing global threats and stop relying solely on the United States and the Transtlantic Alliance for its defense”
Any excited system will sooner or later reach a state of equilibrium. A tetrapolar structure is emerging around the leading nuclear weapon states: the US, Russia, China and France. These four nuclear powers are flanked by others based on criteria of pragmatism and strategic necessity. The whole process is guided more by bilateral agreements than existing treaties and international institutions. The new tetrapolar world order appears as follows:
- Around the US superpower stand nuclear UK as well as Israel, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Canada, and several European NATO states. The connecting force within this pole is American geopolitical primacy and its ambition to strategically control East and South Asia.
- Around Russia will stand India, several former Soviet states, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya, and sometimes Turkey and Egypt. This pole’s source of cohesion is nuclear deterrence against the Chinese threat, as well as geopolitical influence in the Middle East region.
- Around China are Pakistan, North Korea and the majority of the developing countries in the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). In this nuclear pole the predominant parameter is China’s nuclear deterrence of its US, Russian, and Indian adversaries as well as Chinese economic, military and political assistance.
- France would be flanked by several southern European, Middle East and African states (and occasionally by Israel). The prevailing link in this alliance, besides historical and cultural references, is strategic influence on the wider region and security against a rising adversary, Islamic extremism.
Once a stable equilibrium is achieved, this new tetrapolar nuclear world order might allow the leading nuclear powers to realize the vast global threat they pose to humankind through their bilateral standoffs. Nuclear disarmament as requested by the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT, Art. VI) and emphatically repeated by the international community in the Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty of July 2017 should be a top priority. De-escalation of the current nuclear race and terminating weapons “modernization” ought to be the initial objectives of the world powers aiming eventually to complete and irreversible global nuclear disarmament.
The current nuclear threat to humanity arises from the suicidal so-called MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) nuclear strategy, It ought to be abolished. The threat of a nuclear apocalypse, whether by intent, accident, or miscalculation, will be at its highest level ever so long as MAD prevails in this tetrapolar world.
* This article draws on the author’s book “Global Nuclear Developments – Insights of a former IAEA nuclear inspector,” Springer, May 2020.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, September 22
– Josh Rogin says secret CIA assessment says Russian leaders are probably directing an influence campaign against Biden.
– WaPo says DOD shifted Covid money to buy jet engine parts and body armor.
– BuzzFeed says government documents show failure to block suspicious financial transactions linked to drugs and terrorists.
– WSJ says Chinese leaders divided over blacklisting US companies.
–Russia rejects US New START ideas.
– Flouting nonpolitical norms, Pompeo plunges into politics, Politico says.
– CNN says Milley and Esper have different approaches to evading Trump.
RSS - Posts
