Tag: Nuclear weapons
Is war inevitable?
This brings us to Iran. With the first round of the Iranian presidential election on Friday, the West is once again focused on the Iranian nuclear program, negotiations on which will resume once a new president is in place. To date, international sanctions have sought to punish the Iranian leadership for its defiance of the non-proliferation regime. As Iran gets closer to the production of its own nuclear weapon, sanctions have increasingly targeted Iran’s economy, hoping to change the cost/benefit analysis of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. As a result , oil exports have dropped from 2.6 million barrels per day to 1.1 million barrels per day and overall government revenue has seen a 17% drop compared to Iran’s five-year average. Despite these effects, sanctions have been unsuccessful in compelling Iran to suspend its program.
On Monday, members of a newly-established Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs Iran Task Force met to discuss the challenges facing US national security vis-à-vis a nuclear Iran. Chaired by Ambassadors Eric Edelman and Dennis Ross, the task force spans the political spectrum, across which there is a common belief that a nuclear Iran would be detrimental to US strategic interests and dangerous to regional stability. As the experts on the task force made clear, the Iranian nuclear program is now significantly more efficient and operating on a much larger scale than in the past. While the Iranians are careful to avoid so-called international redlines such as breaching 20% uranium enrichment levels, some estimate that they are only a matter of months away from breakout capability – a significant turning point where the only obstacle to weapons production would be their own restraint or military action. Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Iran: something interesting
This I missed: Iran’s presidential candidates sweeping the floor with Saeed Jalili, the apparent front runner, for lack of seriousness in pursuing a nuclear agreement with the P5+1. I am grateful to the well-informed (and informing) Laura Rozen for pointing it out to me, along with her publication of the P5+1 proposal for confidence building measures.
Together these betoken some reason for optimism about nuclear talks that have appeared to be going nowhere. Saeed Jalili is clearly the Supreme Leader’s candidate. Would the others have piled on so blatantly about his shortcomings as a negotiator without believing that there is room for debate? That is room the Supreme Leader allows them, as they are all pretty much regime loyalists. It is also room they presumably think might help them in the general public, whose votes will decide the outcome of the Iranian presidential election June 14.
But ultimately whoever is elected president will have little impact on the nuclear issue, which is very much the Supreme Leader’s turf. He has issued a fatwa against the making and use of weapons of mass destruction, as sinful and prohibited by Islam. A religious judgment of this sort can be superseded. Its validity moreover extends only to the death of its author. Western religious leaders’ strictures against nuclear weapons have not prevented their manufacture and even use. We might expect better of a religious judgment in Iran, but would we get it? Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks, May 28 to May 31
DC will be dark today for Memorial Day, but the rest of the week has ample and varied events:
1. Institutional Reform in Libya, Egypt, and Tunisia, Tuesday, May 28 / 1:00pm – 3:00pm , Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Venue: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20036
Speakers: Marwan Muasher, Frederic Wehrey, Ellen Lust, Jakob Wichmann
As Arab political transitions stumble and parties clash over the pace and direction of reforms, analysts are largely focused on the differences between political actors-Islamists, Salafis, liberals, and others-and the implications for political development. But critics argue that this distracts attention from trying to understand the critical institutional changes underway in these countries.
Register for the event here:
http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/05/28/institutional-reform-in-libya-egypt-and-tunisia/g5xy
2. Nuclear Terrorism: What’s at Stake? Wednesday, May 29 / 8:00am – 9:30am , American Security Project
Venue: American Security Project, 1100 New York Avenue, NW · Suite 710W, Washington, DC
Speakers: Jay M. Cohen, David Waller, Stephen E. Flynn, Stanton D. Sloane, Stephen A. Cheney
The U.S. is a leader in global nonproliferation efforts, from preventing new nuclear states to securing nuclear materials and technology. However, preventing nuclear terror also requires efforts on a domestic front. U.S. ports present a potential vulnerability and securing these ports requires improvement in the capacity to detect and secure nuclear materials that could arrive in shipping containers.
Please RSVP to:
events@americansecurityproject.org
For more information see:
http://americansecurityproject.org/events/2013/event-nuclear-terrorism-whats-at-stake/
3. A Syrian No Fly Zone: Options and Constraints, Wednesday, May 29 / 10:00am – 12:00pm, US Institute of Peace
Venue: US Institute of Peace, 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, D.C.
Speakers: Steven Heydemann, Frederic C. Hof, David A. Deptula, Jon Alterman, Joseph Holliday
Now in its third year, with no end in sight, the Syrian uprising against the authoritarian government of Bashar al-Assad has brought devastation, death, and displacement to the country. Today, more than a quarter of Syrians have fled their homes. Some 250,000 Syrians have been killed, wounded, or are missing. By the end of 2013, half of all Syrians, more than 11 million people, could need assistance in what the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, António Guterres, has called the worst humanitarian crisis the U.N. has ever faced.
As violence deepens, with the Assad regime using ballistic missiles and, reportedly, nerve gas, against civilians, the U.S. and its allies continue to search for viable options to shorten the conflict, bring the regime and the opposition to the negotiating table, and place Syria on the path of political transition.
Few options have received as much attention as the idea of creating a no fly zone (NFZ) over part or all of Syria. The Syrian opposition has appealed to the international community to create a NFZ. Members of Congress have called on the Obama administration to embrace an NFZ as the most effective way to protect Syrian civilians and achieve a political solution.
While debate around the NFZ option intensifies, there has been far less attention to the military, diplomatic, and regional complexities that such a move would entail. To inform and deepen the debate over an NFZ for Syria, the U.S. Institute of Peace is convening a panel of distinguished experts to discuss the diplomatic, strategic, tactical, and political implications involved.
Webcast: This event will be webcast live beginning at 10:00am EST on May 29, 2013 at www.usip.org/webcast. Join the conversation and submit questions for the panel on Twitter with #SyriaNFZ.
RSVP for the event here:
http://www.usip.org/events/syrian-no-fly-zone-options-and-constraints
4. Serbia’s Challenges on Its Path to EU Accession, Wednesday, May 29 / 1:00pm – 2:00pm , Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Venue: Woodrow Wilson Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20004
Speaker: Ljubica Vasic
Assistant Foreign Minister of Serbia Ljubica Vasic will discuss the challenges and opportunities that the Republic of Serbia faces on its path to European integration. Vasic will address key reforms that the country has introduced so far to advance its EU accession bid, and will explain why the European integration process is important for the overall development of the country. She will outline the steps that Serbia has taken to achieve one of its main foreign policy goals; EU membership.
Ljubica Vasic was appointed Assistant Foreign Minister of Serbia in January 2013. Previously, she served as a special adviser to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and headed the Serb Parliamentary Delegation to the Council of Europe. Vasic began her political career in 2008, and has served as an adviser on European integration policies, and has been a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee of Serb National Assembly. Vasic holds two graduate degrees – in European Integration and in English Philology – from the University of Belgrade and the Unviersity of Kragujevac respectively, and is currently working on a doctoral degree at the University of Kragujevac. She is fluent in English, French, Italian, and Serb.
Register for the event here:
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/serbias-challenges-its-path-to-eu-accession
5. Protecting People with Technology: Modernizing U.N. Peacekeeping , Wednesday, May 29 / 2:00pm – 3:30pm, Stimson Center
Venue: Stimson Center, 1111 19th Street Northwest, 12th Floor, Washington D.C., DC 20036
Speakers: Walter Dorn, Sarah Williamson
Protect the People, the Stimson Center, the Partnership for Effective Peacekeeping and the Better World Campaign present: Protecting People with Technology: Modernizing U.N. Peacekeeping
A conversation with Dr. Walter Dorn, author of ‘Keeping Watch: Monitoring, Technology & Innovation in UN Peace Operations’
As U.N. peace operations are asked and expected to do more in increasingly complex and dangerous environments, this discussion with Dr. Dorn will explore the challenges and opportunities of leveraging a broad spectrum of technologies to enable U.N. peace operations to more effectively and safely protect civilians.
Dr. Walter Dorn has also taught at the Pearson Centre and as a visiting professional in the Office of the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court in The Hague. He has served with the United Nations Mission in East Timor, the United Nations in Ethiopia, at U.N. headquarters as a training adviser and as a consultant with the U.N. Department of Peacekeeping Operations. His book ‘Keeping Watch: Monitoring, Technology, and Innovation in UN Peace Operations’ was published in 2011 by U.N. University Press. Copies of his book will be available for purchase and signing.
Register for the event here:
http://www.stimson.org/events/protecting-people-with-technology-modernizing-un-peacekeeping/
6. Editing (Out) the Occupation, Thursday, May 30 / 9:00am – 10:00am , New America Foundation
Venue: New America Foundation, 1899 L St., N.W., Suite 400, Washington, D.C. 20036
Speakers: Linoy Bar-Geffen, Uri Misgav, Sarah Wildman
After nearly forty-six years of military occupation, two intifadas, a unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and a stalled political process, the Israeli public seems to have lost whatever interest it had in the Palestinian issue. Public attention has turned inwards — looking at economic and social concerns. However a critical examination of these concerns, by necessity, requires an equally critical examination of the ongoing occupation.
New America Foundation’s Middle East Task Force will host visiting Israeli journalists Uri Misgav and Linoy Bar-Geffen on May 30 for a conversation examining why the occupation is edited out of mainstream Israeli media and exploring how mainstream and alternative media can bring the occupation more forcefully into the Israeli national conversation.
Register for the event here:
http://www.newamerica.net/events/2013/editing_out_the_occupation
7. The Water-Security Nexus in Pakistan, Thursday, May 30 / 10:00am – 11:30am , US Institute of Peace
Venue: US Institute of Peace, 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, D.C.
Speakers: Majed Akhter, Daanish Mustafa, Winston Yu
Because of overuse and misuse, Pakistan is headed toward a serious water crisis. The U.N. is expected to downgrade Pakistan from ‘water stressed’ to ‘water scarce’ by 2030. While issues between India and Pakistan often garner the most attention, water conflicts within Pakistan’s borders have the explosive potential to poison inter-ethnic and inter-provincial relations and turn simmering tension into violence. In a country where livelihoods depend heavily on reliable access to water, effectively managing water resources can transform a common lightning rod for conflict into an opportunity for building intra-communal cooperation and trust.
Please join the U.S. Institute of Peace on May 30, 2013 from 10:00 am until 11:30 am, for a panel discussion on USIP’s new PeaceWorks, ‘Understanding Pakistan’s Water-Security Nexus’, and the opportunities and pitfalls of peacebuilding through environmental policy in South Asia.
Register for the event here:
http://www.usip.org/events/pakistanwater
8. The Kaleidoscope Turns Again in a Crisis-Challenged Iran, Thursday, May 30 / 12:00pm – 1:30pm, Atlantic Council
Venue: Atlantic Council of the United States, 1101 15th Street, NW, 11th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005
Speakers: Yasmin Alem, Suzanne Maloney, Barbara Slavin
Please join the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center for the release of a new issue brief, “The Kaleidoscope Turns Again in a Crisis-Challenged Iran,” a discussion of Iran’s upcoming presidential elections. While the elections will not be free, fair, or competitive in a Western sense, they will be a barometer of the stability and durability of the Islamic Republic at a time of unprecedented external pressures and rising domestic discontent. Political factions will break down and regroup as a shrinking elite competes for diminishing spoils. The outcome of the elections and the manner in which they are conducted could also have important implications for Iranian policy going forward, including on the nuclear issue.
The Iran Task Force seeks to perform a comprehensive analysis of Iran’s internal political landscape, its role in the region and globally, and any basis for an improved relationship with the West.
RSVP with name and affiliation to:
southasia@acus.org.
9. Reviving U.S. Foreign Policy: The Case for Putting America‘s House in Order, Thursday, May 30 / 3:30pm – 5:00pm , Brookings Institution
Venue: Brookings Institution,1775 Massachusetts Ave, NW, Washington, D.C. 20036
Falk Auditorium
Speakers: Martin S. Indyk, Richard N. Haass, Robert Kagan
A rising China, climate change, terrorism, Iran’s nuclear ambitions, a tumultuous Middle East, and a defiant North Korea all present serious challenges for U.S. foreign policy, but could internal factors actually pose the biggest threat to the United States, its security, and its position as a global leader? In his new book, Foreign Policy Begins at Home: The Case for Putting America’s House in Order (Basic Books, 2013), Richard Haass argues that U.S. national security depends on the United States addressing significant internal issues: repairing its crumbling infrastructure, improving education, reforming its immigration policies and reducing its burgeoning debt. Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, contends that these shortcomings directly threaten America’s ability to project power and exert influence overseas; to compete in the global marketplace; to generate the resources needed to promote the full range of U.S. interests abroad; and to set a compelling example that can influence the thinking and behavior of other nations.
On May 30, Foreign Policy at Brookings will host Haass for a discussion on the challenging issues facing the United States at home and their impact on the successful pursuit of U.S. foreign and security policies abroad. Brookings Senior Fellow Robert Kagan will join the discussion. Vice President Martin Indyk, director of Foreign Policy, will provide introductory remarks and moderate the conversation.
After the program, the speakers will take audience questions.
Register for the event here:
http://www.brookings.edu/events/2013/05/30-us-foreign-policy-haass?rssid=UpcomingEvents&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BrookingsRSS%2Ftopfeeds%2FUpcomingEvents+%28Brookings+Upcoming+Events%29
10. Varieties of Democracy: Global Standards, Local Knowledge, Thursday, May 30 / 4:00pm – 5:45pm, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Venue: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20036
Speakers: Michael Coppedge, Staffan Lindberg, Massimo Tommasoli, Richard Youngs
The global diversity of democracy continues to grow, providing practical and analytic challenges to national policymakers and the international community. Varieties of Democracy, a new collaborative of fifteen social scientists, seeks to provide the first comprehensive approach to the conceptualization and measurement of democracy. Two of the principal investigators, Michael Coppedge and Staffan Lindberg, from the Varieties of Democracy Project, will demonstrate how innovative, freely available data make new kinds of democracy research and project assessment possible for the first time. International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance’s Massimo Tommasoli will comment, and Richard Youngs will moderate.
Register for the event here:
http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/05/30/varieties-of-democracy-global-standards-local-knowledge/g46e
11. Tunisia’s Democratic Future: An Address by Rached Ghannouchi, Friday, May 31 / 10:00am – 11:30am, Brookings Institution
Venue: Brookings Institution, 1775 Massachusetts Ave, NW, Washington, D.C. 20036
Falk Auditorium
Speakers: Martin S. Indyk, Tamara Cofman Wittes, Rached Ghannouchi
In Tunisia, where the Arab awakening began, the move toward a more open society is experiencing growing pains. Economic pressures exacerbated by the revolution and the war next door in Libya, extremist violence, and the country’s deep divisions over drafting its new constitution all present pressing challenges to Tunisia’s democratic transition. Will the country that kicked off the Arab revolutions continue to inspire the region’s drive toward democracy? What can Tunisian approaches to resolving political conflicts and reconciling Islamism and democracy teach us about the prospects for successful transitions elsewhere in the Arab world?
On May 31, the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings will host Rached Ghannouchi, co-founder and president of Tunisia’s Nahda Party, for a special address on the future of Tunisian democracy. Vice President Martin Indyk, director of Foreign Policy, will provide introductory remarks. Following Ghannouchi’s remarks, Saban Center Director and Senior Fellow Tamara Cofman Wittes will moderate the discussion and include audience questions.
Join the conversation on Twitter using #FPTunisia.
Register for the event here:
http://www.brookings.edu/events/2013/05/31-tunisia-democracy-ghannouchi?rssid=UpcomingEvents&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BrookingsRSS%2Ftopfeeds%2FUpcomingEvents+%28Brookings+Upcoming+Events%29
12. The Good Muslim and Religious Freedom, Friday, May 31 / 12:00pm – 2:00pm , Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, & World Affairs
Venue: Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, & World Affairs, 3307 M Street, Suite 200, Washington, D.C. 20007, 3rd Floor Conference Room
Speaker: Mona Siddiqui
The complexities and challenges of religious freedom in contemporary Islam find many of their roots in the development of Islamic law and theology during the Middle Ages, a fact largely unknown to the general public. In a new book, The Good Muslim: Reflections on Classical Islamic Law and Theology, Mona Siddiqui, professor of Islamic and Interreligious Studies at the University of Edinburgh and associate scholar at the Religious Freedom Project, attempts to fill this void. The book explores a wide range of topics from divorce, slavery, and perspectives on evil, to virtue and friendship within both Shari’a and medieval Islamic philosophy.
Siddiqui will discuss these themes with Charles Butterworth, renowned Islamic Studies scholar and professor emeritus of Political Philosophy at the University of Maryland. Karen Rupprecht, Religious
Freedom Project program assistant, will moderate.
Register for the event here:
http://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/events/rsvp?id=the-good-muslim-and-religious-freedom
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The Supreme Leader leads supremely
The bleak outlook for the June 14 Iranian elections was discussed yesterday at the Woodrow Wilson Center. Panelists Ali Vaez, Barbara Slavin and Meir Javendafar weighed in on the likely front runners. A second discussion at Brookings was not for attribution.
The bottom line is clear. The Guardian Council has exercised its authority to eliminate the more interesting candidates and limit competition. There is little likelihood of fundamental change. The disputed the 2009 presidential election has made the Supreme Leader extra cautious. He thinks it is better to prevent dissent by controlling the selection of candidates, rather than deal with an angry population after the votes have been counted. Nothing will be left to chance.
The election will exclude President Ahmedinejad and his friends from positions of power and strengthen the position of Supreme Leader Khamenei. But Ahmedinejad may remain influential after the election by using his knowledge of corruption and electoral fraud to challenge the establishment.
All remaining eight candidates make up in loyalty to the Supreme Leader what they lack in charisma. Possible front runners include:
- Saeed Jalili, Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, is uncontroversial and willing to work with other political factions. His election would help the Supreme Leader, to whom he is notably loyal, to marginalize the presidency.
- Hassan Rowhani, another former nuclear negotiator, and Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, the current mayor of Tehran, are popular, centrist candidates, but both likely more independent than the Supreme Leader wants.
Six of the eight candidates were appointed by the Supreme Leader at some point in their careers. Khamanei wants a president who will stay loyal to him and to his vision as he gets older and weaker.
The Iranian leadership plans to keep the election lackluster in an attempt to prevent the growing undercurrent of dissent from spilling over. Candidates will not even be participating in televised debates. Voter turnout is expected to be historically low, though the state media may report record high turnout. Slavin quipped about the 2009 elections:
80% of the population sat a home and watched the news report that 70% of the population had turned out to vote.
From the US perspective, election of Rowhani might seem the best outcome, as he is the closest thing left in the race to someone interested in reform. But he would also likely be the one most at odds with the Supreme Leader. On the nuclear issue in particular, any division in the Iranian regime, as occurred under Ahmedinejad, could cause paralysis rather than generate progress.
The odds of success in the nuclear negotiation are in any case slim. The Iranians see the US as having taken its best shot with sanctions whose impact has been absorbed and is now declining. With time, they figure the sanctions will fray. The aging and ossified Khamenei is extraordinarily suspicious and cautious. For him to decide in his dotage that what Iran really needs is an agreement with the United States to limit Iran’s nuclear program would be out of character.
Revival of the Green opposition, defeat in Syria or a sharp drop in oil prices are all possible “black swans” that could dramatically affect the situation, before or after the election. But all seem unlikely this year.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Ten things the president should be doing
Herewith my short list of ten international issues more worthy of presidential attention than the issues that are getting it this week:
- Drones: Apparently the President is preparing to address how and why he uses them soon.
- Syria: Secretary of State Kerry and the Russians are ginning up a peace conference next month, while Moscow strengthens Syrian defenses against Western intervention.
- Iraq: The Syrian war is spilling over and posing serious challenges to the country’s political cohesion.
- Egypt: President Morsi is taking the Arab world’s most populous country in economically and politically ruinous directions.
- Israel/Palestine: With the peace process moribund, the window is closing on the opportunity to reach a two-state outcome.
- Libya: The failure to establish the state’s monopoly on the legitimate use of force leaves open the possibility of further attacks on Americans (and on the Libyan state).
- Afghanistan: The American withdrawal is on schedule, but big questions remain about what will be left behind.
- Pakistan: Nawaz Sharif’s hat trick provides an opportunity for improved relations, if managed well.
- Iran: once its presidential election is over (first round is June 14, runoff if needed June 21), a last diplomatic effort on its nuclear ambitions will begin.
- All that Asia stuff: North Korean nukes, maritime jostling with China, Trans-Pacific Partnership, transition in Myanmar (how about trying for one in Vietnam?), Japan’s economic and military revival…
In the good old days, presidents in domestic trouble headed out on international trips. Obama doesn’t seem inclined in that direction. He really does want to limit America’s commitments abroad and restore its economy at home. Bless him. But if things get much worse, I’ll bet on a road trip.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Fool me twice, shame on me
The discussion Monday at the Wilson Center of “The Media and Iran’s Nuclear Program: An Analysis of US and UK Coverage, 2009-12” began with the familiar litany of complaints about the media’s pre-Iraq war coverage: lack of critical analysis, an over reliance on White House sources, lack of precise wording and a narrow pre-war context. Are we falling into the same trap with Iran?
The panel discussed a new report from the Center for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland. Co-author Jonas Siegel laid out the reports major findings:
- The media’s coverage of the Iranian nuclear program lacks context and diversity of sources.
Newspapers relied heavily on government officials. A narrow range of sources leads to a narrow set of policy options. Alternative approaches to conflict resolution are often overlooked. The media ignore the wider context of the crisis and rarely discusses Iran’s domestic politics or security needs. Panelist John Steinbruner of the University of Maryland agreed that the media ignores the obvious diplomatic solution of allowing Iran to enrich uranium under international supervision. Iran has good reason to feel threatened, he added, and exercise of military options would further solidify Iran’s resolve in pursuing a nuclear program. - The media use imprecise language and hawkish rhetoric. The most common terms used on average in press coverage of Iran are “nuclear program” and “nuclear weapon.” This usage affects the reader’s assumptions and essentially jumps to the conclusion that Iran wants or already has a nuclear weapon.
- The media increasingly use commentary as the story, instead of in-depth journalism. The majority of coverage on Iran consisted of “he said, she said” stories about policy makers. News articles increasingly covered the nuclear debate instead of the nuclear issues, emphasizing stories about US or Israeli reactions to Iran and the implementation of sanctions.
- The media place the burden of resolution in Iran. “Iran needs to accept…” was a staple line in news articles. The media rarely discusses compromise from the American side and most often uses “negotiations” as code for Iranian concessions to US demands. Policy makers rely on news coverage for information on foreign affairs. Questions of Iran’s motives, intentions and capabilities should be at the center of the media’s coverage, but they are worryingly absent.
Panelist Walter Pincus of the Washington Post was critical of the report. He thought the authors had shown their own bias toward the issues while also giving their prescription for how the press should act. Every newspaper need not provide deep coverage of an issue. The press should represent one side of a discussion and leave it to the citizen to reach an informed conclusion. Commentary from the audience reflected Pincus’ point: “How can the media be held to such a high standard when dealing with an issue like Iran that no one can get to the truth of?”
Steinbruner concluded with a general point. This report is an indication that our discussion of Iran’s nuclear program is defective and prone to political mis-coverage. Sensationalist and selective reporting has far reaching and damaging repercussions. He ended saying, “that’s not really who we are, and in this situation, that’s not how we want to be.”
RSS - Posts
