The United States Institute of Peace (USIP) hosted a discussion on March 11 about how Pakistan navigates the Saudi Arabia-Iran rivalry, with Alex Vatanka, Senior Fellow at Middle East Institute. He was joined by Ankit Panda, Senior Editor at The Diplomat and Karen Young, Resident Scholar at American Enterprise Institute.
Panda spoke about the competition of Saudi Arabia and Iran in South Asia, mainly in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Pakistan has historically sought to play a neutral role in the Saudi-Iranian conflict. It remained neutral in the Saudi-led Decisive Storm campaign against the Houthis in Yemen. The 5000 troops Pakistan sent to Saudi Arabia were intended to protect the Kingdom’s borders, not to get involved in Yemen’s war. In a bid to avoid heightened tension between Saudi Arabia and Iran following the Saudi Arabia’s execution of prominent Shia Sheikh, Nimr Al-Nimr, Pakistan tried to mediate between the two countries. While its neutrality has been successful so far, it will not prevent Pakistan, if forced to pick sides, from supporting Saudi Arabia over Iran, which was unhappy with Pakistan joining the Islamic Military Counterterrorism coalition (MCTC) led by Saudi Arabia.
Looking at the relationship from an economic perspective, Young claims that Saudi Mohammed bin Salman (MBS)’s visit to South Asia targeted mainly India and China, not only Pakistan. In Islamabad, he had two goals:
- to strengthen military relations and build a regional anti-terrorism coalition;
- to gain access to nuclear technology.
Pakistan exports light weapons to Saudi Arabia and benefits from a Saudi loan of $3 billion for oil and gas supplies. More than two million workers from Pakistan and Bangladesh live in Saudi Arabia. Before his visit to Islamabad, Saudi MBS released 200 Pakistani prisoners.
Vatanka gave an overview of Iran’s perspective on the MBS visit to Pakistan. Pakistan’s neutral position since the eighties between Saudi Arabia and Iran is calculated to avoid fighting with the Arabs against Iran. Islamabad does not criticize what Iran is doing in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen or object to its recruitment of fighters from its population, which is 20% Shia. From the Iranian perspective, MBS’s visit entailed animosity towards Iran. But it produced more noise than substantial results. Unlike Saudi Arabia, Iran can not do much to help Pakistan in terms of arms, money, or foreign policy. Tehran and Islamabad have talked for twenty-five years about their pipeline connection, which is yet to be completed.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Like this:
Like Loading...
1. A city-based strategy for rebuilding Libya | Tuesday, March 12 | 9:00 am – 11:00 am | Brookings Institute | Register Here | The overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in 2011 unleashed a long period of instability in Libya. Although elements of governance and a functional economy remain, Libya’s central institutions are weak, with militias and other non-state actors competing for state spoils, such as oil. This internal crisis has significant security ramifications for Libya and beyond: Besides presenting a potential source of terrorism, Libya’s ungoverned spaces have contributed to the unregulated flows of people from the Middle East and Africa to Europe. However, in recent years, the United States has been largely absent from international–including U.N.-led–efforts to restore governance in Libya. In their new report outlining recommendations for the United States and other outside actors on a new policy in Lybia, it focuses on the country’s economic, political, and security activity on its major cities, with the United States reinstating its embassy and ambassador. John R. Allen, the president of the Brooking Institute, will provide opening remarks, and Karim Mezran, Federica Saini Fasanotti and Frederic Wehrey will join Jeffrey Feltman and Alice Hunt Friend in a discussion moderated by Michael E. O’Hanlon.
2. How Pakistan Navigates the Saudi Arabia-Iran Rivalry Libya | Tuesday, March 11 | 1:00 am –2:30am |United States Institute of Peace |Register Here | The deepening relationship between Pakistan and the Gulf states comes at a period of high tension between Saudi Arabia and Iran, whose border with Pakistan has also been the site of periodic clashes and whose past efforts to launch a gas pipeline project linking the two countries remains stalled. A February 13th terrorist attacked, which killed 27 members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard and was linked to Pakistani-based militants, only further escalated tensions between the two countries. While Prime Minister Khan has professed a desire to serve as a mediator between Saudi Arabia and Iran, Pakistan faces an increasingly challenging diplomatic balancing act. A discussion analyzing the current Pakistani government’s relations with Saudi Arabia, Iran, and the Gulf States, and implications for regional security in South Asia and the greater Middle East, with Ankit Panda for the Diplomat, Karen Young for American Enterprise Institute and Alex Vatanka for Middle East Institute. Ambassador Richard Olson will moderate the discussion.
3. How Russia is surviving Western Sanctions | Monday, March 11 | 2:00 – 3:00 pm | Wilson Center | Register here | Despite uncertainty in the world economy and sanctions, Russia’s economy is set for a broad-based economic recovery. Policies to boost public spending, notably investment, should contribute. Martin Gilman will explore why the Russian authorities have been able to marginalize the impact of the US-instigated sanctions. Gilman will underscore how the most recent legal case involving Baring Vostok could have a much more chilling effect on economic prospects. The panel will be one-one discussion with Martin Gilman of Higher School of Economics in Moscow.
4. Plan País: Building the New Venezuela – A Roadmap for Reconstruction | Monday, March 14 | 5:00pm -6:30pm | Atlantic Council | Register Here | Venezuela is at a turning point. Interim President Juan Guaidó has received the backing of both the Venezuelan people and more than sixty countries. Looking ahead to the democratic transition, the interim government is focused on the reconstruction of Venezuela’s economy and public sector. Here, the Venezuelan National Assembly has proposed Plan País as the most promising opportunity yet to steer Venezuela out of its crisis. Beyond domestic support, Plan País will require the help of the international community and multilateral cooperation for successful implementation. “How would Plan País rebuild Venezuela, and what would be the role of the Inter-American Development Bank and other multilateral development banks,” will feature panelists Ángel Alvarado of Miranda State National Assembly of Venezuela, Alejandro Grisanti of Ecoanalítica, Paula García Tufro of Atlantic Council, Diego Area of Atlantic Council.
5. Dialogues on American Foreign Policy and World Affairs: A Conversation with Jake Sullivan| Friday, March 15 | 11:30am – 12:45 pm | Hudson Institute | Register Here | Hudson Institute will host Jake Sullivan, former national security adviser to Vice President Joe Biden, for a one-on-one discussion with Hudson Institute Distinguished Fellow Walter Russell Mead on U.S. national security threats and opportunities. Mead will explore Mr. Sullivan’s perspective on the future of the Middle East; Russia and Transatlantic relations; the challenge of a rising China; and other concerns facing American policymakers today and in the years ahead. Speakers include Jake Sullivan of Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and Walter Russell Mead of Hudson Institute.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Like this:
Like Loading...
The Middle East Institute (MEI) hosted a discussion on February 21 about understanding what the Taliban wants, with former Ambassador Omar Samad, Nonresident Senior fFellow with the Atlantic Council. He was joined by William Maley, professor of diplomacy at the Asian-Pacific College of Diplomacy, Candance Rondeaux, professor in the School of Politics and Global Studies at Arizona State University, and Ahmed Majidyar, Senior Fellow and Director of Iranobserved at MEI.
Samad gave an overview of the emergence of Taliban twenty-five years ago, emphasizing that it is not known how they evolved and gained support inside and outside Afghanistan. Nor is it known how much control Pakistan has over them, their agenda, and their connection with terrorism. Taliban leaders reside outside Afghanistan; some of them go back and forth. The group grew from madrasa system in Afghanistan and Pakistan, supported by foreign fighters from Central Asia and the Caucasus. While they have updated their beliefs on women rights, democracy and governance, the Taliban’s current intentions remain to be tested and verified. They are proclaiming victory, claiming to have won the war and thus wanting to have a say in any future political settlement in Afghanistan.
Maley thinks the US as a wrong approach to the Taliban based on a Western model of leadership. he Taliban wanted to negotiate directly with the US and other international interlocutors to delegitimate the Afghani government. But since the death of Mullah Omar, the Taliban no longer have a leader whose word will bind the rest of the group. Little is known about what is needed now to negotiate effectively with the Taliban.
Evolving in a network of networks, Rondeaux thinks the Taliban do have a strong command structure, as demonstrated during the recent ceasefire. They gave a pledge and kept it, which showed they have control over their groups. Their command and control has grown, with lines of communication stretching from Peshawar to the interior of Afghanistan as well as to Doha and Turkey. This is considerable progress compared to 2001 and 2012, when they were on their back foot and fleeing across the borders. Now they have military courts and a justice system. Because of their cohesiveness, they are having meetings with the UN, ICRC, and other stakeholders.
Majidyar claims that after the US intervention in Afghanistan the Taliban military structure has become more decentralized and shifted from a disorganized insurgent movement to an organized shadow government. Having their leadership inside Pakistan, the Taliban counts on a cabinet that includes a Ministry of Education, a Ministry of Religious Affairs, and a Ministry of War, among others. They have also set up shadow governors and different committees running the day-to- day affairs. Along with the help of NGOs and the UN, they attend to the needs of the population in terms of health, education, and other sectors. Taliban recruitment comes from refugees inside Pakistan, madrasas, and the local community. Their area of influence has expanded from the south and east all across Afghanistan. With growing legitimacy, the Taliban had deepened ties with Russia, China, and the Gulf States.
According to Majidyar, the Taliban have not changed their connection with national and international terrorist groups. Despite the pledges given to the US, they still maintain ties with Al Qaeda active in the region. While pledging to respect human rights and international law once in power, the Taliban’s views on women’s and other human rights have not changed.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Like this:
Like Loading...
1. What Drives Violence in Central America’s Northern Triangle? | Tuesday, September 25, 2018 | 9:30 am – 11:00 am | U.S. Institute of Peace | 2301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20037 | Register Here
Violence and crime are the main drivers of mass immigration from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador into the United States. These countries form a region known as the Northern Triangle, which ranks in the top 10 worldwide for homicide, corruption, drug trafficking and gang violence. Non-state actors perpetuate insecurity, forcibly recruit individuals into their ranks and use sexual violence as a tool of intimidation and control.
Central America became a key area of U.S. foreign policy in the late 1970s, when a number of conflicts and revolutions broke out across the region. U.S. development assistance spiked during this period and during the early 2000s as conflict began to increase again. A significant amount of these funds were allocated to the war on drugs, rather than for security, peace and development. As conflict continues to escalate in Central America, how can the U.S. mitigate the violence, support and strengthen rule of law, and curb immigration?
Please join the U.S. Institute of Peace and the partners of the Conflict Prevention and Resolution Forum (CPRF) for a discussion on the issues facing Central America, and how the peacebuilding community can develop programming to prevent and mitigate violence, support community resilience and help stabilize the region. Join the conversation on Twitter with #CPRF.
Since 1999, the CPRF has provided a monthly platform in Washington that highlights innovative and constructive methods of conflict resolution. CPRF’s goals are to (1) provide information from a wide variety of perspectives; (2) explore possible solutions to complex conflicts; and (3) provide a secure venue for stakeholders from various disciplines to engage in cross-sector and multi-track problem-solving. The CPRF is hosted at USIP and SAIS and organized by the Conflict Management Program in conjunction with Search for Common Ground. The CPRF is co-sponsored by a consortium of organizations that specialize in conflict resolution and/or public policy formulation.
Speakers
Steve Hege
Senior Expert, Colombia, U.S. Institute of Peace
Enrique Roig
Director, Citizen Security Practice Area Creative Associates International
Others TBD
2. China: Managing Conflict and Competition | Thursday, September 27, 2018 | 11:00 am – 12:00 pm | U.S. Institute of Peace | 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20037 | Register Here
The evolution of U.S.-China relations over the last 40 years presents challenges that, if not properly managed, threaten American leadership in key places of strategic interest, from Asia to Africa to the Western Hemisphere. Please join us for a Bipartisan Congressional Dialogue with two members of Congress who see tension rising as cooperation recedes and the People’s Republic of China increases its malicious activity in cyberspace, expands its military capabilities and presence around the globe, and uses economic tools to gain strategic leverage and undermine democracy in fragile states.
Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT) and Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD) are both members of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations and Related Agencies. Rep. Stewart also serves on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and Rep. Ruppersberger was the first Democratic Freshman appointed to the Committee and concluded his service on the Committee as the Ranking Member. Both Representatives will discuss Congress’ efforts to focus attention on China’s military, diplomatic, and economic approaches around the globe at USIP’s sixth Bipartisan Congressional Dialogue.
Moderated by Nancy Lindborg, President, U.S. Institute of Peace
3. Double Game: Why Pakistan Supports Militants and Resists U.S. Pressure to Stop | Thursday, September 27, 2018 | 11:00 am – 12:30 pm | CATO Institute | 1000 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001 | Register Here
Featuring Sahar Khan, Visiting Research Fellow, Cato Institute; Ambassador Robin L. Raphel, Former Assistant Secretary of State, South Asia; moderated by John Glaser, Director of Foreign Policy Studies, Cato Institute.
The Trump administration has taken a hardline approach toward Pakistan, cutting military and security aid throughout 2018 and accusing Pakistan of not doing enough to combat militants operating on its soil. Pakistan, however, maintains that it has eliminated all safe havens and that the United States is unfairly targeting the country.
Washington’s conventional wisdom on Pakistan correctly links militant sponsorship with the state’s military and intelligence agencies. As such, U.S. policies to combat Pakistan’s militant sponsorship have primarily focused on pressuring the military. In a new report, Sahar Khan analyzes Pakistan’s anti-terrorism legal regime, judiciary, and police and finds that in the context of counterterrorism, civil institutions have developed policies and bureaucratic routines that reinforce the military’s policy of sponsoring militant groups. And this is one of the primary reasons why U.S. attempts to change Pakistan’s policy of militant sponsorship have failed.
Please join us for a lively discussion, with lunch to follow.
4. The Nation-State Law: Implications for Democracy and Peace in Israel/ Palestine | Thursday, September 27, 2018 | 3:00 pm – 4:30 pm | Foundation for Middle East Peace | 1319 18th St NW, Washington DC 20036 | Register Here
In July of this year, the Israeli Knesset passed the “Nation-State” law, defining Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people exclusively. The law poses a major threat to the status of minorities in Israel, especially Palestinian citizens of Israel, who comprise around 20% of the population. Because it can be interpreted to apply to the territories occupied by Israel in 1967, it is also poised to entrench Israel’s occupation. Join us for a conversation about the implications of the law for Israel’s minorities, Middle East peace, and the future of Israeli democracy.
Speakers:
Jafar Farah is the founder and the Director of Mossawa, the Advocacy Center for Arab Citizens in Israel. Jafar is a long-time advocate and activist for civil rights for the Arab community. As a community organizer and activist he was involved in establishing several organizations such as I’lam, ACAP (Arab Center for Alternative Planning) and the follow up committee for Arab education. Before establishing Mossawa, Jafar worked as a journalist for the Local network of Ha’aretz and as a TV producer.
Nabila Espanioly is a feminist and peace activist who founded the Pedagogical Center and Multipurpose Women’s Centre in Nazareth (Al-Tufula) in 1989 and has served as the director since that time. She has an M.A. in Psychology from Bamberg University, Germany and a B.A. in Social Work from Haifa University.
Dr. Debra Shushan is Director of Policy and Government Relations at Americans for Peace Now. Prior to joining APN, she specialized in the politics of the Middle East and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as an Assistant Professor of Government at the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, VA. Dr. Shushan’s writing appears in Haaretz and she is a regular guest on “The Spin Room” on Israel’s i24 TV.
5. Fixing Fragility in the Sahel | Friday, September 28, 2018 | 3:00 pm – 4:30 pm | Brookings Institution | 1775 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036 | Register Here
According to the 2018 Failed States Index, 10 of the world’s most fragile states are in Africa and the Sahel region is a particular locus of concern. Countries such as Burkina Faso, Chad, Mauritania, Mali, and Niger, are facing challenges associated with violent extremism, organized, and transnational criminal networks. During the past decade, terrorists groups such as al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb, the Islamic State, and Boko Haram have killed thousands of people, displaced populations, and threatened stability and security.
Mali’s own efforts at national as well as Sahel-wide stabilization are instructive. In spite of the establishment of the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali—MINUSMA—and the efforts of the G-5 Sahel, along with international efforts to bring peace and security, fragility continues to undermine socio-economic development progress. Creating a viable future for the region will require interlinked solutions at the nexus of economics, security, state capacity, humanitarian efforts, and international interventions.
On September 28, the Africa Growth Initiative at Brookings will host His Excellency Ibrahim Boubacar Keïta, president of Mali and co-founder of the G-5 Sahel. President Keita will deliver opening remarks, after which he will sit down for an interview with Brookings President John R. Allen.
6. Network Propaganda: Manipulation, Disinformation, and Radicalization in American Politics | Friday, September 28, 2018 | 4:00 pm – 5:30 pm | CATO Institute | 1000 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001 | Register Here
Featuring the author Yochai Benkler, Berkman Professor of Entrepreneurial Legal Studies, Harvard Law School; with comments by Rebecca MacKinnon, Director, Ranking Digital Rights project, New America; moderated by Julian Sanchez, Senior Fellow, Cato Institute.
The internet and social media were supposed to radically democratize news and information—yet many observers now worry that they are undermining the preconditions for healthy democracies. Misinformation peddled by conspiracy theorists, unscrupulous clickbaiters, and even intelligence agencies spreads around the globe at the speed of light, while in the United States, citizens increasingly retreat into distinct media ecosystems so divergent as to be mutually unrecognizable. Can liberal democracy function in a world in which voters no longer inhabit the same universe of facts?
We’ll take up these questions with renowned scholar Yochai Benkler, coauthor of the important new book-length study Network Propaganda: Manipulation, Disinformation, and Radicalization in American Politics. We’ll take a close look at the dynamics of how propaganda, misinformation, and “fake news” propagate across modern information networks. Rebecca MacKinnon, author of Consent of the Networked: The Worldwide Struggle for Internet Freedom, and Cato senior fellow Julian Sanchez provide commentary.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Like this:
Like Loading...
RSS - Posts
