Tag: Sudan
Peace Picks | August 24 – August 28, 2020
Notice: Due to recent public health concerns, upcoming events are only available via live stream.
- Gender Equality 100 Years After the 19th Amendment | August 24, 2020 | 2:00 – 4:00 PM EDT | Brookings Institution | Register Here
On August 26, 1920, the 19th amendment was adopted to the U.S. Constitution, granting some – though not all – American women the right to vote. 100 years later, relative equality at the ballot box has not been matched by equity in business, politics, the military, family life, and even retirement.
On August 24, as part of 19A: The Brookings Gender Equality Series, Brookings will host a webinar to examine the state of gender equality today and what needs to be done to achieve full equality for women in our society.
Tina Tchen, CEO of TIME’S UP Foundation and former executive director of the White House Council on Women and Girls will offer keynote remarks, followed by a conversation with Madeleine Albright, the first woman to serve as U.S. secretary of state. Susan Ware, who serves as the honorary women’s suffrage centennial historian at the Radcliffe Institute’s Schlesinger Library at Harvard, will provide a brief historical overview of the women’s suffrage movement. Then, Brookings experts Camille Busette, Elaine Kamarck, Isabel Sawhill, and Makada Henry-Nickie will convene a panel discussion to examine how gender equality has evolved since the amendment’s passage and what public reforms could address gender-based inequalities that persist today.
Speakers:
John R. Allen: President, Brookings Institution
Camille Busette: Senior Fellow, Economic Studies, Governance Studies, Metropolitan Policy Program
Tina Tchen: President & CEO, TIME’S UP Foundation
Madeleine Albright: Chair, Albright Stonebridge Group
Tamara Cofman Wittes: Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy, Center for Middle East Policy
Susan Ware: Honorary Women’s Suffrage Centennial Historian, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard University
Makada Henry-Nickel: Fellow, Governance Studies
Isabel V. Sawhill: Senior Fellow, Economic Studies, Center on Children/Families, Future of the Middle Class Initiative
Elaine Kamarck: Founding Director, Center for Effective Public Management & Senior Fellow, Governance Studies - Prospects for Peace in Sudan: Insights From the Armed Movements & Analysts | August 25, 2020 | 11:00 AM EDT | Atlantic Council | Register Here
The transition to civilian rule in Sudan took place one year ago this month, and the success of that transition depends in part on the successful conclusion of an internal peace agreement between the new transitional government in Khartoum and the various armed movements across Sudan’s regions. Though progress has been made, several of the largest and most powerful groups remain outside the peace process, while many of the issues at the heart of Sudan’s difficult center-periphery dynamics have yet to be addressed. Issues of power-sharing, federalism, restitution, and the role of religion in the state all remain unresolved. Even as the talks approach a hoped-for conclusion, several of Sudan’s regions are at the same time experiencing an uptick in violence and instability, underscoring the urgency around achieving a durable peace.
Speakers:
General Abdelaziz al-Hilu: Chairman, Sudan People’s Liberation Movement – North
Dr. Gibril Ibrahim: Chairman, Justice & Equality Movement
Dr. Elshafie Khidiri: Sudanese Political Advisor & Commentator
Dr. Annette Weber: Senior Fellow, German Institute for International & Security Affairs
Mr. Cameron Hudson: Senior Fellow, Africa Center, Atlantic Council - A Conversation With Afghan Acting Foreign Minister Mohammed Haneef Atmar | August 27, 2020 | 9:00 – 10:00 AM EDT | United States Institute of Peace | Register Here
Afghanistan’s peace process has faced hurdles—some familiar, some new—in recent months. There is increased hope that long-awaited negotiations between the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the Taliban will begin imminently. But despite recent momentum following the Eid cease-fire at the end of July and the Loya Jirga organized by President Ghani at the beginning of August, major barriers remain ahead of talks. The levels of violence against Afghan security forces and civilians remain at unsustainable levels, and continued disputes over prisoner releases may delay the process further.
The lead up to intra-Afghan talks has made it clear that a sustainable peace in Afghanistan will require intensive international and regional support, both during negotiations and following any political settlement. Afghanistan’s acting Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mohammed Haneef Atmar, has led Afghanistan’s efforts to consolidate international support for the peace process in Afghanistan—including diverse neighbors, regional powers, and supportive western nations.
Join USIP as we host Minister Atmar for a virtual discussion about the Afghanistan peace process as talks with the Taliban get set to begin. The foreign minister will speak about the Afghan government’s ongoing efforts for peace and stability, as well as the role of the regional and international community in supporting peace efforts.
Speakers:
Andrew Wilder (Moderator): Vice President, Asia Center, U.S. Institute of Peace
H.E. Mohammed Haneef Atmar: Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs, Islamic Republic of Afghanistan - The Mental Health Costs of Displacement | August 27, 2020 | 10:00 – 11:00 AM EDT | Middle East Institute | Register Here
In addition to economic and legal insecurity, many refugees and IDPs suffer from the immediate and long-term effects of PTSD and other mental health issues resulting from their experiences with conflict, displacement, and discrimination in their new environments. While government and NGO initiatives exist in Jordan, Iraq, and other host countries to promote mental health awareness and services in refugee communities, these resources are insufficient to address this dire need.
How can aid and development programs prioritize mental health as a key component of refugee support? What are the gaps in the regional mental health systems that must be bridged in order to serve refugee communities? What initiatives exist to empower refugee communities at the grassroots level to advocate for mental health services?
Speakers:
Amira Roess (Moderator): Non-Resident Scholar, Middle East Institute
Essam Daoud: Co-Founder & Director, Humanity Crew
Mohammad Abo-Hilal: Founder, Syria Bright Future - Palestine & the Arab World: A Relationship in Crisis? | August 27, 2020 | 4:00 – 5:15 PM AST | Brookings Institution | Register Here
For more than sixty years, the centrality of the Palestinian cause to the Arab world was without dispute, capturing the hearts and minds of people throughout the region and commanding the support of their governments. Today, however, this position has eroded and more Arab countries are pursuing enhanced relations with Israel despite its continued occupation and settlement of Palestine. This month, the United Arab Emirates announced it would establish official ties with Israel, and other countries are reportedly considering following suit. These developments beg the question: What has happened to Palestine’s place in the region and its relationships to regional allies?
The Brookings Doha Center invites you to attend a webinar on Palestine and the Arab world, which will consider the current state of relations and what it means for the Palestinian liberation movement today and in the future. The discussion will address questions such as: How and why have relations arrived at this point? How has Palestine’s diplomacy evolved and how adeptly has its leadership navigated the changing geopolitics of the region? What roles have been played by other countries—such as Egypt, Jordan, and the United States—and by the Palestinian diaspora? And what will the end of Oslo and the possibility of Israeli annexation mean for the region’s future?
Speakers:
Omar H. Rahman (Moderator): Visiting Fellow, Brookings Doha Center
Nour Odeh: Political Analyst & Public Diplomacy Consultant
Shibley Telhami: Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy, Center for Middle East Policy, U.S. Relations With the Arab World
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Tenuous transitions
“The two most populous countries in the Horn of Africa—Ethiopia and Sudan—are both struggling with once-in-a-generation political transitions. Complicating these already tenuous transitions is a convergence of worrying trends, such as widespread food insecurity, severe pressure on public finances, ongoing or unresolved internal conflicts, large numbers of displaced persons, and now, the coronavirus pandemic. The fate of the transitions in Ethiopia and Sudan may determine the broader prospects for peace in the region for years to come.” On May 28, the United States Institute of Peace held an online discussion on the specific challenges facing the political transitions in these countries. The discussion was led by Aly Verjee and featured four speakers:
Manal Taha: Sudan Program Advisor, United States Institute of Peace
Payton Knopf: Senior Advisor, United States Institute of Peace
Aaron Maasho: Independent Journalist
Emebet Getachew: Ethiopia County Program Manager, Life and Peace Institute
Aly Verjee (Moderator): Senior Advisor, United States Institute of Peace
Current Context
In opening remarks, Verjee underscored that moments of great promise and great peril characterize the current transitions of both Ethiopia and Sudan. Striking parallels in regard to internal tensions, inclusivity, economic and environmental pressures, and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic tie these nations together despite their differences.
Sudan
Taha believes that in order to make any real progress, the transitional government of Sudan must change its focus of reform within the capital of Khartoum to the regions in which the revolution began. Security reform, in particular, remains complicated in Darfur because of the presence of various armed groups. During the transition in Sudan, the voices of youth and women have remained underrepresented. This notable weakness of the transitional government can in part be attributed to the inherent patriarchal social structure of Sudanese society. To remedy this problem, Taha calls for further solidarity among Sudanese women across political and socio-economic lines.
Knopf highlighted that in the year since the Sudanese revolution took place and Omar al-Bashir was deposed, many citizens maintained unrealistic expectations for the pace of change within Sudan. The vast majority of Sudanese people sense opportunity for renewal, reinvigorating Sudanese cultural pride and patriotism that was tarnished from years of brutality by the al-Bashir regime. The establishment of the transitional arrangement in Sudan avoided the worst-case scenarios of state fragmentation or dramatic escalation of violence.
Ethiopia
Speaking on the election of Abiy Ahmed as the Prime Minister of Ethiopia, Maasho noted that a sense of optimism initially erupted across the country. Since then, Ethiopia has remained quite fragile and ravaged by ethnic tensions and rivalry. In the last three years, ethnic violence has led to the displacement of nearly three million people. Although the Ethiopian government has pressured displaced peoples to return to their communities, further eruptions of violence remain likely. Notably, Maasho believes that Covid-19 has generated a downward economic trajectory that will exacerbate tensions.
Getachew stresses that the government of Abiy Ahmed is trying to further consolidate its power and build institutions reflective of its own interests. The failure to establish checks and balances will result in authoritarianism. It remains too early to discern whether democracy has truly arrived in Ethiopia. In regard to the status of women, Getachew praised the appointment of women to various governmental positions. Although this may signal that Ethiopians are ready for women to hold key positions within society, one must remain skeptical of deeply entrenched ideas that have informed gender-based discrimination.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks | May 26 – 30
Notice: Due to recent public health concerns, upcoming events are only available via live-streaming.
- The IRGC Quds Force After Suleimani | May 26, 2020 | 9:30 AM | Arab Gulf States Institute | Register Here
The January 3 killing of Major General Qassim Suleimani, commander of the expeditionary Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, brought the Quds Force further to the forefront of the Islamic Republic’s “maximum resistance” campaign to counter the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign. However, the new Quds Force leadership is not only inheriting a military organization stretched thin over a vast geographic area but also faces greater public hostility against the Islamic Republic and its allies in places like Iraq, the main arena of rivalry between the United States and Iran.
How is the killing of Suleimani likely to change Iran’s grand strategy and Quds Force operations in Iraq and beyond? Who is Ismail Qaani, the new commander of the Quds force, and how is he likely to approach these challenges and adapt his organization to the changed circumstances?
Speakers:
Hussein Ibish (Moderator): Senior Resident Scholar, Arab Gulf States Institute
Ali Alfoneh: Senior Fellow, Arab Gulf States Institute
Kori Schake: Director of Foreign and Defense Policy Studies, American Enterprise Institute
General Joseph L. Votel: U.S. Army (Ret.)
- Nuclear Deterrence with Russia and China: How are U.S. Course Corrections Needed? | May 26, 2020 | 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM | CATO Institute | Register Here
As the United States shifts the focus of its foreign and defense policies toward great‐power competition, experts have paid more attention to Russian and Chinese nuclear force postures and strategies. The 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) paints a concerning picture of recent developments in both potential adversaries, noting the growth of arsenals and approaches to nuclear strategy that vex U.S. policymakers. The assessments and threat perceptions laid out in the NPR will drive U.S. nuclear strategy for the rest of the Trump administration and potentially beyond because they inform plans for U.S. nuclear modernization.
In the two years since the 2018 NPR’s release, the Trump administration has put its stamp on America’s approach to nuclear deterrence. The administration is clearly worried about the nuclear arsenals and strategies of Russia and China, and many of the NPR’s more controversial items, such as the low‐yield Trident warhead, are explicitly tied to nuclear developments in potential great‐power adversaries.
But has the United States accurately diagnosed the most important problems posed by other great powers? Is Washington designing the right solutions to these problems? What are the risks of misdiagnoses and/or wrong policy solutions? The COVID-19 pandemic has made finding answers to these questions all the more urgent. The economic fallout of the public health emergency will likely create strong budgetary pressures and subject the multidecade, $1 trillion–plus nuclear modernization plan to closer scrutiny.
Speakers:
Eric Gomez: Director of Defense Policy Studies, CATO Institute
Fiona Cunningham: Assistant Professor of Political Science and International Affairs, George Washington University
Michael Kofman: Direction of the Russia Studies Program, CNA
Amy F. Woolf: Specialist in Nuclear Weapons Policy, Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress
- Democracy’s Defenders – American Diplomacy in the age of COVID-19 | May 26, 2020 | 2:00 PM – 3:00 PM | Brookings | Register Here
In his new book, “Democracy’s Defenders: U.S. Embassy Prague, the Fall of Communism in Czechoslovakia, and Its Aftermath,” Brookings Senior Fellow Norman Eisen examines the role of American diplomats in supporting the end of Communism three decades ago and promoting democratic values since.
On May 26, Governance Studies at Brookings and the Transatlantic Democracy Working Group will co-host a webinar to discuss themes in Eisen’s latest book. Panelists will explore the role of the foreign service in advancing American values abroad, what we can learn from the successes and failures of U.S. foreign policy in Central and Eastern Europe over the past three decades, and the lessons foreign policy holds for all those facing the challenges of transatlantic relations today. The talk will also focus on how American diplomacy and transatlantic democracy has responded to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Today many of those same Czechs and Slovaks are walking the identical boulevards, now wearing masks—does the U.S. still support them in this latest crisis?
Speakers:
Norman Eisen (Moderator) : Senior Fellow, Governance Studies
Alina Polyakova: Former Brookings Expert, President and CEO of the Center for European Policy Analysis
Jeff Gedmin: Editor-in-Chief of The American Interest, Senior Fellow-Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, Co-chair-Transatlantic Democracy Working Group
- Humanitarian Operations During COVID-19 : A Conversation with Michelle Nunn of CARE USA |May 26, 2020 | 4:00 PM – 4: 45PM | Center for Strategic & International Studies | Register Here
The spread of Covid-19 continues to dominate global attention. Governments are primarily focusing efforts on the domestic response to the virus. With 168 million people in need of humanitarian assistance globally, including 70 million forcibly displaced, understanding how the pandemic will impact the most vulnerable is vital to implementing an effective response. In this upcoming series, the CSIS Humanitarian Agenda will speak with leadership across humanitarian institutions about the challenges their organizations face during Covid-19. Our featured guests will give their insights on how the pandemic is changing the humanitarian landscape and the impact it has on the delivery of lifesaving assistance now and in the near future.
The Center for Strategic & International Studies is pleased to invite Michelle Nunn, President and CEO of CARE USA, for a discussion on CARE’s response to the pandemic and the challenges they foresee on the horizon. This conversation will look at what strategies have been implemented, with a particular focus on the gender and economic development impacts of the pandemic.
Speakers:
Michelle Nunn: President and CEO, CARE USA
Jacob Kurtzer: Interim Director and Senior, Humanitarian Agenda
Katherine Bliss: Senior Fellow, Global Health Policy Center
- Tenuous Transitions in Ethiopia and Sudan | May 28, 2020 | 9:30 AM – 10:45 AM | United States Institute of Peace | Register Here
The two most populous countries in the Horn of Africa—Ethiopia and Sudan—are both struggling with once-in-a-generation political transitions. Complicating these already tenuous transitions is a convergence of worrying trends, such as widespread food insecurity, severe pressure on public finances, ongoing or unresolved internal conflicts, large numbers of displaced persons, and now, the coronavirus pandemic. The fate of the transitions in Ethiopia and Sudan may determine the broader prospects for peace in the region for years to come.
At this critical time in history for the Horn of Africa, join USIP and experts from Ethiopia and Sudan for a discussion on the specific challenges facing the political transitions in these two countries, as well as key parallels.
Speakers:
Aly Verjee (Moderator): Senior Advisor, United States Institute of Peace
Manal Taha: Sudan Program Advisor, United States Institute of Peace
Payton Knopf: Senior Advisor, United States Institute of Peace
Aaron Maasho: Independent Journalist
Emebet Getachew: Ethiopia Country Program Manager, Life and Peace Institute
- Iran, Russia, Pakistan, and Afghanistan: Prospects and Potential Trajectories | May 28, 2020 | 10:00 AM – 11:00 AM |Middle East Institute| Register Here
As the United States continues to engage in peace talks with the Taliban, even as Washington considers its future military presence in Afghanistan, the country’s uncertain future provides an opportunity for regional power competition. Recent developments have laid the groundwork for coordination between Iran and Russia in this space, a cooperation which has implications for Iran’s rivalry with Pakistan. At stake in this interplay of regional interests are long-term geopolitical, military and economic interests that can be shaped for years to come.
How might Iran approach the divergent and common interests of Iran, Russia and Pakistan in Afghanistan? What are Iran’s priorities, and where might opportunities emerge for cooperation or conflict? How might Iran balance these competing interests, and what will be the impact on the ground in Afghanistan? The Middle East Institute is proud to host a group of experts to address these questions and more.
Speakers:
Madiha Afzal: David M. Rubenstein Fellow, Foreign Policy program, The Brookings Institution
Fatemeh Aman: Nonresident Senior Fellow, The Atlantic Council
Kamran Bokhari: Director of analytical development, Center for Global Policy
Amin Tarzi: Director, Middle East studies, Marine Corps University
Alex Vatanka: (Moderator) Senior Fellow and Director, Iran program, Middle East Institute
- Jihadism at a crossroads | May 29, 2020 | 9:00 AM – 10:00 AM | Brookings | Register Here
Although jihadist groups have gripped the world’s attention for more than 20 years, today they are no longer in the spotlight. However, ISIS, al-Qaida, and al-Shabab remain active, and new groups have emerged. The movement as a whole is evolving, as is the threat it poses.
On May 29, the Center for Middle East Policy will host a virtual panel event to discuss the current status of jihadist groups. The panel will feature Thomas Hegghammer, senior research fellow at the Norwegian Defense Research Establishment and author of the new book, “The Caravan: Abdallah Azzam and the Rise of Global Jihad.” Other panelists will include Tricia Bacon, assistant professor at American University, and Bruce Riedel, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Brookings Senior Fellow Daniel Byman will moderate the discussion.
Speakers:
Daniel L. Byman (Moderator): Senior Fellow-Foreign Policy, Center for Middle East Policy
Bruce Riedel: Senior Fellow-Foreign Policy, Center for 21st Century Security and Intelligence, Center for Middle East Policy, Director- The Intelligence Project
Tricia Bacon: Professional Lecturer, School of Public Affairs, American University
Thomas Hegghammer: Senior Research Fellow-Norweigan Defence Research Establishment (FFI)
- Strained Cooperation or a Final Rupture? China – U.S. Relations Amidst a Global Pandemic | May 30, 2020 | 10:00 AM – 11:30 AM | Johns Hopkins SAIS | Register Here
The discourse surrounding Sino-US relations in the past decade has often been framed in the context of the “Thucydides Trap,” where conflict between a rising power (China) and the world’s incumbent power (America) is inevitable. The global pandemic has heightened international tensions and is testing global cooperation frameworks. This forum on Saturday, May 30, invites Dr. Adam Webb, Dr. David Arase and Dr. David Bulman to discuss how the global pandemic is impacting nternational relations.
Speakers:
Dr. Adam Webb: American Co-Director, Hopkins-Nanjing Center, Resident Professor of Political Science
Dr. David Arase: Resident Professor of International Politics, Hopkins- Nanjing Center
Dr. David Bulman: Jill McGovern and Steven Muller Assistant Professor of International Affairs and China Studies, Director of Pacific Community Initiative at Johns Hopkins University SAIS
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Imbalanced Region
On September 20 the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) hosted a panel discussion entitled “Red Sea Rivalries: Middle East Competition in the Horn of Africa” to introduce and discuss a new report from the International Crisis Group (ICG) on the influence of Gulf Countries on the Horn of Africa. Opening remarks were delivered by Ambassador Johnnie Carson and Robert Malley, President of ICG. Elizabeth Dickinson, ICG’s Arabian peninsula analyst and Dino Mahtani, ICG’s Africa program deputy director outlined the report’s findings. UN advisor Nicholas Haysom, African Union Chief of Staff to the High-Level Implementation Panel Abdul Mohammad, and former Egyptian Ambassador Hesham Youssef provided commentary.
Malley described three key findings: first, the Gulf must stop exporting its conflicts to the Red Sea region; second, the Red Sea countries should negotiate collectively with the Gulf; and third, Western countries have a role to play in these conflicts but have only recently begun to do so.
Dickinson argued that Gulf competition in the Red Sea region is part of wider strategy throughout North Africa and the Sahel. Qatar and the UAE-Saudi alliance’s interventions in Sudan are related to its actions in Chad and Niger, the three countries bordering the stronghold of the UAE’s Libya proxy General Haftar. She also argued that the Gulf countries do not consider the Horn of Africa part of a different continent in which they are foreign meddlers. Rather, they think of the Red Sea as part of their region and their role in it as a natural extension of longstanding historical ties.
Mahtani emphasized that he is cautiously optimistic about the prospect of a stable dynamic between Gulf countries and domestic actors in Sudan. The killing of 120 people in Khartoum in June by General Hemeti’s forces pushed his Emirati and Saudi backers to show contrition. In July, an attempted coup by Qatar-backed members of Sudan’s military showed that Hemeti faced strong enough opposition to prevent him from ruling through coercion alone. Mahtani argued that this reality may push the UAE to compromise with Qatar on Sudan. This could lay the groundwork for future cooperation between the two countries on their overall plans for Sudan’s post-Bashir development.
Mahtani contrasted this to the situation in Somalia, where the federal government in Mogadishu is aligned with Qatar while regional political leaders receive support from the UAE and Saudi Arabia. He also described the UAE’s indirect support of al-Shabab through purchases of Somali charcoal, a significant source of funding for the militant group. In exchange, al-Shabab has increased the number of their attacks this summer and targeted a delegation of Qataris and Somali federal government employees, acting as “subcontractors for political violence.” Several panelists agreed that the Gulf rivalries have contributed to political fragmentation and violence in Somalia and will likely continue to do so indefinitely.
Both Dickinson and Mahtani emphasized the role that multilateralism can play in addressing the power asymmetry between the Gulf countries and those in the Horn of Africa. They argued that Horn of Africa countries can increase their bargaining power by negotiating jointly with the Gulf through regional multilateral organizations like the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) or the African Union. The United States rarely involves itself but when it does it can make a big difference to the effectiveness of these multilateral discussions. In Sudan, the Quad talks among the United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE facilitated the power sharing compromise.
Mohammad agreed that Africa’s strong tradition of multilateralism could benefit the countries of the Horn of Africa and added that it could provide an example of positive multilateral relations to the Gulf countries. He argued that while Gulf countries have weaponized the GCC against each other in recent years, adopting an African-inspired culture of multilateralism could provide a means to transcend conflict in the Middle East. Hesham agreed that multilateralism in this part of the world is important but argued that it will not solve the problem of asymmetry in the bilateral relationships between Gulf states and Horn of Africa countries.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Watch the pot
The pot is boiling once again in North Africa. Sudanese President Bashir, in power since 1993, is under arrest and his country under de facto martial law. Algerian President Bouteflika has resigned after almost 20 years in power. Libyan General Haftar is trying to take Tripoli by force. The smart money is betting he will bog down in a stalemate with opposing militias from Western Libya.
Not everyone is in turmoil. Morocco and Tunisia, which both embarked on political reforms in the wake of the Arab Spring, are at least for now continuing in that direction. Egypt’s President and former Field Marshall Sisi has restored its military dictatorship, cracked down hard on both Islamist and secular opposition, and embarked on some economic reforms.
Less visible in all these countries is the role of the Gulf potentates. The United Arab Emirates has backed both Sisi and Haftar, hoping to they will eradicate Islamists from their polities. Qatar has backed the Muslim Brotherhood in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya. The Saudi-led coalition fighting against the Houthis in Yemen has used mercenary Sudanese troops, thus indirectly supporting Bashir. Iran has backed the Houthis but has not engaged heavily in North Africa, since there are few Shia there. Tehran’s interests are much stronger in Syria and Iraq.
American engagement in North Africa has been sporadic and targeted mainly against violent Islamist extremism, especially in Libya and more indirectly in Egypt. President Trump has said Libya is Europe’s problem, which makes a lot of sense since Spain, France, and Italy all have strong stakes in North Africa due to migration as well as oil and gas supplies. The problem is that the Europeans have found it hard to combine their efforts. Instead they compete for influence and undermine each other. It is unlikely that they will find a way to use their considerable clout to good effect.
The result will likely be that the North Africans will be left to find their own way. That might not be the worst of all possible worlds, even if it is fraught with risks. Libya’s downward spiral after its 2011 revolution does not suggest much indigenous capacity to manage without international help. But Libyans have always resisted it and are now vitiating the latest UN efforts to unify its state structures and begin the process of recovery from civil war.
Sudan and Algeria have better prospects. Their revolutions have so far been mostly nonviolent (apart from the force the police and military have indulged in). Nonviolent revolutions have a much higher probability of generating peaceful and democratic outcomes. But in both places the strong role of the military runs the risk of a detour to autocratic rule, as in Egypt. That is a contingency the demonstrators will have to guard against, so as not to fall into the Sisi trap.
The trick is to bring the pot to boil, but not let it boil over. If it does, extremists will exploit the situation. North Africa is not immune to Al Qaeda, the Islamic State, and more localized jihadist organizations. Derna in Libya, where the US marines fought “on the shores of Tripoli,” has seen several revivals of extremists since Qaddafi fell, though Haftar for now seems to have things there under control. Tunisia has likewise generated lots of foreign fighters for the extremists, despite its so far successful political transition.
Let’s keep an eye on this pot.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
A bona fide boon to lawyers
That’s what the Supreme Court has decided you need: a bona fide (genuine, real, sincere, non-deceptive) relationship with an individual or entity in the US to come here from six Muslim-majority countries (Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Sudan, and Yemen). President Trump is claiming this vindicates his effort to block all immigration and refugees from these allegedly dangerous countries, from which no terrorist has arrived since 9/11.
Far from it. The merits of the bans he ordered will be considered in the fall. For now, all the Court has decided is that people without a bona fide relationship with the US are not entitled to the ban on the travel ban issued by lower courts.
The question then becomes: what is a bona fide relationship? The Court made clear that category includes familial relations as well as contractual ones, like documented admission to a US university. The only clearly excluded category would be relationships that are deceptive, for example one entered into for the sole purpose of getting into the US.
So the consequence of this decision, as the dissenting minority that wanted to back Trump more fully said, will be a flood of litigation to determine what is a bona fide relationship with a US individual (notable: not necessarily a citizen) or entity. Is an invitation to speak at a conference evidence of such a relationship? Do hotel reservations or airline tickets qualify? What about acceptance into a refugee resettlement program sponsored by the State Department? I’m fairly confident this is a slippery slope to admitting many people.
The problem is that the public image will lean heavily in Trump’s direction, not least because of his exaggerated claim to vindication. This will encourage immigration officials to take a draconian attitude towards enforcement. It will also offend Muslims worldwide, who don’t like the restrictions:
In fact, the countries where majorities like the restrictions are mainly those where ethnic nationalism is rampant: Hungary, Poland, Russia, and Israel fit that category.
Al Qaeda and the Islamic State also relish Trump’s hostility to Muslims, which confirms their assertions about the US and the need to attack it. Trump’s crowing about this Supreme Court decision could easily boost extremist recruitment, both inside and outside the US. The restrictions will likely cause more terrorism than they prevent–it will take only one such act inside the US by someone from one of these countries to prove that point.
Trump however will try to use any terrorist attack in the opposite direction. He all too obviously sees such attacks as opportunities to make his political points. He has used each and every attack in Europe as an opportunity to generate antipathy toward Muslims in general. He’ll no doubt amplify that attitude if and when there is an attack in the US, thus generating more resentment and helping extremist recruitment.
It is true of course that he also has friends in the Muslim world: autocrats like Saudi Arabia’s King Salman, Turkey’s President Erdogan and Egypt’s President Sissi have nothing to fear from this president, who has ignored their brutal and indiscriminate crackdowns on liberal democrats as well as terrorists. Citizens, residents and travelers through those three countries have been involved in terrorist acts in Europe and the US since 9/11, but Trump wouldn’t want to offend his friends by blocking their citizens from the US.
We face another round on the immigration ban at the Supreme Court in the fall, with lots of litigation in the meanwhile. This Administration is a big boon for lawyers.
PS: If you don’t like that chart, try this one:
RSS - Posts
