Tag: Turkey
Untying the Turkish knot
Mort Abramowitz and Eric Edelman published this week a super Bipartisan Policy Center report “From Rhetoric to Reality: Reframing US Turkey Policy.” Mort was US ambassador in Ankara 1989-91 and Eric 2003-5. It doesn’t get much more knowledgeable when it comes to US policy on Turkey than these two. Caveat emptor: Eric is a valued colleague at SAIS (his office is next door to mine) and Mort is a treasured regular lunch partner and occasional co-author.
They argue for something few sitting ambassadors would be keen on, though it seems likely that the current ambassador was at least forewarned if not approving. They want to shift from rhetoric about shared objectives in the Middle East to frank talk (with an Ankara already resenting US policy on Syria, Iran, Egypt, Israel, Palestine and other issues) about Turkey’s domestic situation.
The aim is to keep Turkey moving in a democratic direction, restore its economic vitality, and encourage it to play a leadership role in the region consistent with US policy. As diplomatic propositions go, this is pretty daring:
Practically, this means that Washington should be more open with Ankara about its concerns about issues like press freedom, freedom of assembly, rule of law, and the Turkish government’s increasing sectarianism.
Edelman and Abramowitz view such frank assessments as likely to produce good results and cite chapter and verse of Israel-related occasions on which American bluntness was productive.
The agenda they propose for Washington is an ample one: Read more
The Syrian Coalition speaks
University of Arkansas Professor Najib Ghadbian, the Syrian Opposition Coalition representative to the United States, stopped by SAIS today for an all too rare public presentation, followed by Q and A. I moderated, though I confess both speaker and audience distinguished themselves in moderation. Revolutionaries should always be so reasonable. The event should be up on C-Span soon.
Najib outlined the main problems the Coalition faces in its effort to create an inclusive, secular and free democracy:
- The humanitarian catastrophe: 2.5 million Syrians are refugees, 5 million are internally displaced. Opposition funding has gone predominantly to meet their needs. Access is a major issue, as liberated areas are under frequent attack. But the Coalition’s Assistance Coordination Unit is now functioning well after some initial difficulties.
- Radicalization: Regime killing and weak support from outside Syria for moderates has strengthened extremists, who have proven effective on the battlefield. Jabhat al Nusra and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the former more Syrian and the latter more closely affiliated with Al Qaeda, are big and growing problems. ISIS in particular is responsible for mass atrocities attributed to the opposition.
- Governance: In liberated areas, local revolutionary councils are trying to fill the vacuum left by withdrawal of state institutions, some more successfully than others. The Coalition is expected to form and approve an interim government at its next meeting in Istanbul in early November. This will be a technocratic stopgap until the transitional government called for in the June 2012 Geneva communique is formed.
- Ending the conflict: The Coalition favors a political end to the conflict, but it must be one that leads to a democratic outcome. This is not possible with Bashar al Asad still in the presidency. The idea of his conducting elections next year is completely unacceptable. In order to go to a Geneva 2 conference next month or whenever it is scheduled, the Coalition will need the support not only of the US but also Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The Coalition will also want to see the withdrawal of Hizbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, both of which are fighting inside Syria.
The Coalition needs to meet these challenges by providing humanitarian assistance, isolating and countering extremists, delivering government services and uniting to negotiate an end to the conflict. It is unlikely any negotiation can be successful unless there is a change in the military situation on the ground. The Coalition-linked Supreme Military Council needs increased resources, training and professionalization. Funding to extremists should be blocked. The Coalition will not try to expand in their direction.
Asked about protection for minorities, in particular Alawites, after Bashar al Asad is gone, Najib suggested that international peacekeepers or some form of elite units might be required. In any event, it is clear that the Asad regime is not protecting Alawites so much as it is putting them at risk. There are prominent Alawites within the opposition. Security sector reform, including consolidation of Syria’s 16 existing security agencies into a single internal and a single external service, will be a priority. The Day After report and ongoing project will be helpful, especially on security sector reform and rule of law.
Syria is not nearly as divided ethnically (or in sectarian terms) as Bosnia at the end of its war. Most Kurds are with the opposition. Administrative decentralization will be important in the post-Asad era, but federalization of the Iraqi variety is not in the cards because the Kurdish population is not as concentrated in one geographic area.
From the United States, the Coalition is looking for strong and more consistent support. While the Coalition supports US/Russia agreement, Washington made a mistake to embark on dismantling the regime’s chemical weapons capability without also doing something about Asad’s ferocious use of the Syrian air force against liberated areas. Conventional weapons have killed many more Syrians than chemical weapons. The military training being conducted in Jordan for the opposition should not be secret. It should be taken over by the Defense Department and enlarged to a much grander scale. US leadership and coordination is needed to ensure that the disparate supporters of the Coalition are all working in the same direction, as recommended in the recent International Crisis Group report.
I spent a summer in Damascus not too many years ago studying Arabic. The desire of ordinary Syrians, and even those close the regime, for freedom and democracy was palpable. The people I talked with would be pleased to hear what the Coalition representative had to say. But they would ask how much longer the killing will last.
Peace picks, October 14-18
Today is officially a holiday and the government is still “shut down,” but there are good war and peace events this week in DC:
1. U.S. Policy in the Arab: World Perspectives from Civil Society
In collaboration with the Arab NGO Network for Development (ANND)
Monday, October 14, 2013 – 11:15am – 12:45pm
New America Foundation
The United States has long shaped developments in the Arab world, but the 2011 popular uprisings and subsequent period of unrest have diminished U.S. influence and credibility in the region. More recently, Washington’s reluctance to militarily intervene in Syria and passive reaction to political changes in Egypt have further damaged its image in the eyes of Arab populations. While media coverage of regional events focuses on governments and street protests, the voices of civil society organizations are often marginalized or unheard.
On October 14, the New America Foundation’s Middle East Task Force and the Arab NGO Network for Development will host a distinguished panel of researchers, academics, and activists from Arab civil society organizations. The panelists will present civil society priorities and perspectives on U.S. policies in the region, and will specifically debate whether these policies advance popular aspirations for democracy and sustainable development.
PARTICIPANTS
Kinda Mohamadieh
Policy Advisor, Arab NGO Network for Development (ANND).
Mahinour El-Badrawi
Researcher, Egyptian Center for Economic and Social Rights (ECESR)
Mohamad Loutfy
Campaign Coordinator, The Campaign on World Bank Safeguards and Disability
Senior Advisor, The Lebanese Physical Handicapped Union (LPHU)
Rana Khalaf
Activist, Syrian League for Citizenship
Moderator:
Research Associate, Middle East Task Force, New America Foundation
RSVP: http://www.newamerica.net/events/2013/us_policy_in_the_arab_world Read more
Johns Hopkins President regretfully informs
Dear Students, Faculty and Staff:
We received word today that one of our own was among those killed in the violent takeover of the Westgate Mall in Kenya.
Elif Yavuz, a 2004 graduate of our Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, was living in Africa, working for the Clinton Foundation and fighting malaria.
We know from media reports that she was eight months pregnant, and that she and her partner, Ross Langdon, were visiting Nairobi. Ross, an award-winning architect who designed an HIV/AIDS hospital pro bono and focused on environmentally and socially sustainable tourism infrastructure, also was killed.
Elif, a Dutch citizen of Turkish heritage, studied at the SAIS Bologna Center in 2002-2003 and in Washington the following year, earning a Master of Arts degree and concentrating in European studies. After SAIS, she worked for the World Bank before attending the Harvard School of Public Health. She earned a ScD there earlier this year, doing her dissertation on malaria in East Africa, and then joined the Clinton Foundation.
On behalf of the Johns Hopkins community, I will be expressing our deepest condolences to Elif’s family and loved ones.
Sincerely,
Ronald J. Daniels
Heartbreak and loveless marriages
Wedenesday morning’s event at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace was yet another panel focused on Syria, focused on the interests and perspectives of the domestic and international parties currently involved in the crisis. Moderated by Marwan Muasher of the Carnegie Endowment, the discussion included Ambassador Nasser al-Kidwa, deputy to Arab League Envoy to Syria Lakhdar Brahimi, Karim Sadjadpour of the Carnegie Endowment, Paul Salem of the Carnegie Middle East Center, and Andrew Weiss also of the Carnegie Endowment.
Ambassador al-Kidwa focused his remarks on the future of negotiations in Syria. He believes the Geneva Communiqué drafted last June is still relevant today and provides practical solutions for Syria. The US decision not to strike on Syria but rather focus on placing Syria’s chemical weapons under international control shows its commitment to the Geneva Communiqué. The framework agreement on chemical weapons between the US and Russia is a positive development.
The UN is currently working on a resolution that will mostly likely incorporate much of the strong language used in the US-Russia agreement. Al-Kidwa believes that it will be adopted under Chapter 7 with some language regarding using necessary force if there is no compliance from the Assad regime. He sees a real possibility for negotiations between the opposition and the Assad government. He argues that regional players and the international community have an unusually important role. Read more
Still on the roller coaster
The Russia-US agreement on a Framework for Elimination of Syrian Chemical Weapons is certainly a breakthrough with respect to chemical weapons, if it is implemented with anything like the thoroughness and timeliness specified. John Kerry has delivered on paper what President Obama has wanted: an end not just to the use of chemical weapons in Syria, but destruction of Syria’s capability to make them and use them by the middle of 2014.
But the agreement, even fully implemented, does nothing to solve three other problems: Bashar al Asad’s continued hold on power and attacks on Syria’s civilian population, radicalization of his opposition and his supporters, and destabilization of the region. The number of people killed in chemical weapons attacks is no more than 2% of the total casualties in the past 2.5 years. While the August 21 attack is said to have killed more than 1400, which would almost surely make it the most horrific single incident of the war, that number are killed more or less every week by more conventional means.
There is no reason to believe that this agreement, even if fully implemented, will reduce the overall level of violence and casualties. The agreement makes Bashar al Asad indispensable. Neither Russia nor America will want to see him deposed until the job is done. That of course gives him a license to kill and good reason to delay implementation as much as possible. There has already been an uptick in regime violence. He will certainly try to dawdle. The Chapter VII threat of military intervention in the agreement is clear, but not automatic or unilateral: Read more