Tag: United Nations
Deal, or no deal?
The nuclear talks with Iran are officially with the P5+1 (that’s the US, UK, France, Russia and China). But they are increasingly looking like a negotiation (at a distance) between Israel and Iran, with the P5+1 acting as mediators and looking for a mutually acceptable compromise. What are the odds of finding one? It depends on what we all call leverage. That comes from being able to walk away, because you’ve got a “best alternative to a negotiated agreement” (BATNA) that you prefer over the agreement on offer.
Iran’s BATNA is clear: it can continue its nuclear program, which entails continuing also to endure increasingly tight sanctions as well as the risk an Israeli or American attack. President Rouhani doesn’t like this option, because he has promised Iranians relief from sanctions, improved relations with the rest of the world, and an improved economy. Iranians are not interested in going to war. But Supreme Leader Khamenei can still veto any proposed agreement. There is every reason to believe he would do so if somehow his negotiators dared to bring home an agreement that completely dismantled Iran’s nuclear program, blocking it from any future enrichment (or reprocessing). Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace picks, November 18-22
DC’s top events of the week:
1. Oil Security and the US Military Commitment to the Persian Gulf
Monday, November 18 | 9:00am – 2:30pm
George Washington University Elliott School, 1957 E Street NW, Lindner Family Commons Room 602
9:00-9:20: Introduction
Charles Glaser, Elliott School of International Affairs, GWU
9:30-11:00: Threats to U.S. Oil Security in the Gulf: Past, Present and Future
Salim Yaqub, University of California-Santa Barbara
Thomas Lippman, Middle East Institute
Joshua Rovner, Southern Methodist University
Chair: Rosemary Kelanic, Elliott School of International Affairs, GWU
11:15-12:15: The Economic Stakes: Oil Shocks and Military Costs
Eugene Gholz, LBJ School of Public Affairs, University of Texas-Austin
Kenneth Vincent, George Washington University
Chair: Charles Glaser, Elliott School of International Affairs, GWU
12:45-2:15: Possibilities for U.S. Grand Strategy in the Persian Gulf
Daniel Byman, School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
Caitlin Talmadge, Elliott School of International Affairs, GWU
Rosemary Kelanic, Elliott School of International Affairs, GWU
Chair: Charles Glaser, Elliott School of International Affairs, GWU
The U.S. strategic objective of protecting Persian Gulf oil has generated little controversy since the Gulf became a focus of U.S. military deployments over three decades ago. This may seem unsurprising given the widely-appreciated importance of oil to the global economy. Nevertheless, quite dramatic changes have occurred in the regional balance of power, the nature of security threats, and the global oil market since the U.S. made its commitment-raising the possibility that the U.S. role should be revisited. This conference examines two critical questions for U.S. grand strategy in the Gulf. First, should the United States continue to rely on military capabilities to preserve the flow of Persian Gulf oil? Second, if the U.S. security commitment remains strategically sound, what military posture should U.S. forces adopt? The conference panels examine the key rationales driving current U.S. policies, the costs and benefits of alternative approaches, and options for revising the U.S. military stance in the region.
Lunch will be served.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
More Righting the Balance
Sarah Saleeb’s writeup of the SAIS Foreign Policy Institute Righting the Balance event Thursday evening makes me acutely aware that I did not do a good enough job distinguishing between the State Department and AID as institutions and the people who staff them. My thought experiment concerns the institutions, not the people. I never intended to suggest we throw all of those babies out with the bath water. –DPS
Carla Freeman opened the discussion calling this a “timely and provocative book”.
Daniel Serwer, author of Righting the Balance: How You Can Help Protect America, opened his comments by expressing his respect for the work that the State Department does, particularly the Foreign Service officers who carry out that work. However, he sees two imbalance in the way the US carries out its foreign relations. The civilians do not have sufficient support. So the military has been making up for civilian deficiencies. In Iraq and Afghanistan there were many examples of the military stepping in for civilians. Unless the US is willing to fight endless wars, it needs civilians who can help prevent the collapse of states and promote reforms before the need for military intervention. This is something that the US failed to do in the Arab world.
Serwer outlined five major things that the State Department and USAID are lacking: Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The end isn’t in sight
Today, much of the public conversation about the conflict in Syria is about the infighting, the jihadist opposition groups, and President Assad’s chemical weapons arsenal. But, Syria’s economic turmoil is an issue that has been largely cast aside. The UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the UN Development Program (UNDP), and the Syrian Center for Policy Research have formed a partnership to examine the socio-economic consequences of the conflict. Alex Pollock, the Director of UNRWA’s Microfinance Program, spoke about their report at the New America Foundation on Wednesday. Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
TGBWFEABMC
That’s a “transitional governing body with full executive authority by mutual consent.” It’s the codeword Washington says you have to give in order to get invited to Geneva 2, the UN-mediated conference at which the US hopes to arrange a political end to the Syrian conflict. What it means is President Bashar al Asad has to step aside, if not down, and allow a transition to a democratic regime to begin.
He isn’t prepared to do that, and neither Iran nor Russia appears willing to make him do it. I don’t doubt their capacity. The alacrity with which Bashar agreed to the destruction of his chemical weapons capability showed Moscow’s clout. Withdrawal of Tehran’s support would quickly put him at serious risk on the battlefield, as Iranian revolutionary guards and Hizbollah forces fighting in Syria are vital to the regime. But why would Moscow or Tehran withdraw support? Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Ample warning
The United Nations Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (CIO/DPRK) held a public hearing at Johns Hopkins SAIS in Washington, DC October 30-31. Established in March, the CIO/DPRK has since convened in Seoul, Tokyo, and London to receive testimony from first-hand witnesses and experts. The Commission is mandated to present findings and recommendations to the UN Human Rights Council in March 2014.
Chairperson Michael Kirby, former Justice of the High Court of Australia, and Sonja Biserko, founder and president of the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia, led this hearing.
Kirby recently told the BBC that despite his 35 years of experience as a judge listening to cases “which somewhat harden one’s heart,” testimonies heard by the CIO have brought him to tears.
There were tears in the room on last Wednesday as the Commission collected anecdotal evidence from two witnesses who have defected from the DPRK. Twenty-five-year-old Jin Hye Jo recounted the deaths by starvation of her grandmother and two younger brothers, the trafficking of her older sister, and the alleged extrajudicial execution of her father by security forces. Because her father was born in China, her family was suspect in the eyes of the state. This placed them firmly in the “wavering class,” the middle rungs of North Korea’s elaborately hierarchical caste system known as songbun. Her father therefore had no choice but to work for low pay in the mines, and her family went chronically hungry while government leaders were driving BMWs and drinking high-end whiskey. Jin crossed into China four times—and was repatriated four times, enduring imprisonment and torture “almost to death”—before finally obtaining the protection of the UNHCR in Beijing on her fifth attempt in 2006. She, her mother and her younger sister have settled in the US. Read more
RSS - Posts
