Tag: Yemen
Stevenson’s army, September 21
Some things are clear and indisputable:
– President Trump spoke by phone with incoming Ukrainian President Zelensky on July 25.
– His private lawyer Rudy Giuliani has long been pressing Ukrainian officials to investigate activities of Joe Biden and his son Hunter in 2016.
– Someone submitted a whistleblower complaint to the Intelligence Community Inspector General on August12.
– US aid to Ukraine was not released until Sept 12, despite bipartisan pressure from Congress.
– Despite legal requirements for complaints to be shared with the intelligence committees, the administration has so far declined to do so.- It’s also worth noting that, despite Justice dept guidelines forbidding charging a sitting president with a crime, the Constitution lists “Bribery” as one of the justifications for impeachment.
What is unclear includes:
– What was said in the presidential phone conversation. Two unnamed sources are cited by the key media. WSJ, which says that Trump in that phone call said eight times that Zelensky should work with Giuliani on investigating Biden,also says Mr. Trump in the call didn’t mention a provision of U.S. aid to Ukraine, said this person, who didn’t believe Mr. Trump offered the Ukrainian president any quid pro quo for his cooperation on any investigation.
– How Congress can obtain the whistleblower complaint. Not all lawyers agree with Chairman Schiff.
While I deplore the administration’s stonewalling of this and many other requests for information, and I’m disgusted at the effort to use presidential national security authority for personal political gain, I doubt that the evidence of actual bribery will be clear and compelling, either on legal or political grounds.
In other news, the administration announced plans to send a fairly small contingent of military personnel to Saudi Arabia and UAE in response to the bombing of oil facilities. Trump called China “a threat to the world,” but labeled his trade war “a little spat” as he suggested no big deal would be made before the 2020 elections. Chinese officials also canceled their planned meetings with US farmers.
– CRS has an updated version of its report on Congress and Yemen.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. If you want to get it directly, To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks September 16-22
1.Israeli Elections and Minority Communities|September 17, 2019|10:00 AM-11:30AM|Middle East Institute|1763 N Street NW, Washington District of Columbia 20036|Register Here
The Middle East Institute (MEI) is pleased to present a panel hosted in partnership with the Foundation for Middle East Peace and the New Israel Fund to discuss how minority rights have factored into Israeli parliamentary elections in 2019, both the first election in April and the snap elections taking place on September 17th. Like the first election, this second round of votes again systematically ignored issues facing Israel’s minority communities, including Palestinian citizens of Israel and Bedouin communities living in the Negev. This panel will discuss those issues and examine how Israel’s major political parties and its leaders have treated minority communities on the campaign trail.
This event is part of the George and Rhonda Salem Family Foundation Lecture Series.
Co-sponsor:
The Middle East Institute (MEI) is pleased to sponsor this event in conjunction with the Foundation for Middle East Peace (FMEP).
Featuring:
Ayesha Ziadna is the Director of Sabeel Leadership Institute of the Arab-Jewish Center for Empowerment, Equality, and Cooperation Negev Institute for Strategies of Peace and Economic Development (AJEEC NISPED)
Tal Avrech joined the Negev Coexistence Forum for Civil Equality (NCF) in 2018 and is currently responsible for international relations and NCF’s head researcher
Harry Reis is the Director for Policy and Strategy at the New Israel Fund
Lara Friedman (moderator) is the President of the Foundation for Middle East Peace (FMEP)
2.Future Projections for the Middle East: Game Changers for 2030 and Beyond|September 19, 2019|9:00 AM-2:15 PM|Middle East Institute|1763 N Street NW, Washington District of Columbia 20036|Register Here
The Middle East Institute (MEI) is pleased to host a conference on future projections for the Middle East, assessing projected trends, drives, policy responses, and future challenges for the MENA region in 2030 and beyond.
Agenda
9:00–9:15 AM | Welcoming Remarks and Overview of the Day
Paul Salem President, MEI
Amb. Gerald Feierstein Senior vice president, MEI
9:15-9:45AM | Keynote Address: Trends in Tech, Cyber, Security and their Repercussions in the Middle East
Richard A. Clarke Chairman, MEI Board of Governors
9:45AM-10:55AM | Panel I: The MENA Region in 2030: Trends and Trajectories
This interactive panel will examine the forces over the next 10-15 years that will cause/drive the greatest change in the region. How do we foresee some of these forces influencing each other, accelerating, slowing, and shaping change? What projections can we make of things likely to be significantly different in the region in 2030?
Elhum Haghighat Professor and chair, Department of Political Science, City University of New York
Amal Kandeel Director, Climate Change and Environment Program, MEI
Josh Kerbel Research faculty, National Intelligence University
Paul Salem President, MEI
Steven Kenney (moderator) Founder and principal, Foresight Vector LLC
10:55AM-11:15AM | Coffee Break
11:15AM-11:45AM | Remarks:
His Excellency Dr. Thani Ahmed Al Zeyoudi Minister of Climate Change and Environment, United Arab Emirates
11:45AM-12:55PM | Panel II: Policy Responses to Future Challenges
This discussion will focus on policy areas that will reflect the greatest change in 2030 relative to today. What social-cultural, technological, or other forces will force enable major changes in policies affecting/governing the region? How will policymaking/policymakers address the interrelationships between issue areas?
Ferid Belhaj Vice president, Middle East and North Africa, World Bank
Laila Iskandar Former Minister of Environment, Egypt
Ruba Husari Scholar, MEI
Michael Nagata Former director of Strategic Operational Planning, National Counterterrorism Center
Ambassador (ret.) Gerald Feierstein Senior Vice President, MEI
Patrick Tucker (moderator) Technology editor, Defense One
12:55-1:30 | Lunch Buffet
3.Washington Humanitarian Forum|September 19, 2019|8:30 AM-3:30 PM|Center for Strategic and International Studies| 1616 Rhode Island Ave NW, Washington, DC 20036|Register Here
The CSIS Humanitarian Agenda is hosting the first annual Washington Humanitarian Forum on September 19th, 2019. This full-day conference will focus on humanitarian challenges that sit at the intersection of United States national security and foreign policy priorities. This year’s theme is Unlocking Humanitarian Access – Opportunities for U.S. Leadership.
The Washington Humanitarian Forum will include the launch of a report produced by the CSIS Task Force on Humanitarian Access. The Task Force, co-chaired by Senator Todd Young (R-IN) and Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ), looked at ways in which denial, delay, and diversion prevents humanitarian assistance from reaching the most vulnerable populations, and vice versa, in conflict-affected areas. The Task Force report analyzes challenges in priority countries for the United States and includes recommendations for how United States leadership can mitigate the most pressing access challenges.
AGENDA
8:00 a.m. – 8:30 a.m. | Check-in and Coffee Networking
8:30 a.m. – 9:15 a.m. | Opening Plenary
- Video Address: Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Senator Todd Young (R-IN)
- Introductions: J. Stephen Morrison, Senior Vice President and Director, Global Health Policy Center, CSIS
- Opening Keynote: Mark Lowcock, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
- Moderator: Kimberly Flowers, Director, Humanitarian Agenda & Global Food Security Projects, CSIS
9:15 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. | Task Force Report Launch
- Ambassador Ertharin Cousin, former Executive Director, UN World Food Programme
- Patricia McIlreavy, Vice President for Policy and Practice, InterAction
- Dr. Paul B. Spiegel, Director, Center for Humanitarian Health, Johns Hopkins University
- Anne Witkowsky, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Stability and Humanitarian Affairs, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, U.S. Department of Defense
- Moderator: Kimberly Flowers, Director, Humanitarian Agenda and Global Food Security Project, CSIS
10:15 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. | Networking Coffee Break
10:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. | Morning Breakout Panels
The Humanitarian Implications of Cyber Conflict
- Colonel Gary Corn, Director and Adjunct Professor, Washington College of Law, American University
- Shanthi Kalathil, Senior Director, International Forum for Democratic Studies, National Endowment for Democracy
- Moderator: James Andrew Lewis, Senior Vice President and Director, Technology Policy Program, CSIS
- Dr. Aisha Jumaan, Founder and President, Yemen Relief and Reconstruction Foundation
- Peter Salisbury, Consulting Senior Analyst on Yemen, International Crisis Group
- Sheba Crocker, Vice President for Humanitarian Policy and Practice, CARE
- Moderator: Jon Alterman, Senior Vice President, Zbiegniew Brzezinski Chair in Global Security and Geostrategy, and Director, Middle East Program, CSIS
Access in the Hot Zone: Navigating the DRC Ebola Outbreak
- Admiral Tim Ziemer, Senior Deputy Assistant Administrator, Bureau for Democracy Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance, USAID
- Ella Watson-Stryker, Humanitarian Representative, Médecins Sans Frontières
- Jeremy Konyndyk, Senior Policy Fellow, Center for Global Development
- Moderator: J. Stephen Morrison, Senior Vice President and Director, Global Health Policy Center, CSIS
12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m. | Lunch
1:00 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. | Afternoon Breakout Panels
The Growing Humanitarian Access Challenge in Eastern Ukraine
- Alexander Hug, Former Deputy Chief Monitor, Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine, Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)
- Melinda Haring, Editor, UkraineAlert, Atlantic Council
- Margot Ellis, Senior Deputy Assistant Administrator, Europe and Eurasia, USAID
- Moderator: Heather Conley, Senior Vice President for Europe, Eurasia, and the Arctic; and Director, Europe Program, CSIS
Rethinking Nigeria’s Response to the Boko Haram Crisis
- Brandon Kendhammer, Associate Professor of Political Science, Ohio University
- Fati Abubakar, Documentary photographer and Public Health Worker
- Ambassador Alex Laskaris, former Deputy to the Commander for Civil-Military Engagement, U.S. Africa Command
- Dafna Hochman Rand, Vice President for Policy and Research, Mercy Corps
- Moderator: Judd Devermont, Director, Africa Program, CSIS
A New Age of Humanitarian Reporting?
- Heba Aly, Director, The New Humanitarian
- Arwa Damon, Senior International Correspondent, CNN
- Sherine Tadros, Head of New York Office & UN Representative, Amnesty International
- Moderator: Jacob Kurtzer, Deputy Director and Senior Fellow, Humanitarian Agenda, CSIS
2:30 p.m. – 2:45 p.m. | Networking Coffee Break
2:45 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. | Closing Remarks
- Closing Keynote: Jan Egeland, Secretary General, Norwegian Refugee Council
- Moderator: Kimberly Flowers, Director, Humanitarian Agenda & Global Food Security Project, CSIS
4. Competitive Security Dynamics in Southern Asia: Conflicts, Challenges, and Choices|September 19, 2019|9:00AM-11:30AM| The Stimson Center|1211 Connecticut Ave, NW, 8th Floor Washington, DC 20036|Register Here
The past six months have seen major disruptions in stability across southern Asia. As tensions in Kashmir continue to simmer, a negotiated settlement in Afghanistan is up for debate, and nationalist discourses gain traction in the region, all eyes are on the strategic dynamics in Southern Asia. This year–the 20th anniversary of the Kargil crisis between India and Pakistan–provides a natural point for reflection, particularly in light of the ripple effects of the February 2019 Balakot airstrikes. What lessons can we learn from the history of southern Asian crises and how are emerging regional dynamics likely to shape future scenarios going forward?
Featuring:
Lt. General (ret.) Waheed Arshad, Former Chief of General Staff, Pakistan Army
Suhasini Haidar, Diplomatic Editor, The Hindu Newspaper
Nasim Zehra, author of From Kargil to the Coup: Events that Shook Pakistan
Vice Admiral (ret.) Vijay Shankar, Distinguished Fellow, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies
Rabia Akhtar, Assistant Professor and Director of the Centre for Security, Strategy and Policy Research, University of Lahore
5. What’s Next for Libya|September 19, 2019 9:00AM-10:30AM|Brookings Institution|Falk Auditorium, 1775 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington DC, 20036|Register Here
The past year has seen no end to the turbulence plaguing Libya since the ouster of Moammar al-Gadhafi in 2011, with armed factions vying for control of the country’s strategic assets and United Nations-facilitated negotiations leading nowhere. While the self-styled Libyan National Army of General Khalifa Haftar continues, unsuccessfully, to try to take over the country militarily, the internationally-recognized government of Prime Minister Fayez Serraj in Tripoli, propped up by militias opposed to Haftar, retains control over major institutions and sources of national wealth. Weapons of increasing sophistication and lethality are flowing to the opposing sides, in violation of U.N. sanctions and pitting foreign powers against each other, with the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt (with French support) backing Haftar, and Turkey and Qatar backing Serraj.
Meanwhile, facing a stagnant economy and constant threats to infrastructure, the Libyan people are caught in the crossfire of this protracted jockeying. Unchecked migration and the threat of extremist groups taking hold in the country’s contested spaces likewise make Libya’s internal situation a security concern for Europe and the United States. Solving the civil war in Libya would restore needed stability to a strategically vital part of northern Africa while laying the groundwork for the prosperity of the Libyan people.
On September 19, the Brookings Institution will hold an event on the state of affairs in Libya. Questions from the audience will follow the panelists’ conversation.
Featuring
- Michael E. O’Hanlon, Brookings Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy
- Jeffrey Feltman, Brookings John C. Whitehead Visiting Fellow in International Diplomacy
- Frederic Wehrey, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Senior Fellow, Middle East Program
- Giovanna de Maio, Center on the United States and Europe Visiting Fellow, Foreign Policy
- Karim Mezran, The Atlantic Council Senior Fellow, Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East
6. Red Sea Rivalries: Middle East Competition in the Horn of Africa|September 20, 2019|10:30AM-12:00PM|United States Institute of Peace|2301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20037|Register Here
A new geopolitical paradigm is emerging in the Horn of Africa: Middle Eastern states are playing an increasingly assertive role throughout the region. As Sudan and Ethiopia undergo their most significant political transitions since the Cold War—affecting the future of nearly 150 million people—the jostling for dominance among the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, on the one hand, and Turkey and Qatar, on the other, is fueling instability and insecurity in an already fractious region.
As part of the U.S. Institute of Peace’s ongoing “Red Sea Rising” multi-track initiative, please join us for the release of the International Crisis Group’s forthcoming report unpacking the regional goals, motivations, and often conflicting aims of Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates.
The report, based on conversations with senior officials on both sides of the Red Sea, examines how outside forces are jockeying to build political influence and carve out pivotal positions in the Horn of Africa’s emerging economy. At this historic juncture for the region, Crisis Group researchers will present the report’s main findings, followed by a panel discussion with experts from the Horn of Africa and the Middle East. Join the conversation with #RedSeaRisingUSIP.
Speakers
Amb. Johnnie Carson, opening remarks, Senior Advisor, U.S. Institute of Peace
Robert Malley, opening remarks, President and CEO, International Crisis Group
Elizabeth Dickinson, presenter, Senior Analyst for the Arabian Peninsula, International Crisis Group
Dino Mahtani, presenter, Deputy Director, Africa Program, International Crisis Group
Payton Knopf, moderator, Advisor, U.S. Institute of Peace
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The time is ripe
When adversaries square off, as the US and Iran have done in recent weeks, they sometimes reach a point at which they think escalating to violence can get them no more than what they hope to get at the negotiating table. If both reach that point within the same time frame, talking becomes a serious alternative to escalating. That is the “ripe” moment at which it is worth considering whether there is a “way out” that will do better for both than resorting to violence.
President Trump has reached his ripe moment. He is saying he is ready to meet with Iran to discuss one subject: nuclear weapons. He has dropped Secretary of State Pompeo’s 12 preconditions, he has forgotten about Iran’s missiles as well as its involvement in Yemen, Syria, Bahrain, and Iraq, and he called off military retaliation against Iran for its shoot-down of an American drone. He even tried to given Tehran an “out” by suggesting the downing of the drone was not properly authorized. The man is begging for negotiations with Iran.
The Iranians are hesitating, for several reasons. They want the US back in the nuclear deal and the associated relief from sanctions before talking to Washington. Tehran knows that Trump is erratic and doesn’t want to be the next victim of his decisionmaking. The Iranians may also believe that they can continue to “bleed” the Americans with little risk of retaliation, because they know neither the US public nor the Congress is prepared to sustain a new war in the Middle East. There will also be some in Tehran, especially the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, that want to continue expanding the nuclear program, with a view to eviscerating the nuclear agreement even if Iran doesn’t formally withdraw from it.
My sense though is that the time is ripe for at least clandestine talks between Iran and the US, likely focused initially not on the nuclear deal but rather on release of prisoners. That accomplished, with more or less simultaneous but unilateral releases, the adversaries could proceed on to other matters, including some relief from sanctions while talks continue. That will be a requirement for the Iranians. The Europeans would certainly appreciate loosening of sanctions, as would the Chinese, Turks, Iraqis and many others. Getting them to support Washington in any future nuclear negotiation should be a high priority for Trump. They won’t do it while the sanctions continue to make their trade and investment impossible.
The Iranians will fear that any negotiation will have to tighten the nuclear agreement, or extend it. But they have surely seen how incapable of negotiating any serious agreement the Trump administration is. The renegotiation of the South Korea free trade pact generated little. The NAFTA negotiation produced a modest update. The North Korea negotiations have produced nothing. President Obama had as one of his chief negotiators a Nobel-prize winning physicist who was then Secretary of Energy. Trump’s Secretary of Energy wouldn’t know a nuclear reactor from a coal-burning plant.
Tehran should also understand that there are only a very few serious US objections the the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). First is that it didn’t cover missiles or Iran’s regional interventions. Those issues are going to require a long conversation, and President Trump has dropped them from the agenda, at least for now. Even if started tomorrow, talks on missile and regional issues are unlikely to be completed before the next US election, when Tehran certainly hopes to see elected a more reliable, even if no more friendly, president.
Second is that the JCPOA “sunset,” or ended, at various times in the next decade or more. That too is a conversation that could drag on, but there may be some relatively easy pickings in that department. Iran has good reason to make it clear to Israel and Europe, its two most concerned neighbors, that nuclear weapons are not its objective, even in the long term. Israel has first strike capabilities that make a nuclear Iran a dangerous place to live. Europe is an important trade and investment partner with potential to enormously ease Iran’s desperate economic situation.
All that Trump really needs from Iran in the short term is to rename and extend the JCPOA so that he can claim proprietary rights. The technical aspects are likely to remain unrevised. As Evelyn Farkas suggests, the Trump/Iran Nuclear Adjustment (TINA) need be no more than a JCPOA 2.0. US sanctions might stay in place during talks, but their application to third countries would have to be at least suspended. The Iranians are serious people and will understandably hesitate to be sucked in to an agreement with a notoriously unreliable negotiating partner. But when the moment is ripe and the way out is better than war, it is a mistake to pass up the opportunity.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The Yemeni quagmire
Hudson Institute held a panel discussion April 18 about the crisis in Yemen and its strategic threat to US interests and allies. The panel included Michael Doran, Senior Fellow at Hudson Institute, Fatima Abo Alasrar, Senior Analyst at Arabia Foundation, Bernard Haykel, Professor of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University.
Haykel gave an overview about the Houthis (who call themselves Ansar Allah), a group belonging to a particular caste of Yemeni society who ruled the country for a thousand years. Before rising again in 2000, They were marginalized since the late 1960s and displaced in 1992 with the revolution. Hussein El Houthi, founder of the group is influenced by Iranian ideology and draws inspiration from Ayatollah Khomeini. El Houthi and the Supreme Leader share the view that the US and Israel are enemies of Yemen, the Arabs, and Islam. This ideological connection was cemented from the middle of 1990s between the Zaydis (a Shia sect which the Houthis belong to) and Lebanese Hezbollah, which provided military, ideological and media training.
Although a small group in Yemen, the Houthis are the most disciplined, best trained and most ideologically motivated group. They are unlikely to be defeated military. Haykel urges that other ways of dealing with Houthis be conceived. Yemen, a poor country, has never been integrated into the labor market of the Gulf. A broad strategy that encompasses development and socioeconomic elements is needed. But Riyadh is not going to be easily convinced to end the war because the Saudis see the Houthis as a Hezbollah-like force on their southern border.
Alasrar argues that neither a military solution nor a political one has worked so far in Yemen. Incentives for the Houthis to come to the table are insufficient. Even when they do negotiate, they are not sincere, due in large part to the ideological alignment with Hezbollah and Iran. The Houthis are likely to remain the de facto authority on the ground given the reluctance of the international community to solve this issue military or politically. The Houthi’s core belief is legitimacy through force. Yemen’s future is therefore bleak. ,
But Alasrar also argues that many in Yemen recognize that the state marginalized the Houthis. Younger Yemenis would like to see a political reconciliation process to help the Houthis become a legitimate political actor. The Houthis did not subscribe to the national reconciliation process conducted in the aftermath of Yemen’s “Arab Spring.” They seized power easily at a vulnerable time when the transitional government after had no army. Weapons and ballistic misled smuggled to Houthis created a means for Iran to attack Saudi Arabia.
Doran stated that the US as a super power has to create a stable regional order in the Middle East. The Khashoggi murder was immoral and ugly, but the campaign to shift US policy on Saudi Arabia is wrong. Its roots lie in President Obama’s outreach to Iran, which he hoped would become a partner in establishing regional stability, which meant down-grading US relations with Saudi Arabia and Israel. There are only two American allies who are contesting Iranians on the ground: Israelis in Syria and the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen. The argument that Mohammed bin Salman is unacceptable morally does not mean US should end its support for the Yemen war, which would weaken Saudi Arabia vis-a-vis Iran and leave a Hizbollah-like force on the Red Sea threatening shipping and hitting Saudi Arabia with ballistic missiles. Ending support to Saudi Arabia is not going to improve the Yemen situation or get the Iranians out.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks 15-19
1.Crisis in Yemen: A Strategic Threat to U.S. Interests and Allies?| Thursday, April 18, 2019 | 11:45 am – 1:30 pm | Hudson Institute | 1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 400 Washington, DC 20004| Register Here|
Hudson Institute will host a panel to explore the strategic implications of the conflict in Yemen. In 2014, the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels overthrew the government of Yemen and seized the capital. With U.S. logistical support, Saudi Arabia mustered a coalition to restore the government. In response, the Houthis waged war on Riyadh, firing ballistic missiles at civilian areas, including airports. Though the Houthis have been successful in portraying themselves as defenders of Yemen and Saudi Arabia as the aggressors, they have violated countless internationally brokered ceasefires and the conflict continues today.
In the U.S., Congress has voted to withdraw support from the Saudi-led campaign and the White House has turned up the pressure on Tehran, recently imposing sanctions on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps—the Houthis’ patron. Can the Trump administration afford to let the Islamic Republic implant a Hezbollah-clone on the border of a key U.S. ally, thereby creating a failed state, and threatening international trade through Bab al-Mandeb?
Speakers
Fatima Abo Alasrar, Senior Analyst, Arabia Foundation
Michael Doran, Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute
Bernard Haykel, Professor, Near Eastern Studies Director, Institute for Transregional Study of the Contemporary Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia, Princeton University
Lee Smith Speaker, Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute
2. Results of the Indonesian Elections: New Directions or More of the Same?| Thursday, April 18, 2019 | 10:00 am – 11:30 pm | The Center for Strategic and International Studies | 1616 Rhode Island Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036| Register Here|
The CSIS Southeast Asia Program is pleased to present “Results of the Indonesian Elections: New Directions or More of the Same?” a panel discussion featuring Dr. Ann Marie Murphy (Professor, Seton Hall University) and Adam Schwarz (Founder and CEO, Asia Group Advisors). An estimated 193 million eligible voters in Indonesia will head to the polls on April 17 to cast their vote for president, vice president, and members of the People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR).The “Results of the Indonesian Elections: New Directions or More of the Same?” event will assess the outcomes of these elections, and what they mean for Indonesian domestic politics, economic policy, foreign policy, and U.S.-Indonesia relations.
Speakers
Dr. Ann Marie Murphy, Professor, Seton Hall University
Adam Schwarz, Founder and CEO, Asia Group Advisors
3. Netanyahu’s Reelection: Implications for Israeli Politics and Palestinian Statehood?| Friday, April 19, 2019 | 12:00 am – 1:30 pm | The Center for Strategic and International Studies | 1319 18th St. NW, Washington D.C. 20036| Register Here|
The reelection of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for a fifth term was widely perceived as a blow to the prospects for peace and protection of Palestinian rights.
Netanyahu’s pledge to annex parts of occupied Palestinian territories in the West Bank, as well as the ongoing marginalization of Palestinians inside Israel, make Palestinian statehood and the possibility of a peace plan seem ever more distant.
To assess the consequences of this vote, The Middle East Institute (MEI) and The Institute for Palestine Studies (IPS) invite you to a timely conversation with Raef Zreik, a prominent Palestinian lawyer and academic. Zreik will discuss what the elections say about the Israeli body politic, and the implications for Israel’s domestic and foreign policy. Amb. Gerald Feierstein, MEI’s senior vice president, will moderate the conversation.
Speakers
Raef Zreik, Associate professor, Carmel Academic College; Academic co-director, Minerva Centre for the Humanities, Tel Aviv University
Ambassador Gerald Feierstein, moderator, Senior vice president, MEI
4. Inside the Mind of Lashkar-e-Tayyaba| Monday, April 15, 2019 | 12:00 am – 1:30 pm | The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace | 1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW Washington, DC 20036-2103| Register Here|
This past November marked the tenth anniversary of the terrorist attack in Mumbai that killed more than 160 people, perpetrated by a Pakistan-based jihadist terrorist group called Lashkar-e-Tayyaba. Today the group still operates inside, and outside, of Pakistan’s borders despite mounting international pressure on Pakistan to disrupt its operations. As the group continues to attack India from bases in Pakistan, it further escalates tensions between the two nuclear-armed countries.
C. Christine Fair’s new book, In Their Own Words: Understanding Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, reveals little-known details of how this group functions by translating and commenting upon its sophisticated propagandist literature. The book examines how this canon of texts is the group’s most popular and potent weapon, in particular demonstrating how Lashkar-e-Tayyaba thinks about recruiting families rather than simply fighters. C. Christine Fair, Joshua T. White, and Polly Nayak will discuss the book’s findings and implications for the broader challenges around Pakistan’s nuclear coercion. Carnegie’s Ashley J. Tellis will moderate.
C. Christine Fair, associate professor in the Security Studies Program within Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service.
Polly Nayak, fellow with the South Asia program at the Stimson Center
Joshua T. White, associate professor of the practice of South Asia Studies and Fellow at the Edwin O. Reischauer Center for East Asia Studies at Johns Hopkins SAIS
Polly Nayak, fellow with the South Asia Program at the Stimson Center.
5. Ukraine’s Future Leaders on the Frontlines of Change| Thursday, April 18, 2019 | 12:00 am – 1:30 pm | The Atlantic Council| 1030 15th St NW, Washington, DC 20005| Register Here|
The Atlantic Council and Stanford’s Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL), are pleased to invite you to a special event on April 18, 2019 at the Atlantic Council Headquarters (1030 15th Street NW, 12th Floor, West Tower Elevators) to celebrate Ukraine’s future.
In the five years since the end of the Revolution of Dignity, Ukraine continues to ask the important question: How will the country ensure democratic values in its future development? Much of Ukraine’s hope lies in its young leaders who will drive the country forward in the coming years. CDDRL has been fortunate to provide a year-long residency to some of these future leaders as part of the Center’s Ukrainian Emerging Leaders Program.
Agenda
Welcome and Introduction:
Ambassador John Herbst, Director, Eurasia Center, Atlantic Council
Keynote Address:
Dr. Francis Fukuyama, Mosbacher Director of the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL), Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford University
Panel Discussion:
Ms. Nataliya Mykolska, Ukrainian Emerging Leaders Program 2018-19, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies;Former Trade Representative of Ukraine, Deputy Minister, Stanford University; Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of Ukraine
Mr. Ivan Prymachenko, Ukrainian Emerging Leaders Program 2018-19, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies; Co-founder, Stanford University; Prometheus
Ms. Oleksandra Ustinova, Ukrainian Emerging Leaders Program 2018-19, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies; Head of Communications and Anti-Corruption in HealthCare Projects, Stanford University; Anti-Corruption Action Center (ANTAC)
Moderated By: Ms. Melinda Haring, Editor, UkraineAlert, Atlantic Council
6. Algeria what happened? What’s next?| Monday, April 15, 2019 | 2:00 pm – 3:30 pm | Project on Middle East Democracy | 1730 Rhode Island Ave NW #617, Washington, DC 20036| Register Here|
Since February, millions of Algerians have taken to the streets week after week for historic, peaceful mass protests against a fifth term for President Abdelaziz Bouteflika and for democratic change. The popular pressure led to the postponement of the April 24 presidential elections and, on April 2, to Bouteflika’s resignation after 20 years in power. Abdelkader Bensalah, long a key ally of Bouteflika and since 2002 the Speaker of Algeria’s upper house of parliament, has been appointed interim president. This appointment is in line with Algeria’s constitution, but is contrary to protesters’ demand for a genuinely independent figure to oversee this transitional period. The next steps remain unclear and many Algerians worry that the regime will resist a democratic transition. Please join POMED to hear from a panel of Algeria experts who will analyze what led to the protests, what has happened so far, and what might happen next.
Rochdi Alloui, Independent Analyst on North Africa, Georgia State University
Alexis Arieff, Africa Policy Analyst, Congressional Research Service
Amel Boubekeur, (speaking by video from Algiers)
Research Fellow, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales
William Lawrence, Visiting Professor of Political Science and International Affairs,
George Washington University
Moderator: Stephen McInerney, Executive Director, POMED
7. Africa in Transition: Investing in Youth for Economic Prosperity| Tuesday, April 16, 2019 | 9:30 am – 11:30 am | The Wilson Center| 1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, DC 20004-3027| Register Here|
Africa is at a crossroads—and which road its leaders take will shape the lives of billions of people, not only in Africa but also beyond its borders. Often overlooked, population trends play a significant role in Sub-Saharan Africa’s chances for prosperity. Between 15 and 20 million young people are expected to join the African workforce every year for the next three decades. Investing in the health and education of these young people, and providing opportunities for employment, will be essential to ensuring a positive future marked by economic prosperity and stability in the region.
Please join the Wilson Center’s Environmental Change and Security Program and Maternal Health Initiative, in partnership with Population Institute, for a discussion about impactful investments that country leaders can make to empower their countries’ youth.
Speakers
Moderator, Lauren Herzer Risi, Project Director, Environmental Change and Security Program
Parfait Eloundou-Enyegue, Professor, Department Chair, Department of Development Sociology, Cornell University; Associate Director, Cornell Population Center, Unami Jeremiah, Founder, Mosadi Global Trust
Dr. Gladys Kalema-Zikusoka, Founder and CEO, Conservation Through Public Health
Musimbi Kanyoro, President and Chief Executive Officer, Global Fund for Women
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Remote war
New America hosted a panel discussion March 21 about twenty-first century proxy warfare with Candace Rondeaux, Senior Fellow at New America’s International Security Program and C. Anthony Pfaff, Research Professor, Strategic Studies Institute at Army War College.
Rondeaux gave an overview of the strategic and tactical changes in twenty-first century proxy war. Proxy warfare is moving away from both Cold War bipolarity and also uni-polarity. The reason for this shift is the proliferation of standoff, remote targeting capabilities, mainly in the Middle East region. Iran and other states in the region have standoff capacity, which means limited war has expanded beyond the great powers. States can limit their direct engagement. There is also the rise of transnational movements and the weakening of nation-states. The decay of multilateral institutions and their power to exert influence over conflict, such as the UN and increasingly NATO, has also become quite remarkable. The situation in Syria would be different without the log jam among the permanent members of the Security Council, with Russia always objecting to resolutions that seek to contain conflict.
At the tactical level, Rondeaux argues the nation-states that are struggling internally with their own domestic order often look to conflict beyond their borders as a means to signal cohesion at the national level. That is quite apparent in Iranian support to Hizballah, which helps to contain domestic challenges. Also, there is an increasing appetite within autocracies, particularly Russia, for a “military sugar rush” of instant victory on the battlefield, even if it causes big diplomatic trouble. It has been hard to make the Minsk agreement for Ukraine work so far. The last tactical concern is the way in which communication technology has connected social networks in ways never seen before. The rapid transit of ideas and national, ethnic and political identities in Syria, Ukraine, and Yemen has been a big factor in the availability of proxies.
Pfaff stated that proxies not only are not well understood but also under-regulated. The world is becoming multi-polar with state actors who can serve as benefactors and proxies and also a proliferation of non-state actors who can do the same thing. This comes with increasingly fragmented and contested sovereignty, which changes the security calculations of all actors as well as the options they have for pursuing their security goals. According to Pfaff, the inclusion of benefactors won’t make an unjust cause just, or illegitimate authority legitimate, but their involvement can make the disproportionate proportionate, and alternatives to fighting less appealing. Work still needs to be done in terms of international law to hold benefactors responsible for the illegal actions of their proxies .
Pfaff argues that international law does not address proxies. There are no norms in this situation. There isn’t any problem with having a proxy relationship, but the question is whether this relationship is stabilizing or destabilizing. States should be held responsible for the acts they sponsor remotely.
RSS - Posts
