Overload

Posted in Daniel Serwer - June 4, 2019 - 0 Comment

The Trump Administration has taken on a lot of foreign policy burdens:

  1. Replacing Venezuelan President Maduro with opposition interim President Guaido.
  2. Ending North Korea’s nuclear program.
  3. Solving the Israel/Palestine conflict.
  4. Getting Mexico to end transit of asylum-seekers headed for the US.
  5. Negotiating a trade deal with China.
  6. Initiating talks on nuclear, missile, and regional issues with Iran.

Right now, President Trump is in London taking on still a few more burdens: encouraging Brexit, negotiating a trade deal with whatever remains of the UK thereafter, and pushing Boris Johnson as the next Prime Minister. So far, he is failing at all these things.

That is not surprising. The US government finds it hard to do two things at once, much less six high priorities and dozens of others lower down the totem pole. It is hard even to talk about priorities when there are so many. And some interact: you can’t impose tariffs on China without weakening Beijing’s commitment to sanctions on North Korea. Nor can you get Europe to support Jared Kushner’s cockamamie Middle East peace plan while dissing the Union’s interest in maintaining the nuclear agreement with Iran.

Any serious president would be re-examining and resetting priorities, with a view to accomplishing something substantial before the November 2020 election, less than 18 months off. Trump isn’t going to do that, because he believes he can create reality by what he says rather than what he accomplishes. Today in London he said the protests were negligible and the crowds adoring. He was booed pretty much everywhere he went in public. The photos with the Queen (courtesy of @Weinsteinlaw) couldn’t be more telling:

But no doubt Trump and his loyal press will portray the state visit as a great triumph.

That however does not change the reality. Trump has bitten off far more than he can chew. American prestige almost everywhere is at a nadir. Only in countries where ethnic nationalism or autocracy or both are in vogue does Trump enjoy some support: Hungary, Poland, Brazil, the Philippines, and Israel. Making America great again is admired only by those who have similar ambitions.

Without wider international support, there is little prospect that Trump can deliver on more than one or two of his foreign policy priorities before the next election. Failure to cut back on the multiple, sometimes contradictory, efforts makes it less likely that any will succeed. The Administration is overloaded and doomed to failure.

Tags : , , , , , , , , , , ,

Emerging from the woods festival

Posted in Daniel Serwer - June 3, 2019 - 0 Comment

Boris Kamchev of the Macedonian Information Agency asked me some questions last week about Kosovo. I responded:

Q: Could you please comment on the tensions this week between the Kosovo’s security forces and the Serb-dominated enclave in northern Kosovo. Is this a beginning of a well prepared conflict organized by the Russian factor, for breakaway of the Kosovo’s northern province and its annexation by Serbia?

A: As I understand the events this week, the Kosovo security forces made several arrests in the north of alleged criminals, as is their responsibility. There is no northern province of Kosovo. There are four majority-Serb municipalities that are not going to “breakaway,” not least because KFOR won’t permit it and Belgrade would want to accept them.

Q: What are the options for pacification of the situation and reaching an agreement between Pristina and Belgrade?

A: Arrests of criminals are very much part of maintaining law and order. Belgrade already agreed to the validity and applicability of Kosovo’s constitution and justice system in the north in the April 2013 Brussels agreement. There is no need for a new agreement on that subject.

Racist remarks about Albanians by Serbia’s Prime Minister have aggravated the situation, but the predominant reaction I’ve seen from Albanians is mockery. The situation could benefit from a sense of humor. Rather than banning the Prime Minister, I’d like to see Pristina invite her to an “emerging from the woods” festival.

Q: Are you proponent of a territorial exchange between Pristina and Belgrade for resolution of this question?

A: No. I am a notorious opponent of land and people swaps, which would lead to disaster for Serbs in Kosovo, Albanians in Serbia as well as everyone in Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine. The first rule of international behavior is to avoid harm. Only Vladimir Putin would gain from the chaos a land swap would precipitate. The United States and Europe would lose.

Tags :

Peace Picks June 3-June 9

Posted in Nathaniel Haas - June 2, 2019 - 0 Comment

1. How Security Cooperation Advances US Interests|June 4th, 2019|10:00am-11:00am|Brookings Institution|Saul Zilkha Room, 1775 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, DC 20036|Register Here

One of the United States’ key strategic advantages is a global web of alliances that allow it to project power and influence abroad. Defense security cooperation includes defense trade and arms transfers, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, institutional capacity building, and international education and training activities. The United States leverages these programs to ensure its allies and partners have the capability to defend themselves and carry out multinational operations while also building up relationships that promote American interests. As near-peer competitors seek to erode U.S. technological advantages, the importance of security cooperation will only grow in the coming years.

On June 4, Brookings will host a conversation between Senior Fellow Michael O’Hanlon and Lt. General Charles Hooper, director of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), on how DSCA advances U.S. foreign policy objectives in an era increasingly driven by great power competition.

2. Europe’s Populist and Brexit Economic Challenge|June 4th, 2019|2:00pm-4:00pm|American Enterprise Institute|Auditorium, 1789 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, DC 20036|Register Here

Europe’s political landscape is becoming much more challenging, as evidenced by the strong showing of populist parties in the recent European parliamentary elections and by the deepening Brexit crisis. This event will examine how serious these challenges are to the European economic outlook and the economic policies that might be needed to meet these challenges.

Agenda:

1:45 PM
Registration

2:00 PM
Introduction:
Desmond Lachman, AEI

2:05 PM
Panel discussion

Panelists:
Lorenzo Forni, Prometeia Associazione
Vitor Gaspar, International Monetary Fund
Desmond Lachman, AEI
Athanasios Orphanides, MIT

Moderator:
Alex J. Pollock, R Street Institute

3:15 PM
Q&A

4:00 PM
Adjournment

3. Countering Terrorism in the Middle East: A Situation Report|June 4th, 2019|3:00-4:30pm|Middle East Institute|1319 18thSt NW, Washington, DC 20036|Register Here

The Middle East Institute (MEI) is pleased to host a public panel on countering terrorism in the Middle East, featuring high-level panelists representing the United States, the United Nations and the United Kingdom: Ambassador James Jeffrey, Edmund Fitton-Brown and Jessica Jambert-Gray.

The territorial defeat of ISIS’s self-declared Caliphate in March 2019 was a significant victory in the fight against terrorism, but the ISIS threat remains urgent and widely distributed across the Middle East and beyond. Al-Qaeda meanwhile, has faced a series of challenges in the years since the Arab uprisings of 2010 and 2011, with some of its affiliates appearing to have learned lessons from the past and adapted their strategies towards operating more durably, within existing and likely intractable local conflicts. That pursuit has been a defining feature of Iran’s regional strategy, in which local militant proxies – some designated terrorist organizations – are built and consolidated in order to become permanent fixtures of countries like Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.

The international community clearly has a long struggle ahead in terms of combating the threats posed by terrorist organizations. This panel will seek to discuss these challenges and address existing and future policy responses to them.

Panelists:

Ambassador James Jeffrey, Special Envoy to the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, Special Representative for Syria Engagement, U.S. Department of State

Edmund Fitton-Brown, Coordinator, Analytical Support & Sanctions Monitoring Team, ISIS, Al-Qaeda & Taliban, United Nations

Jessica Jambert-Gray, First Secretary, Counter-Terrorism, British Embassy to the U.S.

Charles Lister, moderator, Senior Fellow and Director, Countering Terrorism and Extremism program, MEI

4. African Women’s Mobilization in Times of Unrest|June 5th, 2019|10:30am-3:00pm|Wilson Center|5thFloor, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, DC 20004-3027|Register Here

Please join the Wilson Center Africa Program and the Women and Peacebuilding in Africa Consortium for a discussion on “African Women’s Mobilization in Times of Unrest” on Wednesday, June 5, from 10:30 am to 3:00 pm in the 5th Floor Conference Room. The symposium will examine the cost of women’s exclusion and the possibilities for their inclusion in peacebuilding in war-affected African countries. Based on research conducted by the Consortium, this event will seek to provide evidence, comparative theoretical insights, and policy implications on women and conflict.

The morning session will focus on Women’s Mobilization in the Current Uprisings in Sudan and Algeriaand the ways in which women’s past mobilization has led to the extraordinary roles they are playing in leading the fight for democracy, inclusion, and transparency in the current Algerian and Sudanese uprisings.

The afternoon session will discuss Women Activists’ Informal Peacebuilding Strategies in conflicts in northern Nigeria and South Sudan. It will look at the costs of exclusion from formal peacebuilding processes, and explore efforts at inclusion in governance in Somalia

Moderators:

Aili Mari Tripp, Fellow, Professor of Political Science and Women’s Studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Ayesha Imam, Coordinator, Baobab, A Women’s Human Rights Organization in Nigeria

Speakers:

Samia El Nagar, Independent Researcher, Sudan

Liv Tønnessen, Research Director, Chr Michelsen Institute, Norway 

Helen Kezie-Nwoha, Executive Director, Isis-Women’s International Cross Cultural Exchange

Jackline Nasiwa, Founder and National Director, Centre for Inclusive Governance, Peace and Justice, South Sudan

Ladan Affi, Assistant Professor, Zayed University, Abu Dhabi

 

5. A Changing Ethiopia: Lessons from U.S. Diplomatic Engagement|June 5th, 2019|2:00pm-4:00pm|U.S. Institute of Peace|2301 Constitution Ave NW, Washington, DC 20037|Register Here

With more than 100 million people, Ethiopia is one of Africa’s most important and populous countries.  Recent changes in political leadership have heralded widely welcomed political and economic reforms, at home and abroad. Yet amid the positivity, Ethiopia faces notable challenges: many reforms remain transitory, the country’s broader national stability is being tested, and its internal politics disputed. Given the historically strong bilateral relationship with Ethiopia, how the United States responds and supports the transition in Ethiopia will be hugely significant for the country’s future.

During this crucial period of reform and uncertainty in Ethiopia, join the U.S. Institute of Peace to hear from a distinguished panel who will reflect on their experiences as serving diplomats in Ethiopia, and identify what lessons are relevant to engagement with Ethiopia today. Take part in the conversation on Twitter with #AChangingEthiopia.

Participants:

Ambassador Johnnie Carson, opening remarks, Senior Advisor to the President, U.S. Institute of Peace

Ambassador David Shinn, U.S. Ambassador to Ethiopia, 1996-1999; Adjunct Professor, Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University

Ambassador Aurelia Brazeal, U.S. Ambassador to Ethiopia, 2002-2005

Ambassador Donald Boot, U.S. Ambassador to Ethiopia, 2010-2013

Susan Stigant, Director, Africa Program, U.S. Institute of Peace

Aly Verjee, moderator, Senior Advisor, Africa Program, U.S. Institute of Peace

6. Understanding Extremism in Northern Mozambique|June 6th, 2019|9:00am-12:00pm|Center for Strategic & International Studies|2nd Floor, 1616 Rhode Island Ave NW, Washington, DC 20036|Register Here

Since their first October 2017 attack in Mozambique, Islamist extremists—invariably called al-Shabaab or Ahlu Sunna wa Jama—have conducted over 110 attacks, with more than 295 civilian and military deaths. Despite this escalating violence, there are significant gaps in our understanding of the problem. There is not a consensus about the key drivers of extremism in the region, including the linkages between local, regional, and international extremist networks. Experts have struggled to identify who comprises al-Shabaab (Ahlu Sunna wa Jama), and furnish answers to key questions regarding their objectives, recruitment, or funding sources.

Join the CSIS Africa Program on Thursday, June 6, 2019, from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. for a half-day conference on growing insecurity in Mozambique. This event will feature two expert panels on the drivers of extremism and potential response efforts in Mozambique.

Panel 1: Examining Social, Political, and Religious Drivers
Featuring Dr. Alex Vines (Chatham House), Dr. Yussuf Adam (Universidade Eduardo Mondlane), and Dr. Liazzat Bonate (University of West Indies)
Moderated by Emilia Columbo

Panel 2: Exploring Regional and International Response Efforts
Featuring H. Dean Pittman (former U.S. Ambassador to Mozambique), Zenaida Machado (Human Rights Watch), and Dr. Gregory Pirio (Empowering Communications)
Moderated by Judd Devermont (Director, CSIS Africa Program)

This event is made possible by the general support to CSIS.

FEATURING:

Dr. Alex Vines OBE,Head, Africa Program at Chatham House 

Dr. Yussuf Adam, Lecturer, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane

Dr. Liazzat Bonate, Lecturer, University of West Indies

Dr. Gregory Pirio, Director, Empowering Communications

Amb. H. Dean Pittman, Former U.S. Ambassador to Mozambique 

Zenaida Machado , Researcher, Human Rights Watch Africa Division 

Judd Devermont, Director, Africa Program

7. After India’s Vote: Prospects for Improved Ties with Pakistan|June 6th, 2019|10:00am-11:30am|U.S. Institute of Peace|2301 Constitution Ave NW, Washington, DC 20037|Register Here

In March, India and Pakistan moved to the brink of war. In response to a terrorist attack claimed by a Pakistan-based militant group, India conducted an airstrike into Pakistani territory for the first time since 1971. The next day, Pakistan downed an Indian MiG 21 jet and captured its pilot. By returning the pilot two days later, India and Pakistan avoided further immediate escalation. However, tensions remain high.

Now India’s just-completed parliamentary elections pose new questions: How will the next government in New Delhi engage Pakistan, and how might Islamabad respond? To share assessments of the likely trajectory of India-Pakistan relations following India’s election and the necessary steps to improve ties, USIP will host a panel on Thursday, June 6 from 10:00am-11:30am. Panelists will include two USIP senior fellows leading the Institute’s research on the best current options for reducing and resolving the 70-year-old India-Pakistan conflict.

Participants:

Ambassador Jalil Jilani, Jennings Randolph Senior Fellow, U.S. Institute of Peace
Former Pakistani Ambassador to the United States
Tara Kartha, Jennings Randolph Senior Fellow, U.S. Institute of Peace 
Former Director of Indian National Security Council Secretariat
Josh White, Associate Professor, Johns Hopkins University
Vikram Singh, moderator, Senior Advisor, Asia Center, U.S. Institute of Peace 

8. China’s Changing Role in the Middle East|June 6th, 2019|12:00pm|Atlantic Council|12thFloor, 1030 15thSt NW, Washington, DC|Register Here

Please join the Atlantic Council for a keynote address outlining the Trump Administration’s views on China’s changing role in the Middle East and the implications for US foreign policy by National Security Council Senior Director for the Middle East Dr. Victoria Coates. This will be followed by a panel discussion to mark the release of an Atlantic Council report on this subject by Dr. Jonathan Fulton, assistant professor of Zayed University in Abu Dhabi based on his research across the region. The discussion will also include a perspective from Dr. Degang Sun, a visiting scholar at Harvard University and deputy director of the Middle East Studies Institute of Shanghai International Studies University in China.

Opening remarks by:

Dr. Victoria Coates, Senior Director for the Middle East, US National Security Council

Panelists:

Dr. Jonathan Fulton, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Zayed University

Dr. Degang Sun, Visiting Scholar, Harvard University

Introduced and Moderated by: 

Mr. William F. Wechsler, Director, Middle East Programs, Director, Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East, Atlantic Council 

9. Brittle Boundaries: Creating Collective Cybersecurity Defense|June 6th2019|3:00pm-5:00pm|Wilson Center|5thFloor, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, DC 20004-3027|Register Here

 

Currently, efforts worldwide to defend information systems and respond to cybersecurity incidents are based on a combination of government led actions, isolated regulations, and a limited culture of information sharing between industry, government, and the security research community. The current cybersecurity threat environment can be characterized by independent actions with brittle boundaries. Looking forward, there is a need for government, industry, and the security research community to work collectively together in defending systems and responding to incidents.

Please join the Wilson Center for an event to discuss the state of cyber threats – especially to critical infrastructure – and options for building a global collective defense. 

This event is held in co-operation with the Embassy of Switzerland in the United States and the Europa Institut at the University of Zurich.

Speakers:

Introduction

Robert S. Litwak, Senior Vice President and Director of International Security Studies

Ambassador Martin Dahinden, Ambassador of Switzerland to the United States

Andreas Kellerhals, Global Fellow, Director, Europa Institute, University of Zurich

Keynote

André Kudelski, CEO, The Kudelski Group

Christopher C. Krebs, Director of Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), Department of Homeland Security

Panelists

André Kudelski, CEO, The Kudelski Group

Christopher C. Krebs, Director of Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), Department of Homeland Security

Paige Adams, Group Chief Information Security Officer, Zurich Insurance Group

Meg King, Strategic and National Security Advisor to the Wilson Center’s CEO & President; Coordinator of the Science and Technology Innovation Program

Tags : , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What next for the US in Syria

Posted in Daniel Serwer - May 30, 2019 - 0 Comment

I spoke today at SETA with Charles Lister, Bassam Barabandi, Geoffrey Aronson, and Kadir Ustun on Syria. Here are the talking notes I prepared. I started at number 13 and didn’t use them all. The video of the event is below:

  1. I find it difficult to know what to say about Syria.
  2. I could of course just repeat what many others have rightly said: the war is not over, Assad has not won because the country is in ruins and he lacks the means to fix it, it is all tragic and more tragedy impends because the underlying drivers of conflict have not been resolved.
  3. I could even go further and say that President Trump’s decision to withdraw was foolish, the US must stay in Syria, because otherwise we will have no say in its future, and that those who are trying to at least partially reverse that decision are correct.
  4. But I really don’t believe much of that: the policy implications for the US merit deeper examination.
  5. Assad has defeated any chance for a transition to democracy in Damascus: who in Syria would trust others to govern them today? Assad is demographically engineering the part of the country he controls to ensure regime security and has for most practical purposes won.
  6. He will keep most of the refugees out of regime-controlled Syria because he knows full well he cannot allow them back. He lacks the resources for reconstruction and fears they will threaten his hold on power.
  7. The Americans are not going to have much say over what happens in Syria, partly because they don’t want to. Neither President Obama nor President Trump thinks Syria is worth a candle.
  8. They cared about ISIS and Iran, not Syria.
  9. It is the Astana three that will determine Syria’s fate.
  10. Iran is there to stay because they have to. They think propping up Assad responds to threats from Israel and from Sunni extremists. Only regular bombing will limit Iranian power projection into the Levant. The Americans should prefer that the Israelis do it.
  11. The Russians are there to stay because they want to. Syria has given them not only an important naval base and now an air base, but also a toehold in Middle East geopolitics. At the very least, they can now cause trouble for the Americans in most of the region.
  12. The Turks are there to stay because they want to chase the PKK/PYD away from their borders and enable at least some of the refugees they host to return to Syria.
  13. The Syria Study Group in its interim report suggested that the Americans stay in northeastern Syria and do what is needed to enable civilians to stabilize it.
  14. But before a decision like that can be made, the Americans need to ask themselves what it would take. The Study Group put the cart before the horse.
  15. The six American civilians working there on contracting for rubble removal and a few other basic necessities like demining, water and electricity before being withdrawn by the Trump Administration were nowhere near what is required for a serious stabilization operation.
  16. That’s what you need if you ISIS is to be prevented from returning: governance and justice decent enough to be preferable to the caliphate.
  17. Experience, as Frances Z. Brown suggested in Monkey Cage last week, demonstrates that much more will be needed.
  18. How much more?
  19. Jim Dobbins is the best guide I know on this subject. For a “heavy peace enforcement” operation in a territory with, let us assume, 2.5 million people, which is my guess at how many are in northeastern Syria (and at least that many in Idlib), Jim suggests a force of more then 35,000 internationals and 13,000 locals costing almost 8 billion dollars per year.
  20. On top of that, you’ll need dozens if not hundreds of civilians supervising and guiding the disposition of stabilization funding.
  21. Sure, you can skimp or trade off locals for internationals, but not without consequences. I’ve heard little about Raqqa that suggests reconstruction there is going well there.
  22. The Turkish reconstruction efforts in the Euphrates Shield and Olive Branch territories, which are said to be “comprehensive” in SETA’s recent description of them, suggest Dobbins’ numbers are not far off.
  23. The simple conclusion is that nowhere near the required resources are likely to be available for a serious American stabilization effort in northeastern Syria.
  24. What about the Turks? They want a buffer zone of 30 km or so inside Syria. Could they be relied upon to do the necessary stabilization and reconstruction all across their southern border?
  25. The answer is likely yes, but not without consequences.
  26. Upwards of 600,000 Kurds live in northeastern Syria. A significant percentage of them would likely flee, as many did from Afrin during and after Olive Branch, and the PKK fighters so vital to the effort against ISIS would be forced back into the arms of the Syrian regime, which would no doubt expect them to do what they were created to do: attack Turkey.
  27. US troops remaining in northeastern Syria while the Turks repress the Kurds they think support the PKK and the Syrian regime supports the same Kurds to attack Turkey is not my idea of a place I would want US troops to be.
  28. What about Idlib? It looks to me as if Assad is determined to retake it, with massive consequences: millions might seek to leave. There is no real ceasefire.
  29. Maybe these two dire scenarios lead to a standoff? The regime might hold off in Idlib fearing that Ankara would use the occasion to go into northeastern Syria? Maybe Ankara will hold off in northeastern Syria for fear Damascus will go after Idlib in a serious way?
  30. Might it be possible to deploy Arab peacekeepers to both areas? Now I’m in fantasyland.
  31. Whatever happens, I don’t think the US presence in Syria, even if doubled or quadrupled, is adequate to the task of enabling stabilization of the territory the SDF now controls, especially as ISIS reconstitutes and the Iranians decide to test our mettle.
  32. We can’t get out for fear of the consequences. And we don’t want to put enough effort in to make a real difference in repressing ISIS and repelling Iranian-backed proxies. That’s not a good place for America to be.
  33. My recommendation would be just this: go big and fix Syria or get out and let the chips fall where they may. But neither is likely to happen.
  34. That will reduce us to putting US troops at risk for the sake of a possible future role in some imagined UN-sponsored peace negotiation. I argued in favor of that 18 months ago. Today it is hard to justify.
  35. It is fitting that Hulu has revived Catch-22 at this fraught moment.
Tags : , , , , ,

Not exonerated

Posted in Daniel Serwer - May 30, 2019 - 1 Comment

Special Counsel Mueller has spoken:

He is clear that the investigation found insufficient evidence to charge a “broader conspiracy” with the concerted Russian effort to interfere in the US election against Hillary Clinton and that the investigation did not exonerate the President of obstruction of justice, a charge that can only be pursued in the Congress through impeachment or oversight proceedings.

Insufficient evidence of conspiracy is not exoneration. Not exoneration on obstruction of justice is also not exoneration. We’ve got a President whose middle name should be not exonerated: Donald “Not Exonerated” Trump.

Tags :

Peace Picks May 27-June 2

Posted in Nathaniel Haas - May 28, 2019 - 0 Comment
  1. The Role of Parliament in Today’s Britain|Tuesday, May 28th|9:45am-11:15am|Brookings Institution|Falk Auditorium 1775 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, DC 20036|Register Here

On May 28, Foreign Policy at Brookings will host Speaker of the House of Commons John Bercow for a discussion of Parliament’s role in politics and policy at a pivotal time for one of the United States’ closest allies. The past year has seen a series of extraordinary developments in British politics, with the House of Commons at the center of it all. Following repeated parliamentary defeats for the government’s Brexit agreement with the European Union, the country’s scheduled departure from the EU has been delayed until October 31 and elections for the European Parliament will be held on May 23.

Brookings President John R. Allen will introduce Speaker Bercow. Following the speaker’s remarks, Thomas Wright, director of Brookings’s Center on the United States and Europe, will moderate a conversation with Bercow and Amanda Sloat, Robert Bosch Senior Fellow at the Center on the United States and Europe. Questions from the audience will follow the discussion.

This event is part of the Brookings – Robert Bosch Foundation Transatlantic Initiative, which aims to build up and expand resilient networks and trans-Atlantic activities to analyze and work on issues concerning trans-Atlantic relations and social cohesion in Europe and the United States.

2. The Arms Control Landscape|Wednesday, May 29th|8:45am-11:00am|Hudson Institute|1201 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC 20004|Register Here

Hudson Institute will host the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Lieutenant General Robert P. Ashley, Jr., for a discussion on Russian and Chinese nuclear weapons. Lt. Gen. Ashley will provide keynote remarks and engage in a discussion with Hudson Senior Fellow Rebeccah Heinrichs. This will be followed by a panel of senior government officials who will discuss the global landscape for arms control.

Speakers:

Lt. Gen. Robert P. Ashley, Jr., Director, Defense Intelligence Agency

Rebeccah L. Heinrichs, Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute

Dr. James H. Anderson, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans and Capabilities, U.S. Department of Defense

Tim Morrison, Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Weapons of Mass Destruction and Biodefense, National Security Council (NSC)

Thomas DiNanno, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Defense Policy, Emerging Threats, And Outreach, Bureau Of Arms Control, Verification And Compliance, U.S. Department of State

3. A Conversation with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dunford|Wednesday, May 29th| 10:30am-11:30am |Brookings Institution|Saul/Zilkha Room, 1775 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, DC| Register Here

During his distinguished tenure as 19th chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff—the nation’s highest-ranking military officer—General Joseph Dunford has been a key force at the center of America’s defense policy. He has helped redirect U.S. strategic attention to the challenges posed by great power competition, while also remaining vigilant against threats from the Korean Peninsula to the Persian Gulf and broader Middle East, and addressing rapidly evolving military technologies as well as other challenges.

On May 29, Brookings will host General Dunford for a discussion with on the national security landscape facing America, the state of the nation’s armed forces, and key defense choices for the future, moderated by Brookings Senior Fellow Michael O’Hanlon.

Questions from the audience will follow their conversation.

4. EU Elections 2019: The Future of the European Project|Wednesday, May 29th |12:00pm-2:00pm|Atlantic Council|1030 15thSt NW, 12thFloor, Washington, DC 20005|Register Here

Please join the Atlantic Council on Wednesday, May 29, 2019, from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. for a conversation on “EU Elections 2019: The Future of the European Project.”

In the wake of the 2019 EU elections, the Future Europe Initiative will host a number of experts to discuss their insights on the results. They will provide analysis on the election results, the outcome on individual nations and regions within the EU, and the impact on Europe and the European project as a whole.

Mr. Antoine Ripoll, the Representative of the EU Parliament in Washington, DC, will provide opening remarks with Dr. Frances G. Burwell, Distinguished Fellow with the Future Europe Initiative at the Atlantic Council, moderating the conversation.

Additional speakers will include Dr. Emiliano Alessandri of the German Marshall Fund of the United States, Dr. Célia Belin of The Brookings Institution, Ms. Katerina Sokou of Kathimerini and SKAI TV, and Mr. Bart Oosterveld of the Atlantic Council.

To share the perspective on the ground, Mr. Jeremy Cliffe of the Economist and Ms. Sophia Besch of the Centre for European Reform will join us via webcast from Brussels and Berlin respectively.

5. A New Opening for Peace in Ukraine?|Wednesday, May 29th|2:00pm-4:00pm|Carnegie Endowment for International Peace|1779 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, DC 20036| Register Here

After five years of war, the conflict in Ukraine is effectively stalemated. Join Carnegie for a timely conversation on whether the arrival of a new Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, can help break the deadlock. How should the Trump administration and its European allies respond to this new political reality and continued provocative Russian actions in eastern Ukraine?

U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations Amb. Kurt Volker will deliver a keynote address, followed by a panel discussion with leading experts and former government officials.

Travel for participants in this event was made possible with the support of the Embassies of Lithuania and Poland.

Panelists:

Charles Kupchan, Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and Professor of international affairs at Georgetown University

Marek Menkiszak, Head of the Russia Department at the Centre for Eastern Studies in Warsaw, Poland.

Oxana Shevel, Associate Professor in Political Science, Tufts University

Amb. Petras Vaitienkūnasis, former Foreign Minister of Lithuania and Ambassador to Ukraine (2010 to 2014), Adviser to the Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council

Moderator:

Andrew S. Weiss, James Family chair and Vice President for Studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

6. Russia’s Resurgence in the Middle East: How does US Policy Meet the Challenge?|Thursday, May 30th|2:00pm|Atlantic Council||1030 15thSt NW, 12thFloor, Washington, DC 20005|Register Here

Russia is once again a major player in the Middle East. Moscow has notably backed the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, while it has a growing footprint in Iran, Turkey, and the Gulf. Russia’s return to the region has posed significant challenges for transatlantic policymaking in this era of renewed great-power competition. The Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security will bring together a panel of experts to discuss Russia’s growing role in the region and its economic, political, and security implications. This event is intended to qualify as a widely-attended gathering under the Executive Branch and Congressional gift rules.

Introduced by:

William F. Wechsler, Director, Middle East Programs, Atlantic Council

Keynote address by:

Kathryn Wheelbarger, Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, US Department of Defense

Panelists:

Mark N. Katz, Professor, Schar School of Policy and Government, George Mason University

Becca Wasser, Policy Analyst, RAND Corporation

7. How to Advance Inclusive Peace Processes: Mobilizing Men as Partners for Women, Peace and Security|Thursday, May 30th|2:00pm-3:30pm|United States Institute of Peace|2301 Constitution Ave NW, Washington, DC 20037|Register Here

Efforts to develop more inclusive peace processes are making progress. Yet, 20 years after the passage of U.N. Security Resolution 1325 on women, peace, and security, very few women are currently part of formal peace processes. This gap is exemplified by the recent struggles of Afghan women to be included in peace talks and U.N. reports that showed between 1990 and 2017, women constituted only 2 percent of mediators, 8 percent of negotiators, and 5 percent of witnesses and signatories in major peace processes. A new initiative from Our Secure Future, “Mobilizing Men as Partners for Women, Peace and Security,” seeks to remedy this by calling on men in gatekeeping positions throughout the defense, diplomacy, development, civil society, faith-based, and business sectors to commit to ensuring women are an equal part of peace processes and decision making. 

Join the U.S. Institute of Peace for an event exploring how men in leadership positions are organizing as partners to identify, encourage, and mobilize collective voices in the support of women’s engagement in the pursuit of peace. By bringing global citizens more fully into this campaign, these stakeholders can step away from the sidelines of the women, peace, and security movement and more fully stand alongside—and empower—the women leading the effort. Take part in the conversation on Twitter with #MobilizingMen4WPS.

Reception to follow.

Speakers

Sanam Naraghi-Anderlini, Founder and Executive Director, ICAN 

Honorable Ed Royce, Former U.S. Representative from California

Ambassador Donald Steinberg, Fellow, Our Secure Future

Ambassador Steven McGann, Founder, The Stevenson Group
Ambassador Melanne Verveer, Executive Director, Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security

Ambassador Rick Barton, Co-director, Scholars in the Nation’s Service Initiative, Princeton University

Rosarie Tucci, moderator, Director, Inclusive Peace Processes, U.S. Institute of Peace

Sahana Dharmapuri, Director, Our Secure Future

Dean Peacock, Senior Advisor for Global Policy, Promundo

8. Line on Fire: India-Pakistan Violence and Escalation Dynamics|Thursday, May 30th|2:00pm-3:30pm|Carnegie Endowment for International Peace|1779 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, DC 20036|Register Here

Over the last decade, firing by Indian and Pakistani troops across the Line of Control in Kashmir increased dramatically, but did not escalate to general conflict. Meanwhile, the February 2019 terrorist attack in Pulwama sparked a sharp, albeit short, military confrontation between India and Pakistan that saw the first aerial combat between the two since 1971. What explains the patterns of violence along the Line of Control and what are the chances that conflict could escalate and involve nuclear weapons?

Join Carnegie for a conversation with Happymon Jacob on this question and more. In his new book Line on Fire: Ceasefire Violations and India-Pakistan Escalation Dynamics, Jacob analyzes new empirical data to examine the causes of India-Pakistan violence along the Kashmir border and the relationship with potential crisis escalation. 

Panel:

Happymon Jacob, Associate professor of Disarmament Studies at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University.

Tamanna Salikuddin, Senior Expert at the U.S. Institute of Peace

George Perkovich, Ken Olivier and Angela Nomellini Chair and Vice President for Studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, overseeing the Technology and International Affairs Program and Nuclear Policy Program.

Tags : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Tweet