Peace Picks, June 18 – 24
1. ROK-U.S. Strategic Forum 2018: Assessing the Trump-Kim Summit | Monday, June 18 | 9:00 am – 4:30 pm | Center for Strategic and International Studies | Register here
Join CSIS for a timely discussion with scholars, experts, opinion leaders, and government officials from the United States and South Korea who will participate in a series of panel discussions focused on the historic inter-Korean and U.S.-North Korean summit meetings, the potential for denuclearization and building a peace regime on the Korean peninsula, and regional implications of summit diplomacy in Northeast Asia.
9:00 am: Registration
9:30 am: Welcoming Remarks
Dr. John Hamre, President and CEO, CSIS
Ambassador Lee, Sihyung, President, The Korea Foundation
9:45 am: Opening Keynote Address
His Excellency Lim, Sungnam, First Vice Foreign Minister, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Korea
Moderated by:
Dr. Victor Cha, Senior Adviser and Korea Chair, CSIS; D.S. Song-KF Professor of Government, Georgetown University
10:15 am: Coffee Break
10:30 am: Session I: Assessing the Inter-Korean Summit and the U.S.-North Korea Summit
Ms. Rachel Martin, Host, Morning Edition and Up First, National Public Radio
Dr. Victor Cha, CSIS and Georgetown University
Dr. Sue Mi Terry, Senior Fellow, Korea Chair, CSIS
Dr. Paik, Haksoon, President, The Sejong Institute
Dr. Kim, Joon Hyung, Professor, Handong Global University
11:45 am: Luncheon and Keynote Conversation
Moderated by:
Ambassador Mark Lippert, Vice President, Boeing International; Former U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Korea, U.S. Department of State
1:00 pm: Session II: Denuclearization and Peace Regime on the Korean Peninsula
Mr. Evan Osnos, Staff Writer, The New Yorker
Ms. Rebecca Hersman, Director, Project on Nuclear Issues; Senior Adviser, International Security Program, CSIS
Mr. John Schaus, Fellow, International Security Program, CSIS
Dr. Yoon, Young-kwan, Former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Korea
Dr. Lee, Sang Hyun, Senior Research Fellow, The Sejong Institute
2:15 pm: Coffee Break
2:20 pm: Session III: Regional Implications of Summit Diplomacy
Dr. Kim, Heung-Kyu, Professor, Ajou University
Dr. Michael Green, Senior Vice President and Japan Chair, CSIS; Professor and Director, Asian Studies Program, Georgetown University
Mr. Christopher Johnson, Senior Adviser and Freeman Chair in China Studies, CSIS
Dr. Lee, Hochul, Professor, Incheon National University
Dr. Lee, Shin-wha, Professor, Korea University
3:35 pm: Coffee Break
3:45 pm: Closing and Keynote Address
Senator Cory Gardner, United States Senator for Colorado
Moderated by:
Dr. Victor Cha, CSIS and Georgetown University
4:30 pm: Adjournment
2. Strategic Challenges in the Baltic Sea Region | Monday, June 18 | 1:00 pm – 2:30 pm | The Atlantic Council | Register here
Please join the Atlantic Council’s Transatlantic Security Initiative and Future Europe Initiative for a public event on “Strategic Challenges in the Baltic Sea Region: Russia, Deterrence, and Reassurance” on Monday, June 18, 2018 from 1:00 pm. to 2:30 pm.
As an assertive Russia continues to threaten the stability and security of the Baltic Sea region, NATO’s deterrence posture and readiness continues to evolve. The nations of Northern Europe are also working to address the current gaps in national defense capabilities and ensure the security of the Baltic Sea region.
At this crucial juncture for the future of Northern Europe and the Baltic Sea region the Atlantic Council is hosting a public discussion on the new book “Strategic Challenges in the Baltic Sea Region: Russia, Deterrence, and Reassurance” edited by Council senior fellow Ann-Sofie Dahl. This new book sheds light on the complex security challenges of the Baltic Sea region, and provides insights on next steps for bolstering defense and deterrence in the region.
Featuring:
Dr. Ann-Sofie Dahl, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, Atlantic Council
Dr. Andres Kasekamp, Professor, Elmar Tampolf Chair of Estonian Studies, University of Toronto
Dr. Robert Lieber, Professor, Department of Government, Georgetown University
Mr. Magnus Nordenman, Director, Transatlantic Security Initiative, Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, Atlantic Council
Ambassador Alexander Vershbow, Distinguished Fellow, Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, Atlantic Council
3. Chinese Expansion and the South China Sea: Beijing’s Strategic Ambition and the Asian Order| Monday, June 18 | 3:00 pm – 4:00 pm | The Wilson Center | Register here
China’s ambitions to become Asia’s undisputed regional hegemon is perhaps most evident in the South China Sea, as Beijing creates military bases along remote reefs and islands in a 1.5-million-square mile expanse. Join us for a discussion with Humphrey Hawksley, author of Asian Waters: The Struggle Over the South China Sea and the Strategy of Chinese Expansion and Los Angeles Times Deputy Washington Bureau Chief Bob Drogin for a discussion on the rivalry between China and the United States, and the dilemma facing countries in the region including Vietnam, South Korea, Indonesia, Japan, and the Philippines to challenge China’s dominance. James Clad, the CNA Corporation’s senior advisor for Asia and former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asia, will also join the discussion.
4. Restoring Restraint: Enforcing Accountability for Users of Chemical Weapons | Tuesday, June 19 | 9:00 am – 11:30 am | Center for Strategic and International Studies | Register here
In 2012, a 20-year moratorium on state employment of chemical weapons use was broken. Since then there have been more than 200 uses – against civilians, military targets, and political enemies. These attacks have broken norms against the use of weapons of mass destruction and create a gap in the nonproliferation fabric – despite the robust international architecture of laws, treaties, agreements, and norms designed to restrain the proliferation and use of these weapons. Accountability for these recent attacks has been limited or non-existent, which threatens the credibility of the nonproliferation regime and only encourages further use. Leaders must find the political and moral strength to use a full spectrum of tools to re-establish this system of restraint. This event will discuss ways in which the international community is working to rebuild the system of restraint against chemical weapons, and CSIS will also launch on a report on this topic.
9:30 am: Welcome, Rebecca Hersman, Director, Project on Nuclear Issues, and Senior Adviser, International Security Program, Center for Strategic and International Studies
9:45 am: Keynote Address, H.E. Mr Ahmet Üzümcü, Director-General of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
10:20 am: Panel Discussion, Moderator: Rebecca Hersman, Director, Project on Nuclear Issues, and Senior Adviser, International Security Program, Center for Strategic and International Studies
Dr. Yleem D.S. Poblete, Assistant Secretary of State for Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance
Samantha Job, Counsellor for Foreign and Security Policy, British Embassy Washington
Nicolas Roche, Director of Strategic, Security and Disarmament Affairs, French Ministry of Foreign Affairs
11:45 am: Event Concludes
4. Columbia’s Vote: The Road Ahead for the Next President | Tuesday, June 19 | 12:00 pm | The Atlantic Council | Register here
The June 17 presidential runoff election between Iván Duque and Gustavo Petro comes at a critical moment for the country’s future. Colombians will choose between two starkly different visions at a time of deep divide. What will be the trajectory for a hemispheric leader and a close US ally on the regional and world stages?
The next president takes office on August 7 with many immediate tasks including: jumpstarting economic growth now as a member of the OECD; determining next steps around the peace process; putting in place new mechanisms to combat corruption; and navigating the challenges of a deepening crisis next door in Venezuela. What new policies can we expect in these crucial areas?
Join the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center on Tuesday, June 19 from 12:00pm to 1:00pm (EDT)— two days after the Colombian election — for a rapid reaction discussion on what to expect from Colombia’s next president on some of the most pressing issues facing the country today.
Speakers:
Alina Dieste, Washington Correspondent, Agence France-Presse
Tomás González, Member, Atlantic Council Colombia Task Force; Executive Director, Colombia, International Monetary Fund
Juan Carlos López, US Political Director & Anchor, CNN en Español
Jason Marczak, Director, Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, Atlantic Council
5. Lawless Skies: Airstrikes and Civilian Casualties in Libya | Wednesday, June 20 | 12:15 pm – 1:45 pm | New America | Register here
In 2011, NATO intervened during a national uprising in Libya to protect civilians from the forces of Libyan leader Muammar al-Gaddafi. Today, the environment remains chaotic. At least four countries and two Libyan armies have continued to carry out airstrikes since the end of the NATO intervention.
New America and Airwars, the UK-based airstrike monitoring group, investigated those strikes and published our findings in the paper “Air Strikes and Civilian Casualties in Libya,” co-authored by Peter Bergen, Vice President at New America, and director of New America’s International Security Program (ISP) and Alyssa Sims, a policy analyst in ISP. New America and Airwars documented more than 2,000 airstrikes that were reportedly conducted between September 2012 to June 2018 in Libya. According to news reports and accounts on social media, at least 242 civilians were killed in these strikes, taking the lowest estimate, and as many as 392 killed, by the highest estimate. This study is the first accounting of these civilian deaths.
To discuss the results of the study and the political environment in Libya, New America welcomes Jonathan M. Winer, the State Department’s Special Envoy for Libya during the Obama administration, Chris Woods, an investigative journalist and the director of Airwars, Oliver Imhof, a Libya researcher and data analyst, and Alyssa Sims.
6. The Middle East: A Region in Chaos? | Wednesday, June 20 | 1:00 pm – 2:30 pm | The Wilson Center | Register here
Last December, the Wilson Center and the U.S. Institute of Peace co-sponsored an event on turmoil across the Middle East with four experienced analysts and practitioners. We agreed to gather again a half-year later to review our observations and conclusions.
Six months later, a scan of the landscape reveals many changes: a new phase in the ongoing war in Syria; recent elections in Iraq, Tunisia, and Lebanon; and U.S. withdrawal from the Iran nuclear agreement. At the same time, we see a stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace process – and yet, the possibility of a new peace initiative from the Trump administration; the continuing war in Yemen; a continuing rift within the GCC; and potential for a serious Israeli-Iranian conflict in Syria.
Please join the Wilson Center as our four veteran analysts reconvene to address these and related issues in a region whose volatility shows no signs of abating.
Speakers:
Jane Harman, Director, President, and CEO, Wilson Center
Mike Yaffe, Vice President, Middle East and Africa, U.S. Institute of Peace
Aaron David Miller, Vice President for New Initiatives and Middle East Program Director, Historian, analyst, negotiator, and former advisor to Republican and Democratic Secretaries of State on Arab-Israeli negotiations, 1978-2003; Global Affairs Analyst with CNN
Bruce Riedel, Senior Fellow and Director, Brookings Intelligence Project, Brookings Institution
Robin Wright, USIP-Wilson Center Distinguished Fellow, Journalist and author/editor of eight books, and contributing writer for The New Yorker
Mona Yacoubian, Senior Advisor, Syria, Middle East and North Africa, U.S. Institute of Peace
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
A bad day
The President had a bad day yesterday:
- The FBI Inspector General found fault with his nemesis, former Director James Comey, for things he did that hurt Hillary Clinton’s election prospects, but no partisan bias in its decisions, in particular against Trump or the Republicans.
- The New York State Attorney General charged Trump and his three older children with crimes associated with the persistent misuse of Trump Foundation funds.
- A video showing Trump saluting a North Korean general went viral:
I disagree with Barry McCaffrey: a competent White House would have avoided any situation in which the President needed to shake the hand of a North Korean general, not to mention preventing the President from lauding Kim for his violent takeover of power and repression of the North Korean people.
Each of these events casts doubt on Trump’s legitimacy. It is now clear that Comey inadvertently helped Trump get elected, by publicizing the investigation into Clinton’s emails, announcing that it had been concluded, and then reopening it, all contrary to FBI policy. Trump may not like Comey, who has criticized the President for inappropriate pressure on the Russia investigation, but he owes him the White House.
The Trump Foundation malfeasance occurred not only in the past but also during the campaign, when its spending was used to support Trump’s bid for the presidency. The amounts involved–single digit millions–seem risible in the grand scheme of things, but that is irrelevant. The use of Foundation funds for both campaign and personal purposes is criminal, whatever the amounts. The case has also been referred to the Internal Revenue Service, which will hopefully try to collect on any amounts spent to settle personal obligations.
Worse than the salute to a general no doubt in part responsible for maintaining a tight clamp on North Korea’s citizenry, was Trump’s justification for his adulation of Kim: lots of people do bad things. This is not his first use of that excuse, which represents a complete abandonment of the traditional US concern for human rights worldwide. America was founded on the principle that all people (at the time, men) are created equal with inalienable rights. Trump has shown clearly that he doesn’t agree with that either at home or abroad, most glaringly and recently in its decision to separate children of asylum-seekers from their parents in order to discourage victim of human rights abuse from trying to enter the US.
The White House is trying to lay on a meeting with Russian President Putin within the next few months. Trump will try for the kind of show he put on with Kim Jong-un: a substance-free engagement with lots of flags and allegedly good vibes, no complaints about human rights, unilateral concessions on sanctions, and claims his interlocutor has agreed to things he hasn’t really agreed to. Trump will try to squeeze this meeting in before the November election, during the September/October blackout of any action by the Special Counsel. The President really doesn’t hide his interest in Russian support, which raises the ultimate legitimacy question: is he the agent of a foreign power?
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Bamboozled
President Trump’s continuing self-adulation for his meeting with Kim Jong-un is tiresome. The only real result was legitimization of a brutal dictator. America is no safer. Kim retains the missiles and nuclear weapons needed to attack the US. He’ll refrain for now from further testing, but there is little comfort in that, since he has the missile and nuclear capabilities he wants. The slick video Trump showed him of a capitalist North Korea will be of no interest to Kim, who wants to maintain a dictatorial regime. Kim may want US diplomatic recognition, an embassy, and maybe a Trump hotel he can hold hostage in Pyongyang, but he isn’t going to open up North Korea.
Trump also retreated on three important points. First, he agreed to a phased process, which is what the North Koreans have wanted, because they don’t intend to complete it. Then he failed to get the North Koreans to agree to “verifiable and irreversible” denuclearization and accepted instead in the summit communique “complete denuclearization.” Secretary of State Pompeo embarrassed himself on this point yesterday. Trump also promised suspension of “war games,” by which he seems to have meant military exercises that the US conducts with the South Koreans.
The net result is “freeze for freeze.” The North Koreans will stop testing missiles and nuclear weapons in exchange for a freeze of US military exercises while a lengthy negotiation starts. The outcome is necessarily uncertain, but no one who knows the nonproliferation business thinks the Administration will come out with something better than the Iran nuclear deal from which Trump has withdrawn. Inspection anywhere in North Korea upon evidence presented of nuclear activities? A commitment not only to get rid of the nuclear weapons but to back up enriched uranium and plutonium production so that the “breakout” time required to produce a nuclear weapon is lengthened to one year? A permanent commitment to never again seek nuclear weapons? Not even in Donald Trump’s wild imagination.
I doubt the Administration has either the will or the capability to negotiate a detailed and verifiable agreement with North Korea. The bureaucracy will try, because that’s what it does when the president commits to something. But the Administration has already set the bar low: it wants the North Koreans to act by 2020, presumably after the November election that year. Trump will be uninterested, the negotiations will bog down, and sooner or later the North Koreans will decide they are better off ditching the process. In the meanwhile, they will be deploying the nuclear weapons and missiles in their arsenal, so that when the negotiations fail they are in a position to threaten the US.
Trump needed a diplomatic triumph to boost his always needy ego. The North Koreans used it to bamboozle him.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Flim flam
President Trump today tweeted:
Donald J. TrumpVerified account@realDonaldTrump2 hours ago
Before taking office people were assuming that we were going to War with North Korea. President Obama said that North Korea was our biggest and most dangerous problem. No longer – sleep well tonight!
Just landed – a long trip, but everybody can now feel much safer than the day I took office. There is no longer a Nuclear Threat from North Korea. Meeting with Kim Jong Un was an interesting and very positive experience. North Korea has great potential for the future!
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Not with a bang
The prime ministers of Macedonia and Greece today announced a solution to the “name” issue: they propose that the former will in the future be known as the Republic of Northern Macedonia, its language as Macedonian, and its citizens Macedonians, if I understand correctly. The new name is to be used both within Macedonia, including in the constitution, and externally, as the Greeks had insisted. The agreement needs to be approved by parliaments in both capitals as well as by referendum in Macedonia.
This is excellent news. Disagreement about the name has slowed the country’s progress towards the EU, stalled its entry into NATO, and exacerbated frictions between its Albanian and Macedonian communities. A solution would mark important progress in a lingering Balkans dispute. Progress in one place gives encouragement to others, as last year’s entry of Montenegro into NATO did. Keeping the Balkans bicycle moving forward is vital to keeping it from falling over.
Of course it isn’t finished until it’s finished. Approvals in parliaments aren’t automatic. Nationalists in both countries will oppose the new name. Referenda are likewise dicey: no telling how things will go, though the Albanians in Macedonia, who are impatient for NATO accession, will presumably turn out in force to vote in favor. That’s close to half the votes needed for approval.
This is one of those issues that has aroused passions but will soon be forgotten once the solution is approved in both countries. There are much more important issues for both Greece and Macedonia: the welfare of their citizens (including EU and NATO membership for Macedonia), defending their electoral campaigns from Russian trouble-making, and exploiting the many synergies between their economies. The sooner both countries refocus on those issues, the better.
Once the name issue is settled, the remaining Balkan tough nuts will be normalizing relations between Kosovo and Serbia as well as making the government of Bosnia and Herzegovina capable of negotiating and implementing the acquis communautaire required for EU membership. Those are not easy problems, but there is more than enough time to solve them before the window for EU membership opens again in 2023.
Republic of Northern Macedonia: it’s a solution that could have been found at any time during the last 25 years. No big bang here, but a blessing to the politicians willing to take the associated risks. Prime Ministers Tsipras and Zaev deserve a lot of credit, as do Foreign Ministers Dimitrov and Kotzias and the ever-patient UN envoy Nimetz. Congratulations! Googletranslate tells me the right words are: συγχαρητήρια! and алал да му е! I trust someone will tell me if I’ve got that wrong.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Giving away the store for a photo op
President Trump today agreed to suspend US military exercises with South Korea during negotiations with the North and to provide Pyongyang with unspecified security guarantees in exchange for an equally vague commitment to denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. He and Kim Jong-un also got their photo op, which featured a stunning array of American and Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea flags.
The quid pro quo is clear: the US will be guaranteeing the permanence of one of the most brutal dictatorships on earth and reducing its commitment to its South Korean allies in exchange for some still-to-be-determined constraints on North Korean missile and nuclear weapons capabilities. The joint statement contains no reference at all to human rights issues or North Korean abductions, though it does refer to repatriation of the remains of prisoners of war and those missing in action from the Korean War. All you need to know about this deal is what the Republicans would be saying if President Obama had negotiated it.
Kim also got a lot from the photo op, which portrayed him as the equal of the President of the United States. The handshake was a de facto acknowledgement of North Korea’s nuclear power status, legitimizing both the regime and its acquisition of nuclear weapons. It will strengthen Kim both at home and abroad. Trump has no problem with that: he seems to relish relations with dictators and disdain democrats.
Trump will also benefit from the photo op, though less than Kim. He’ll use it to assert effectiveness in foreign policy, an arena in which the Administration has had absolutely no success and a number of significant failures, not the least at the G7 meeting in Quebec last weekend. The Atlantic alliance is a shambles, relations with European and Pacific allies and trading partners have been upended, and Russia continues its occupation of part of Ukraine as well as its marauding in Syria. America is more alone in the world, and less able to exert its will, than it has been in decades.
I don’t expect Trump’s supporters to understand or acknowledge this. Their enthusiasm for Trump is unconditional. I do hope that others can see through the photo op to what it really amounts to: Trump has given away the store in exchange for very little. He is a lousy negotiator. He put himself in the unenviable position of having no alternative to this premature and ill-advised meeting. The only hope left is that now some serious American negotiators will get busy making lemonade out of Trump’s lemons.
RSS - Posts
