Month: July 2012
At last
The defections in the last few days of a senior Syrian republican guard commander and Damascus’ ambassador to Iraq could be a tipping point. It has taken a remarkably long time for cracks in the regime to show. But these two defections could be the beginning of an avalanche, one that would sweep away Bashar al Asad’s murderous regime.
If so, we need to begin considering seriously whether the international community and the Syrian opposition are ready for the difficult days ahead. Syria, unlike Libya, has limited oil resources and frozen assets abroad. It is a more diverse society than Tunisia, with significant Alawite, Christian, Druze and Kurdish minorities. It has seen a great deal of violence.
So what should we be expecting? The country will be broke at the end of this year and a half of contestation. It will have several armed forces on its territory: the Syrian army and intelligence forces (including non-uniformed thugs), the Free Syria Army and various neighborhood watch and other militias. Sectarian resentment against Alawites, who form the mainstay of the regime even if some have joined the revolution, will be ferocious. Some Christians and Druze will also be afraid of retaliation. Large numbers of regime supporters may flood into neighboring countries (there are still hundreds of thousands of Qaddafi-supporting Libyans in Tunisia and Egypt). Refugees now in Turkey, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon will flow back into Syria to reclaim and defend their homes. Weapons will be circulating freely, with some risk that the regime’s heavier armament and chemical weapons will fall into the hands of malefactors. Sunni extremists (whether Al Qaeda or other varieties) will see a chaotic situation and try to take advantage of it.
I see no sign that the international community is ready for post-Asad Syria. I know why: we are tired of doing post-war reconstruction, which has posed expensive and seemingly insurmountable difficulties in Iraq and Afghanistan. We’d like Syria to be like Libya and Tunisia, which are taking reasonably good care of themselves. Or like Yemen, which is bumbling along under the former autocrat’s vice president with help from the UN and the Gulf Cooperation Council. Or at worst like Egypt, where the military is clumsily trying to steer a revolution that has managed so far to avoid massive violence.
I doubt that is possible in Syria. Too much blood has been spilled for the revolution to entrust the army with steering anything, even itself. The army is unlikely to evaporate, as Qaddafi’s did in Libya. While many of its draftees will happily go over to a revolutionary regime, the elite units of the republican guard are unlikely to do that. Nor will the Alawite paramilitaries known as shabiha.
I’ve seen little sign of serious thinking or preparation for the big challenges ahead: creating a safe and secure environment, separating combatants, minimizing sectarian violence, providing for returnees and refugees, re-establishing law and order, beginning a political transition and somehow funding the effort. Nothing about the Syrian National Council’s performance in recent months suggests that it is capable of handling the situation with the modicum of legitimacy and skill that the Libyan National Transitional Council managed. Nothing about the Syrian army’s performance suggests that it could do even as well as the shambolic performance of the Egyptian Supreme Council of the Armed Forces. Nothing about the UN’s performance in trying to implement the Annan peace plan suggests it can take on Syria and be effective.
We are in for a rough ride in Syria. Post-war transitions are difficult in all situations. This one will be among the toughest.
PS: Nothing in Steve Heydemann’s The End Game in Syria convinces me the situation is better than the doubtful one I describe above.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
This week’s peace picks
1. Front Burner: Al Qaeda’s Attack on the USS Cole, Heritage Foundation, 12-1 pm July 10
Event Details
- DATE Tuesday, Jul 10, 2012
- VENUE Lehrman Auditorium
More About the Speakers
Author
Hosted By
On October 12, 2000, eleven months before the 9/11 attacks, the USS Cole – with Commander Kirk Lippold at the helm – docked in the port of Aden in Yemen for a routine fueling stop. At 1118, the 8,400-ton destroyer was rocked by an enormous explosion. This bombing marked al Qaeda’s first direct assault against the United States and expanded their brazen and deadly string of terrorist attacks throughout the Middle East. In this first-person narrative, Lippold reveals the details of this harrowing experience in which seventeen sailors died and thirty-seven were wounded. Thanks to the valor of the crew in the perilous days that followed, the ship was saved.
Yet, even with al Qaeda’s intentions made clear in an unmistakable act of war, the United States government delayed retaliating. Bureaucrats and politicians sought to shift and pin blame as they ignored the danger signaled by the attack, shirking responsibility until the event was ultimately overshadowed by 9/11. In Front Burner, Lippold captures this critical moment in America’s battle against al Qaeda, telling a vital story that – until now – has been lost in the fog of the war on terror.
Commander Lippold retired from the Navy in 2007 and remains active in current events and national security affairs. His personal awards include the Defense Superior Service Medal, Legion of Merit, Meritorious Service Medal, and Combat Action Ribbon, among others.
2. Chronic Kleptocracy: Corruption within the Palestinian Political Establishment, 2172 Rayburn HOB, 2 pm July 10
House Committee on Foreign Affairs Oversight Hearing
|
Date
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
|
Time
2:00 PM
|
|
Location
Washington, DC
|
Room
2172 Rayburn HOB
|
|
Subcommittee
Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia
Chaired by Steve Chabot (R-OH) |
|
|
Witnesses
|
|
3. Reform, Revolt and Revolution in Egypt and the Arab World, Embassy of Slovenia, 2410 California Street NW, 6-8 pm July 10
Egypt and the Arab World
Lisa Anderson
President, The American University in Cairo
H.E. Roman Kirn
Ambassador of Slovenia to the US
Reception and Program
Embassy of Slovenia
2410 California Street, NW
Washington, DC
Space is limited. Advance registration is required.
4. Libya’s First Elections: A Preliminary Look at Results and Outlook, Atlantic Council, 12-2 pm, July 11
| Date / Time | Wednesday, July 11 / 12:00pm – 2:00pm |
|---|---|
| Location |
Atlantic Council of the United States 1101 15th Street, NW, 11th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005
|
| Speakers | Gregory Kehailia, Fadel Lamen, Esam Omeish, Karim Mezran |
| Description | After four decades of dictatorship under the rule of Moammar Qaddafi, Libyans will go to the polls on July 7 to elect the nation’s first constituent assembly. With more than 4,000 candidates for the assembly’s 200 seats and nearly 2.7 million voters, all eyes are on the National Transitional Council to fulfill this final step in handing power over to the elected body. After delays due to security and technical reasons, how did the first election proceed? What do the results say about the desires of Libyans to move forward in their transition to democracy? Who are the major players that emerged through this election and how will government formation proceed? |
5. After the Summit: Assessing Iraq’s Relations with its Arab Neighbors, Middle East Institute, 12-1:30 pm July 12
Location:
The Middle East Institute is proud to host John Desrocher, Gregory Gause, Ken Pollack and Amb. Samir Sumaida’ie for a discussion about Baghdad’s complex relations with its Arab neighbors during a time of regional transition. As Iraq seeks to reclaim its role as a powerful player in the Arab world, what obstacles does it face as it attempts to project power and influence in a region still largely suspicious of Iraq’s motivations and alliances? What’s the view of Baghdad from the Arab Gulf and what influence does Iraq have on the unfolding crisis in Syria?
Bios:
John Desrocher took up his position as the director of the Office of Iraq Affairs in September 2010. He spent the preceding year at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad as minister counselor for Economic Coordination, responsible for U.S.-Iraq economic policy issues. He has extensive experience in international trade and in Middle East issues and has served as counselor for Economic and Political Affairs at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo. He participated in Palestinian-Israeli economic negotiations while serving at the U.S. Consulate General in Jerusalem in the late 1990s and served as State Department desk officer for Iraq in the mid-1990s.
Gregory Gause is professor of political science at the University of Vermont, and was director of the University’s Middle East Studies Program from 1998 to 2008. In 2009-2010, he was the Kuwait Foundation Visiting Professor of International Affairs at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. He was previously on the faculty of Columbia University (1987-1995) and was a Fellow for Arab and Islamic Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York (1993-1994). He has published three books, among them The International Relations of the Persian Gulf (Cambridge University Press, 2010).
Kenneth Pollack is a senior fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution. He is an expert on national security, military affairs, and the Persian Gulf. He was drector for Persian Gulf affairs at the National Security Council. He also spent seven years in the CIA as a Persian Gulf military analyst. He is the author of A Path Out of the Desert: A Grand Strategy for America in the Middle East (Random House, 2008)
Amb. Samir Sumaida’ie was appointed Iraq’s ambassador to the United States in April 2006. Following the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Sumaida’ie served as a member of Governing Council (GC) in Iraq. In the GC, he was chairman of the media committee, helped found the Iraqi Telecoms and Media Commission and the Public Broadcasting Institution, and held positions on the security, finance, and foreign relations committees. He then served as the minister of interior in Baghdad. In this capacity he managed a domestic security force of over 120,000. Prior to his appointment as ambassador to the U.S., Sumaida’ie served as permanent representative to the United Nations from July 2004 to April 2006.
Moderator: Phebe Marr is a prominent historian of modern Iraq. She was research professor at the National Defense University and a professor of history at the University of Tennessee and at Stanislaus State University in California. She is the author of The Modern History of Iraq (Third Edition, Westview Press, 2011). She is a member of the Board of Advisory Editors of The Middle East Journal.
6. Democratic Transition in the Middle East: Between Authoritarianism and Islamism, National Endowment for Democracy, 12-2 pm July 12
featuring
Mokhtar Benabdallaoui, Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellow
with comments by
Samer Shehata, Georgetown University
Thursday, July 12, 2012
12 noon–2:00 p.m.
(Lunch served 12:00–12:30 p.m.)
1025 F. Street, N.W., Suite 800, Washington, D.C. 20004
Telephone: 202-378-9675
RSVP (acceptances only) with name and affiliation by Tuesday, July 10
About the Event
The outcomes of the recent Arab uprisings have confirmed the organizational superiority and widespread appeal of Islamist political parties in a number of countries in the Middle East. The new form of Islamism appears to be compatible with democracy, a free society, and a modern economy, and its ascendancy may foreshadow the political future of the region and the roles of domestic, regional, and international actors.
In his presentation, Mokhtar Benabdallaoui will explain why Islamists have embraced democracy instead of fundamentalism and why the appeal of Islamists exceeds that of leftists and liberals in the Arab world. He will assess the challenges of shaping Islamist political thought in a democratic direction, the prospects of Islamist governments accepting diversity and differences of opinion, and the ways in which Islamists may reconcile conflicting religious and political ideas from across the Arab world. Drawing upon the example of Islamist political parties in four countries—Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt, and Lebanon—Mr. Benabdallaoui will consider how ascendant Islamists have influenced societies across the Middle East and conclude with an assessment of the main stakeholders in the Arab Spring, their propensity for reform, and the prospects for further change in the region. Samer Shehata will provide comments.
About the Speakers
Mokhtar Benabdallaoui is a professor of Islamic studies and director of the Doctoral Center for Studies in Politics and Religion at Hassan II University in Casablanca, Morocco. He is also founding director of the Center for Humanities Studies and Research, a Casablanca-based nongovernmental organization that carries out a broad range of activities under the auspices of the Civic Forum, including civic education workshops, publication of the quarterly journal Rihanat, and conferences on democratic reform. During his fellowship, Dr. Benabdallaoui is studying the evolution, activities, and impact of Islamist parties in the Arab world and intends to publish his findings in the form of a book. Samer Shehata is an assistant professor of Arab politics at the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies at Georgetown University.
7. The Role of Central Asia in Afghanistan, Carnegie, 12:15-1:45 pm July 12
Ambassador Robert O. Blake, Martha Brill Olcott Thursday, July 12, 2012 – Washington, D.C.
12:15 PM – 1:45 PM EST
As Central Asia plays a fundamental role in efforts to develop a peaceful and stable Afghanistan as well as a secure and prosperous region, the United States must continue to actively engage with Central Asian countries.
Assistant Secretary of State Robert O. Blake will discuss the prospects for developing Central Asia into a region of economic opportunity, which could help lead to regional integration.
Please note that the event will take place in the Saul/Zikha Room of the Brookings Institution.
8. View from the Ground in Syria, CSIS, 10:30-11:30 am, July 13
-
Friday, Jul 13, 2012 | 10:30 am – 11:30 am
The Center for Strategic and International Studies invites you to a discussion on
View From the Ground in Syria
With Donatella Rovera Senior Crisis Response Adviser, Syria Amnesty International
With commentary by Aram Nerguizian
Visiting Fellow, Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy Center for Strategic and International Studies
Moderated by Dr. Anthony H. Cordesman
Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy Center for Strategic and International Studies
Friday, July 13, 2012 10:30 a.m. – 11:30 a.m.
B1 Conference Room
1800 K Street, NW, Washington DC 20006
Seating is limited.
RSVP is required. Please RSVP (acceptances only) with your name and affiliation to externalrelations@csis.org
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Hang together
There is something special about celebrating July 4 in Tripoli. This is a country that made a revolution only after 42 years of dictatorship. Watching it prepare for elections July 7 is thrilling, even to an old salt. I’ll miss the reading of the Declaration of Independence on NPR this morning, especially this portion of the stirring preamble:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
These are the founding principles of the American republic. I am not by nature a proselytizer. I think everyone should find their own form of government. But if you start from these principles, it is hard–pretty much impossible–to come to other than democratic conclusions.
All the revolutions of the Arab spring have to some extent been inspired by similar thinking, but the Libyan and Tunisian ones more than others have been able to fulfill the hope of throwing off absolute despotism. Egypt experienced something more like a creeping military coup than a revolution. Yemen is enjoying, if that is the right word, a negotiated transition. Syria is lost in a civil war. Sudan (Khartoum) is seeing only the first stirrings of discontent. Bahrain has put the genie back in the bottle, for the moment. Other Gulf states have bought off and repressed their protest movements.
It is hard to fault those who decide the weight of oppression is too great to claim the dignity inherent in the idea that all men (and women) are created equal and endowed with inalienable rights. But if you believe that the premise is true, it is difficult not to want to support those who do decide to take the risk.
In the Libyan case, support came in military form, in response to a threat the dictator posed to Benghazi. But it is a mistake to believe that this is the only form of support, or even the most effective one. It is hard for me to imagine how military support to the Syrian rebellion, short of full-scale intervention well beyond the level in Libya, will do much more than widen and worsen the violence. Someone may get lucky and kill Bashar al Asad, but even then his Alawite sect and its allies will likely continue to fight a war they believe is “existential.” Thinking that way likely makes it so. It is easy to understand, and impossible to justify, their self-protective abuse of power.
Syrians and others engaged in the fight against tyranny would do well to remember Benjamin Franklin’s injunction at the signing in 1776:
We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.
May we all hang together.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Elections are the means, legitimacy the end
Again from Tripoli:
Even in a country as small (6.4 million people) as Libya, an election is a complicated affair. More than 2.8 million people are registered to vote. Four thousand candidates are running for 200 seats an assembly that will write the new constitution. Voting by Libyans living abroad started today in six countries.
This would be a difficult election to administer even with another year to prepare and an established voting tradition. People displaced within Libya will vote where they are living, but using ballots from the communities that they left. This means ballots from all over Libya have to be available in principle in every polling place, which greatly complicates logistics, ballot security and counting but ensures that the displaced have an opportunity to be represented in their home communities. Assisted voting will be necessary: there are no symbols on the ballot (parties are too recent a phenomenon to have established symbols) and 20% of the electorate is illiterate. Assistance is appropriate, unless it extends to picking the box checked.
What can a small team of 30 or so international observers hope to contribute to such a far-flung and complicated process? They can, most directly, hope to get some idea of whether the process meets the standards set in Libya’s own legislation and in international agreements to which Libya is a signatory, as well as whether the process is conducted according to what are today considered best practices. These standards go well beyond election day voting, counting and aggregation of results. They include the right of effective remedies after the fact when there are complaints as well as rights of freedom of assembly, expression and movement for the weeks of the campaign. They also include the process by which the courts blocked stalwarts of the Qaddafi regime (several hundred of them) from becoming candidates, using 21 different criteria.
In a post-war country like Libya security is particularly important. The militias claiming to provide security in parts of Libya, and clashing occasionally with each other, are both a virtue and a problem every day. But on election day they could play an important role, either by helping to ensure a safe and secure environment and letting people vote their minds or by aligning with particular candidates or parties to try to affect the outcome. Ideally, they should have been dissolved one way or the other before this first post-revolution election. In practice, that is a lengthy effort, which has begun with cooptation of some of their leaders as ministers of interior and defense (as well as absorption of their cadres into the public administration) and will have to continue in the future.
Foreigners like me are not likely to be able to detect subtler efforts to influence the voting by militias and political parties, and in any event we can cover only a few of the many polling places, none of which are in the most insecure areas. But there are also local observers–both “party agents” and civil society representatives–who are far more likely to detect abuses. Hopefully the presence of internationals flying the banners of EU, the Arab League and The Carter Center will give courage to these local observers. The international presence should also encourage local election boards to try to execute their responsibilities in accordance with the elaborate procedures hurriedly put into effect. The High National Election Commission has issued more than 100 directives.
Why do we, and the Libyans, go to all this trouble? The answer is deceptively simple: legitimacy. Muammar Qaddafi took power in a coup and within the first decade destroyed whatever popular support he initially enjoyed. Thereafter he ruled the country by fear. He never held an election. The National Transitional Council that took over in Benghazi after the February 15, 2011 revolt and now holds governing authority throughout most of the country feels acutely its own lack of democratic legitimacy, in addition to the shortage of state capacity needed to govern the country. So it has proceeded, with only a few weeks delay to allow more registrations, to hold these elections, which will produce a democratically validated “constituent assembly” (to choose the committee that will write the new constitution) and government Libya has ever had.
This is only the beginning of a lengthy transition. Apart from the oil and gas sector, which was somewhat well-managed even under Qaddafi since it was his cash cow, Libya lacks effective state institutions. It also lacks a constitution that tells which institutions should do what. The distribution of power between the central government and the regions will be the principal issue. Some here would like to return to a more “federalist” structure like the one Libya had under the monarchy, where the regions would have ample powers and possibly control over natural resources. Others see that as threatening the unity of the Libyan state and would prefer decentralization–something like the relationship our states have with counties and municipalities, with responsibility for many services delegated to the more local level.
This is one of the classic problems of distributing power in a way that enables all segments of society to feel they have adequate control over their governance and related resources. The International Crisis Group, which is a lot closer to the situation where problems are occurring than I am, believes that militias in the East concerned about their ability to influence the outcome pose a serious threat to the July 7 elections. Iraqis are still hashing out problems of regional power distribution, nine years after the fall of Saddam Hussein. The Libyans will not find these problems easy to solve, but solve them they will if these elections run reasonably well and produce results that the country as a whole feels are legitimate.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Libyan bellwether
From Tripoli:
It is hard not to share Libyans’ affection for their revolution. They are thrilled with themselves. Qaddafi seemed forever, especially after the United States normalized relations with Libya in 2004. But somehow in a relatively few months last year they found the courage and the means to evict him from power and establish what they hope will be a free society and a democratic state.
The odds are long. Libya has no democratic tradition. Elections were not held at all during Qaddafi’s 42 years in power. The violence of the Libyan revolution, supported by NATO air power, has left thousands of armed youths and dozens of militias scattered throughout the country. This week a mob claiming to object to the geographic distribution of parliamentary seats attacked the elections commission office in Benghazi. Their looting of the computers and other equipment suggests other motives, as did the green shirts some of the youths wore (green was Qaddafi’s favored color). There are also threats of an election boycott in the south, where clashes have occurred recently. Disorder lurks not far below the apparently peaceful and relatively orderly surface.
It is not however hard to find a hopeful Libyan. Things were so bad under Qaddafi that improvement will not be difficult. Libyans believe themselves moderate people who will not reward the Muslim Brotherhood or the more radical Salifists the way Egypt did, a woman with hair covered by a hijab says to me. It has taken time for Libyans to begin to understand that the election on July 7 is important. Some thought they had fulfilled their civic obligation when they registered to vote. No one knows how many will turn out or how they will vote, but there is ample choice and a real possibility of new faces emerging.
Women in Libya will run both as individuals for 120 seats in the assembly as well as on party lists for the remaining 80. The party lists are required to alternate male and female names. An Italian businessman who has been coming to Libya for decades was surprised they were even being allowed to vote. There is palpable distrust in political parties, which have emerged only in the past year. Individual reputation and standing is expected to count for a lot.
I enjoyed dinner this evening with activists from Egypt and Morocco. The contrast with Libya could not be stronger. Egypt has elected a Muslim Brotherhood president who will now engage in a complicated tug of war with the country’s still powerful Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, which has dissolved the elected parliament. The Moroccan king has nominally begun a reform process with a new constitution and elections that returned an Islamist-led government, but things there remain as always: absolute monarchy rules.
Libya, a country many in the region view as backward, has a grand opportunity with the elections this week. If they go well, it will mark an important step forward in a democratic direction for the Arab awakening, which has lost a lot of its shine in recent months due to profound confusion in Egypt, extreme violence in Syria and a half-baked outcome in Yemen. If the elections in Libya go poorly, with violence or boycott undermining their legitimacy, it will be a giant step backwards. Libya is not the largest or most important country in the Arab world, but right now it is a bellwether that counts.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Just two peace picks this week
This is the deadest week I remember in DC, but if you happen to be stuck in town here are two events worth considering:
1. The State of Afghanistan, Brookings, 9:30-11 am July 3
As the U.S. and NATO troop surges in Afghanistan begin to wind down, and transition of control to the Afghan government and people moves forward, continued long-term support for the country remains crucial to the mission’s prospects. While much of the last year has witnessed decreased violence, many challenges clearly still remain. Many of them center on governance and development. A major donors’ conference will be held July 8 in Japan to discuss Afghanistan’s development and governance, and consider future international financial support.
On July 3, Foreign Policy at Brookings will host a discussion on the current situation in Afghanistan, featuring keynote remarks from Alex Thier, assistant to the administrator and director of the Office of Afghanistan and Pakistan Affairs at the U.S. Agency for International Development. Following his remarks, Thier will be joined by former U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan Ronald Neumann, author of The Other War (Potomac Books, 2009), and Brookings Senior Fellow Michael O’Hanlon, co-author of Bending History (Brookings, 2012) and the report “Towards a Political Strategy in Afghanistan,” for a discussion.
After the program, participants will take audience questions.
Falk Auditorium
1775 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
For More Information
Brookings Office of Communications
events@brookings.edu
202.797.6105
Event Agenda
- Introductory Remarks
-
- Keynote Address
-
Alex Thier
Assistant to the Administrator and Director of the Office of Afghanistan and Pakistan Affairs
U.S. Agency for International Development
-
- Panelists
-
Ronald Neumann
-
Alex Thier
Assistant to the Administrator and Director of the Office of Afghanistan and Pakistan Affairs
U.S. Agency for International Development
-
2. New Story Leadership for the Middle East, SAIS 9 am-2 pm July 6
| When: | Back to Calendar July 6, 2012 @ 9:00 am – 2:00 pm | |
|---|---|---|
| Where: | The School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) Johns Hopkins University 1740 Massachusetts Ave NW Washington,DC 20036 USA |
|
| Cost: | Free | |
| Contact: | Paul Costello 240-476-1123 paul@newstoryleadership.org |
|
| Categories: | Conferences | |
Add to Google Calendar 
The younger generations of Egypt, Tunisia and other countries in North Africa and the Middle East have decisively spoken up for change, demanding new leadership, greater freedom and the right to choose their own futures. Now the younger generation of the most conflicted zone in the region also wants to speak for change, to engage you in the new conversation by sharing their stories and their hopes for peace.
NSL, partnering with SAIS, is proud to announce a special half-day conference featuring inspiring presentations from young leaders from Israel and Palestine who are living and working together for the summer here in Washington. They will share their insights about the on-going Israeli-Palestinian conflict and field questions from the audience in effort to unearth what this emerging generation of young adults from the Middle East is thinking about their future, and the future of their region.
If you are tired of the old story of the Middle East, of failed peace attempts and stalled negotiations, come and hear fresh voices, voices that insist on being heard because it is their future that is being shaped by conversations conducted in Washington. They are demanding a say for themselves and on-behalf of their generation.
RSS - Posts
