Tag: China
Trials and tribulations
President Trump’s former campaign manager and his former personal attorney/fixer yesterday became convicted felons. Paul Manafort’s conviction on eight charges confirmed his financial crimes. He was not acquitted on any charges, but the jury failed to come to a conclusion on ten. Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to financial crimes as well as campaign finance violations associated with paying hush money, at Donald Trump’s direction, to women with whom Trump had had affairs. Nothing like this level of corrupt behavior has come so close to a president in at least 100 years, if not since the founding of the republic.
What significance does any of this have, in particular for foreign policy?
Manafort’s conviction brings enormous pressure on him to cooperate with the Special Counsel in the Russia investigation. Manafort, who seems to me to be a Russian agent, presumably knows a great deal about Trump’s dealings with the Russians. To avoid his spilling the beans, Trump may pardon him, but Manafort would remain vulnerable to state prosecution. That is presumably the reason the President has hesitated so far, though he signaled clearly in his reaction to the verdict (Manafort is a “good man” he said) that he might resort to a pardon. If Manafort talks, many of the details of Trump’s relationship with Moscow are likely to become public, with dramatic impacts: Trump may be soft on Russia, but the Congress has been tough and insisted on increasingly draconian sanctions.
Cohen’s conviction makes it virtually certain that he will cooperate with the Special Counsel to get a lightened sentence. He presumably knows the gory details of Russian investments in Trump real estate, which are manifold and the likely cause of much of Trump’s affection for Putin, in addition to Putin’s help in getting him elected. Trump is terrified Putin will block Russian investments in Trump properties. The day of reckoning on that score is near.
So these convictions, while not directly connected to the Russia investigation, do have implications for its future. I doubt Special Counsel Mueller will act decisively before the end of the month, when a pre-electoral moratorium on major judicial moves begins. The question, which won’t be answered until November 6, is whether Americans will be able to read the handwriting on the wall. Trump’s solid 35% or so is likely to stick with him, but 65% is a lot of potential voters. The big question is whether they will go to vote in sufficient numbers to begin to correct the mistake of 2016.
Many tribulations lie ahead. If the Republicans lose control of the House of Representatives, it will have grounds for impeachment (indictment). The Republicans are likely however to continue their control of the Senate, where conviction is unlikely so long as they remain solid in their support of Trump. The process of impeachment and trial will take months, distracting the Administration from other important issues, including foreign policy.
If the Democrats do not gain control of the House or Senate, impeachment is not possible and they will continue in opposition while the Special Counsel pursues his investigation and decides whether to charge the President. That is unlikely as it contradicts Justice Department policy. Mueller will however file a report that could state boldly what laws the President has violated.
That will happen only if Trump doesn’t fire him or neuter the investigation by taking away its staff’s security clearances. Both are possible, but the political risks involved are significant. It would amount to a presidential guilty plea and would not stop state-level prosecutions that could detail presidential malfeasance and lead to prosecution after Trump leaves office.
So no, we are nowhere near the end of the Trump scandals and their consequences. We face at least two more years of painful revelations and judicial maneuvers, while the Russians, Iranians, Chinese, and others test our mettle in cyberspace, on the high seas, and on land in Syria, Ukraine, Turkey, and elsewhere. Our traditional allies in both Europe and Asia are all hedging their bets, because of Trump’s erratic behavior, his attack on NATO, and his cozying up to Kim Jong-un. And the lengthy Obama recovery is showing signs of aging, in part due to Trump’s tariffs, an inflationary budget, and a giant tax cut for the wealthy.
Neither the trials nor the tribulations are over.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
America last
The general reaction to yesterday’s Helsinki summit between Presidents Putin and Trump was even more dramatic than my own. Here’s a sampling:
- treasonous
- collusion in public
- nauseating
- most embarrassing performance by american president ever seen
- incredibly weak
- a personal and national embarrassment
- beyond disgraceful to dangerous
- most serious mistake of his presidency
- pathetic and weak display of American leadership
Many of those comments are from Republicans. Trump’s indication that he continues to believe Putin’s denials about interference in the 2016 campaign won the most disapproval, though that is something he has said repeatedly in the past. Saying it in front of Putin, and looking admiringly at the Russian president through several slams against the United States, got to people.
I can almost hear the tectonic plates of the world order shifting.
Putin is the big winner out of this summit, as he reasserted Russia’s claim to being a global power equal to the US. He came to the meeting well-prepared but late enough to show Trump who is boss. His people have declared that the summit exceeded all Russian expectations. Trump did nothing to take Putin down a peg or two: on Ukraine they agreed to disagree, on Syria Moscow is dominant, and on many other issues Putin asserted Russia’s claim to being America’s indispensable partner, even though the country has a GNP the size of Spain’s and the moral standing of those little figures you find at the bottom of a Hieronymous Bosch painting, roasting in hell.
The US in the past week has proven itself weak and unreliable as an ally. All Europeans should understand that when Trump says you are a foe, he means it and will try to do you serious harm, in particular on trade. Europe needs to stand up for itself, not only vis-a-vis Russia. The Americans are providing a fabulous opportunity to unify and strengthen the European Union, its military capabilities, and its soft power. Brexit will be a blow–the UK has been an important contributor to EU strength–but Europe will still be the largest economy in the world. Use the position wisely and the Americans will soon be begging for their alliance back.
The Chinese must be chortling. Putin is just an inconvenient and annoying neighbor to them, one that seems unable to produce all the natural gas it promises to export. But Putin has done Beijing a big favor by distracting Washington from the Asia Pacific, where the US should be doing far more to maintain its friends and allies. They are the first line of defense against a rising rival hegemon as well as against North Korea. But Washington is doing nothing to counter China’s South China Sea militarization, it has abandoned the Trans Pacific Partnership, and it has made a hash of the effort to get Pyongyang to give up its nuclear weapons. China’s claim to restoring its position as the “Middle” Kingdom, that is the central one, is now closer to being realized.
On the home front, Trump has embarrassed Republicans, but they aren’t going to do anything about it. Few are parroting the White House’s talking points about the Summit, and some have even directly criticized the President. But mostly they are staying mum or issuing mild critiques. The Democrats are having a field day, but that won’t matter to Trump. Only a serious rebellion within his own party could cause him to rethink, or maybe better to say think. That isn’t happening yet.
Mueller still has a month or so to indict Americans for their roles in the Russian election hacking. That is the next shoe to drop. Then he needs to hold back for the two months preceding the election, in accordance with Justice Department rules. Then the only effective antidote to Trump’s surrender of American interests to Putin is at the polls in November. We can hope that it is finally dawning on most Americans that this is a president who puts the United States last, not first. The rest of the world already knows.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Putin’s pet
President Trump is on his way to a meeting Monday with Russian President Putin. Along the way, he is doing precisely what Putin most wishes for.
First Trump trashed NATO. That’s the alliance Putin loves to hate. Trump not only criticized the allies for failing to meet the 2024 2% target for defense spending, he also fired a salvo at Germany for importing gas from Russia. Sitting next to him when he did that at breakfast were Secretary of State Pompeo, Ambassdor to NATO Hutchison, and Chief of Staff Kelly. All looked stunned, but Kelly did not bother hiding his discomfort. The White House spokesperson put him in his place by claiming he was disappointed in the breakfast offerings.
Then last night, in an interview that became public while he was at dinner with Prime Minister May in London, Trump compounded the felony. He not only blasted his host for not favoring “hard” Brexit and allowing immigrants to damage the “fabric” of British society, but also attacked the mayor of London for being soft on terrorism. The racist tone of these remarks is apparent to anyone who listens. The “special relationship” between the US and UK hasn’t known a lower moment in the past 100 years.
Then this morning we read that Trump is preparing to cut a “deal” on Syria in which Putin promises something he can’t deliver: withdrawal of the Iranians and their proxies from Syria’s border with Israel. In return, the US would withdraw from Syria, something Trump has promised publicly he would do, leaving the Kurds to cut a deal with Assad. This is an idea Netanyahu is pushing, along with relieving Russia from US and European sanctions.
The next shoe to drop will be Ukraine. Trump believes Crimea rightfully belongs to Russia, since people speak Russian there. Never mind that many people throughout Ukraine speak Russian, as well as Ukrainian. He may accept the Russian annexation, thereby putting a big smile on Putin’s face and completing an extraordinary week for the Russian president: NATO undermined, the UK/US relationship weakened, Syria won, and Crimea absorbed. What else could go right?
The pattern is clear: Trump is Putin’s pet president doing precisely what Moscow wants. The only real question is why.
I have favored the view that money is the main reason. Trump’s real estate empire, about which he cares more than anything else, is heavily dependent on Russian investment and purchases of condos. Putin could turn off the flow of rubles in an instant. No wealthy Russian would buck the president, who gets to decide which oligarchs prosper and which don’t. Trump’s finances wouldn’t survive a month without Moscow’s support.
But it is also possible that Trump himself was recruited long ago. He hired people for his campaign who were Russian intelligence assets. Special Counsel Mueller has already indicted some of them. Trump’s visit to Moscow in the late 1980s, when it was still the capital of the Soviet Union, has raised questions. The Republican attempt yesterday in Congress to discredit the former chief of FBI counter-intelligence operations, Peter Strzok, suggests how desperate they are to stymie an investigation that has already gotten to one degree of separation from Trump.
But the Congress is also beginning to react appropriately to Trump’s surrender of American interests to Putin. It has passed a strong resolution in support of NATO and against concessions to Putin on Ukraine. Republican discomfort with Trump’s “national security” tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and the European Union is starting to show. The trade war with China is causing a lot of heartburn in the Middle West and other areas of the country the Republicans need to keep on their side.
But Putin is still making Trump sit and beg. He is Putin’s pet.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace picks July 2 – 15
1. Mexican Ambassador Discusses the Evolving U.S.-Mexico Relationship | Tuesday, July 3, 2018 | 11:30 am – 12:30 pm | Hudson Institute | Register Here
On July 3rd, Hudson Institute will host Gerónimo Gutiérrez Fernández, Ambassador of Mexico to the United States, for a discussion about the current state of U.S.-Mexico relations. The conversation will be moderated by Hudson Distinguished Fellow Walter Russell Mead.
The U.S.-Mexico relationship has recently faced new challenges. Immigration enforcement has intensified along the shared border; NAFTA renegotiations have progressed slowly, leading some in the Trump Administration to consider bilateral trade deals as an alternative approach with its North American partners; and new tariffs imposed on Mexican steel and aluminum have triggered retaliatory measures. Yet Mexico has long served as a strong regional trade ally and critical partner in efforts to combat narcotics trafficking. Voters in Mexico’s presidential elections on July 1st will likely be influenced by the rapidly evolving relationship between these two countries.
Gerónimo Gutiérrez Fernandez was named Ambassador of Mexico to the United States on January 13, 2017 by President Enrique Peña Nieto. During a more than 15-year career as a public servant, Ambassador Fernandez has served under four Mexican presidents. Prior to his most recent appointment, he was the Managing Director of the North American Development Bank (NADB).
Speaker:
His Excellency Gerónimo Gutiérrez Fernández, Ambassador of Mexico to the United States
Moderator:
Walter Russell Mead, Distinguished Fellow, Hudson Institute
2. Stabilizing Sino-Indian Security Relations: Managing Strategic Rivalry After Doklam | Tuesday, July 10, 2018 | 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM | Carnegie Institute for International Peace | Register Here
The Doklam standoff between Indian and Chinese troops in the summer of 2017 coincided with an ongoing deterioration in bilateral relations, and accelerated pre-existing military competition. Frank O’Donnell provides a detailed analysis of Indian and Chinese nuclear and conventional ground force posturing, and illustrates darkening rival perceptions of these actions and their underlying strategic intentions. Join Carnegie for a discussion with O’Donnell on his new paper, Stabilizing Sino-Indian Security Relations, which proposes new measures to limit the recurrence of future Doklam-like episodes and their inherent risk of escalation. Copies of the paper will be available.
Speakers:
Sameer Lalwani: senior associate and co-director of the South Asia program at the Stimson Center.
Tanvi Madan: director of the India Project and fellow in the Project on International Order and Strategy in the Foreign Policy program at the Brookings Institution.
Frank O’Donnell: Stanton junior faculty fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University, and a nonresident fellow in the South Asia program at the Stimson Center.
George Perkovich: Ken Olivier and Angela Nomellini chair and vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
3. Senator Jeff Merkley on Violence and Humanitarian Response in Africa | Wednesday, July 11, 2018 | 9:00 am – 10:00 am | US Institute of Peace | Register Here
Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR) recently returned from a five-country visit to Somalia, South Sudan, Djibouti, Kenya, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo to assess the region’s humanitarian crises while seeking to better understand their root causes. He held over 35 meetings with civil society, refugees living in camps, aid workers, government officials, and U.N. peacekeepers. During his visit, it became clear to Senator Merkley that U.S. diplomatic leadership, development aid, and humanitarian response are critical to addressing the root causes of conflict, climate change and corruption.
Senator Merkley will speak about Congress’ priorities on humanitarian- and conflict-related issues in Africa.
Speaker:
Senator Jeff Merkley, US Senator from Oregon, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Multilateral International Development, Multilateral Institutions, and International Economic, Energy, and Environmental Policy.
Moderator:
Nancy Lindborg, President, U.S. Institute of Peace.
4. Rethinking globalization: How do we rebuild support? | Wednesday, July 11, 2018 | 10:00 am – 11:30 am | American Enterprise Institute | Register Here
The Trump administration’s America First approach to economic policy has brought into stark relief the declining support among a growing number of Americans for what has come to be called “globalization.” But anti-globalization sentiment in the United States has broader support than the Trump base alone and reflects deeper social and economic drivers that policymakers have failed to address over time. Increasingly, Americans wonder what is in “globalization” for them. In today’s hyper-divisive environment, how can policymakers cut through the fractious political discourse and improve our understanding of the impact of an increasingly interconnected world on the American people?
Join AEI and the Brookings Institution for the launch of “Reconceptualizing Globalization,” a joint project to address globalization, anti-globalization, and the importance of engagement for all Americans.
Agenda:
9:45 am – Registration
10:00 am – Discussion
Participants:
Jared Bernstein, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Daniel W. Drezner, Tufts University
Stephen J. Hadley, RiceHadleyGates
Merit Janow, Columbia University
Moderators:
Joshua Meltzer, Brookings Institution
Neena Shenai, AEI
11:10 am – Q&A
11:30 am – Adjournment
5. War or Deal? The Impact of Trade on the East Asian Economies | Thursday, July 12, 2018 | 12:00 pm – 1:30 pm | Stimson Center | Register Here
Whether a trade war or trade deal, U.S.-China trade disputes are guaranteed to have a spillover effect on the East Asian regional economies. The Trump administration’s recent escalation of tariffs on Chinese goods – with immediate reciprocation from Beijing – is already rippling through the global economy, but U.S. allies and partners in East Asia could be among the hardest hit. Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea have significant exposure to Chinese production, both as importers and exporters in the regional value chain. How does the ongoing trade war – or potential deals in the future – impact the interests of Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea? Join us for a panel discussion with Dr. Liu Shih-Chung, Vice Chairman at the Taiwan External Trade Development Council, Troy Stangarone, Senior Director at the Korea Economic Institute of America, Matthew Goodman, Senior Vice President at the Center for Strategic & International Studies (invited), and Yun Sun, Co-Director of the East Asia Program at Stimson (moderator). A light lunch will be served.
6. Beheading Dragons: Streamlining China’s Environmental Governance | Thursday, July 12, 2018 | 2:00 pm – 4:00 pm | The Wilson Center | Register Here
In March, China’s National People’s Congress passed sweeping reforms to streamline environmental governance in order to more rapidly mitigate China’s crushing air, water, and soil pollution. Natural resource and pollution regulation have long been fragmented and managed by overlapping bureaucracies in China, leading to infighting and buck passing. The Chinese idiom “nine dragons rule the waters” (jiu long zhi shui) aptly captures how nine different government agencies have competed to regulate water. Under today’s reforms, China’s lead environmental watchdog—newly renamed Ministry of Ecological Environment (MEE)—will share water regulation with the Ministry of Water Resources, decreasing nine dragons to two. Another major dragon-slaying reform was to grant most regulatory power over climate change to MEE, a move that will require this newly reconfigured agency to become significantly more powerful than its earlier incarnation.
On July 12, CEF has invited three speakers to unpack the drivers and impacts of this major reform in China. Liu Zhuoshi (Environmental Law Institute) will detail how legal and regulatory authorities around pollution and climate issues are changing. He will also reflect on hurdles Chinese government faces to expand these reforms at the subnational level. Hu Tao (WWF – U.S.) will explore how the new MEE could act more holistically to manage complex pollution issues, like a better coordination on the joint management of air pollution and carbon emission regulations. Liu Shuang (Energy Foundation China) will reflect on the implication of China’s recent governance reforms on efforts to create a national carbon emissions trading systems and what other policies and institutional changes are needed to make it succeed.
Speakers:
Zhuoshi Liu, Staff Attorney at Environmental Law Institute.
Tao Hu, Director of the China program at World Wildlife Fund – US.
Shuang Liu, Director of the Low Carbon Economic Growth Program at Energy Foundation China.
Moderator:
Jennifer L. Turner, Director, China Environment Forum & Manager, Global Choke Point Initiative.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
What Iranians want to know
Mohammed Ataei of the Iranian Republic News Agency last week asked some questions. I answered. The interview was published in Farsi today:
1. President Trump asserted that his decision to abandon the JCPOA had already changed Iran’s regional policies. Do you think his statement is based on any factual evidence or is it just a political statement in response to internal and international criticisms of his withdrawal from the Iran nuclear agreement?
A: I know of no factual evidence for this. Iran remains forward deployed and engaged in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and Bahrain. Much as I might hope that Tehran would pay more attention to the welfare of Iranians and less to its military adventures in the region, I don’t think it is happening.
2. Since the election of President Trump, we have seen many reports about Israeli and Saudi lobbying campaign to undermine the Nuclear Agreement with Iran. They openly welcomed President Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the agreement. To what extent was Trump’s decision influenced by Benjamin Netanyahu and Bin Salman?
A: I think both Netanyahu and MbS were influential, even if I don’t understand what either one gains from the withdrawal.
3. President Obama always said that he had been able to create an international consensus against Iran. Now some observers argue that President Trump’s unilateral policies have unwittingly brought Russia, China and India closer together. How would you see the efficiency of the US sanctions on Iran in the context of the US unilateralism in international affairs? Do you think Secretary Pompeo can persuade the international community to rebuild the sanctions coalition against Iran?
A: In a word: no. Even if the Europeans are compelled by secondary sanctions to observe the U.S. restrictions, China, Russia, India and others will not. There will be no voluntary international consensus, as there was in the lead-up to the JCPOA.
4. President Trump said that he would target any third party which violates the US sanctions against Iran. There are reports that the EU has threatened to take the US to the World Trade Organization. Don’t you think that Trump is isolating the US rather than isolating Iran?
A: He is definitely isolating the U.S. more than he is isolating Iran, as you saw yesterday at the G7 Summit. But the WTO is a slow mechanism and big European companies are not likely to defy the U.S.
5. How would you explain the challenge of the US extraterritorial sanctions to international agreements and the UN Security Council’s resolutions such as 2231?
A: I’m not a lawyer, but I do think the U.S. has the right to limit use of its own financial system. It just isn’t wise to do so. The U.S. is clearly in violation of UNSC res 2231. But who is going to enforce it?
6. The EU vowed to stop European companies from leaving Iran despite the renewed threat of U.S. sanctions. However, major European companies have already announced that they would end business with Tehran. Do you think that the European leaders have done enough to save the JCPOA?
A: Not yet. They will have to be very tough with the U.S. to save it. Iran will also need to be flexible.
7. How does the US withdrawal from the JCPOA affect the worldwide nuclear disarmament? How would you see the future of NPT?
A: U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA undermines nuclear non-proliferation efforts worldwide. We’ll have to wait and see what Iran does, but if it proceeds now with its nuclear program without restraints, we could also see quite a few other countries proceed in the same direction.
PS: Mohammed followed up with a phone call in which he asked about the differences between a treaty and other executive agreements, how the Europeans might maneuver around secondary sanctions, as well as a few other things.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
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
RSS - Posts
