Tag: Democracy and Rule of Law
Measuring peace
It is hard for me to know what to make of the Global Peace Index (GPI), the 2012 version of which was presented at CSIS this morning by Michael Shank of the Institute for Economics and Peace. I was originally trained as a scientist (through a master’s degree in physical chemistry at the University of Chicago). I take measurement and numbers seriously, which means I am skeptical of hodge-podge agglomerations of numbers based on implicit models not well articulated.
It is difficult to reduce a lot of things to numbers, and when you do the results aren’t always interesting. Thus it is with aspects of the GPI. Western Europe is the most peaceful region, followed by North America as well as Central and Eastern Europe. Asia Pacific comes in fourth. Latin America fifth. The laggards are sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Duh.
The individual country numbers and the changes from last year aren’t any more interesting: sure the Arab Spring pushed the MENA numbers down a bit. Somalia, Afghanistan, Sudan, Iraq and Democratic Republic of the Congo are at the bottom of the heap. Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe moved in the more peaceful direction. Syria, Egypt and Tunisia went the other way.
This suggests one big problem with the GPI. It counts countries undergoing revolutions as less peaceful, even if the overall direction from the perspective of their inhabitants may be positive. And it perceives the end of war in Sri Lanka and the power-sharing arrangement in Zimbabwe as positive developments, despite the real possibility that they are merely prelude to new violence.
The GPI has a big problem with the United States, which it ranks as middling in peacefulness because of its large military expenditures and arms exports. But as Lawrence Wilkerson pointed out during the presentation, these are a necessary concomitant of any country with global security responsibilities. If you play the role of world policeman, whether wisely or unwisely, you are going to need the power projection capabilities required as well as well-equipped allies. And some of the things you do are likely to contribute positively to peace. Emily Cadei, speaking from a Congressional perspective, confirmed that America’s politicians certainly do not see defense expenditure or arms exports as negative for American security.
Far more interesting than the country and regional numbers are the twenty-year trends and correlations for components of the GPI, which itself is remarkably unchanged in each region except the Middle East and North Africa since 2007, when it was first calculated. Military expenditures as a percentage of GDP are down everywhere except the United States, battle-related deaths are generally down too, with the notable exceptions of the Balkans in the 1990s, the Rwandan genocide and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
Where things really get interesting, as pointed out by Anne-Marie Slaughter in her introduction, is in correlation trends. To avoid getting it wrong, let me quote:
Both the Corruption Perception Index and per capita GDP have a similar looking relationship with the Global Peace Index. There appears to be a ‘tipping point’ for countries with a score of around 2 on the GPI. This meant that at a score of 2 on the peace index, small positive changes in peace had large positive impacts on corruption or per capital GDP. Similarly once past the score of 2 on the GPI small negative changes in corruption or per capita GDP were associated with large decreases in peace.
The data likewise confirms the relative peacefulness of full democracies. Of course these are correlations that confirm our fondest beliefs. There are still big questions about the direction and mechanism of causality.
New this year is the Positive Peace Index (PPI), whicch is intended to measure attitudes, institutions and structures that determine capacity to create and maintain a peaceful society. It is based on factors like well-functioning government, sound business environment, equitable distribution of resources, acceptance of the rights of others, good relations with neighbors, free flow of information, high levels of education and low levels of corruption. The difference between GPI and PPI is the “peace gap”:
A surplus means that the institutions, structures and attidudes of the country can support a higher level of peace than is being experienced, while the inverse, a deficit, signifies that the country may be fragile due to weaker than expected institutional capacity.
This is where the U.S. (as well as Israel and Bahrain) are shown to have more potential than they have realized. On the deficit side, there are relatively peaceful countries (mostly in sub-Saharan Africa) that seem to lack the institutions needed to manage “external shocks.” The PPI will presumably offer more interesting results in the future as trends emerge with time.
I’m not less skeptical of hodge-podge quantification than at breakfast this morning. But the GPI report is worth a look.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
This week’s peace picks
1. His Excellency Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations: Building and Sustaining Peace: The UN Role in Post-Conflict Situations, CSIS, 11-noon May 7
The Center for Strategic and International Studies Program on Crisis, Conflict, and Cooperation (C3) invites you to a Statesmen’s Forum with
His Excellency Ban Ki-moon
Secretary-General of the United Nations
On
Building and Sustaining Peace: The UN Role in Post-Conflict Situations
Welcoming Remarks and Moderated by
Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski
Counselor and Trustee
CSIS
Monday, May 7, 11:00 a.m.–12:00 p.m.
B1 Conference Room
1800 K Street, NW, Washington DC 20006
This event will be webcast live and viewable on this webpage.
For questions or concerns, please contact statesmensforum@csis.org.
Ban Ki-moon is the eighth Secretary-General of the United Nations. His priorities have been to mobilize world leaders around a set of new global challenges, from climate change and economic upheaval to pandemics and increasing pressures involving food, energy, and water. He has sought to be a bridge builder, to give voice to the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people, and to strengthen the organization itself. Mr. Ban took office on January 1, 2007. On June 21, 2011, he was unanimously reelected by the General Assembly and will continue to serve until December 31, 2016.
2. Decline of Armed Conflict: Will It Continue? Stimonson, 12:30-2 pm May 7
SIPRI North America, 1111 19th St. NW, 12th floor, Washington DC 20036
RSVP: Please click here.
There is a prevalent public perception that the world has become a more violent place. However, many leading experts agree that there has been a decline of violence and war since 1989. To expand upon these findings and explore their future implications, SIPRI North America will convene a roundtable discussion with two leading experts in the peace and conflict field.
The following key questions will be discussed by a panel of experts:
- What are the reasons behind the decline of armed conflict? And will the decline of armed conflict continue?
- What do we know about the nature and patterns of armed conflict?
- Should the definitions of armed conflict be adjusted?
- How does the Arab Spring fit into the paradigm of declining conflict?
- What role did and should the international community play in mitigating armed conflict?
Welcome: Dr. Chantal de Jonge Oudraat, Executive Director, SIPRI North America
Speakers:
- Dr. Sissela Bok, Board Member, SIPRI North America and Senior Visiting Fellow, Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies (Moderator)
- Dr. Joshua S. Goldstein, Professor at the School of International Service, American University
- Dr. Peter Wallensteen, Dag Hammarskjöld Professor of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala Universit
*Light lunch and refreshments will be provided
If you have any questions, please contact Masha Keller at sipri-na@sipri.org
3. Thinking the Unthinkable: Potential Implications of Oil Disruption in Saudi Arabia, Heritage Foundation, noon-1:30 pm May 8
If an “Arab Spring” uprising completely disrupted Saudi oil production, the U.S. and the global economy would face a massive economic and strategic crisis. Russia and Iran as oil-producing states would likely exploit the crisis to increase their power around the world while undermining U.S. influence, especially in the Middle East. A crisis in Saudi Arabia would have drastic implications for the United States, its economy, and the whole world.
The U.S. must plan ahead and develop pro-active, multi-layered preventive and responsive strategies to deal with political threats to the security of oil supply. These would combine intelligence, military, and diplomatic tools as well as outline domestic steps the United States should take in such a crisis. Please join our distinguished panel of experts as they discuss strategic threats to oil supply; policy options available to the United States and to the oil consuming and producing states; and examine lessons learned from other Heritage Foundation energy crisis simulation exercises.
More About the Speakers
Ariel Cohen , Ph.D.
Senior Research Fellow, The Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, The Heritage Foundation
Bruce Everett, Ph.D.
Adjunct Associate Professor of International Business, The Fletcher School, Tufts University
Simon Henderson
Baker Fellow and Director, Gulf and Energy Policy Program, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Hosted By
4. The Consequences of Syria for Minorities in the Levant, Middle East Institute, noon-1 pm May 9
The Middle East Institute is proud to host journalist and author Jonathan C. Randal for a discussion about the impact of the conflict in Syria on neighboring Lebanon and its complicated religious and ethnic make-up. A tired joke among Lebanese asks why their much-battered country has been spared most of the turmoil that has attended the Arab Spring and its often violent ramifications elsewhere in the Middle East. The jest’s cynical answer: because Lebanon is automatically seeded for the finals. Such gallows humor reflects fears Lebanon will end up footing the bill whether the Alawite regime prevails in Damascus or succumbs to the largely Sunni Syrian opposition. Once again, the region’s minorities feel threatened by outsiders’ geostrategic considerations pitting Iran and its Syrian and Hezbollah allies against the United States. Europe, and the Gulf monarchies. Will the Syria conflict, like so many earlier Middle East conflicts, end up undermining, the role and status of the Levant’s Christian and other minority communities? Randal will draw from his many decades covering Lebanon for the Washington Post and from his book about Lebanon’s civil war, Going All the Way: Christian Warlords, Israeli Adventurers and the War in Lebanon (1983, Viking Press) which has been reissued by Just World Books with an all-new preface as The Tragedy of Lebanon: Christian Warlords, Israeli Adventurers and American Bunglers.
Speaker: Toby Dodge, Consulting Senior Fellow for the Middle East, IISS
Venue: IISS-US, 2121 K Street NW, Suite 801, Washington, DC 20037
Dr Dodge will discuss the future of Iraqi politics.
Dr Toby Dodge is Consulting Senior Fellow for the Middle East at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. He is also a Reader in International Relations at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Dr Dodge has carried out extensive research in Iraq both before and after regime change, and has advised senior government officials on Iraq. He holds a PhD from the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.
This meeting will be moderated by Andrew Parasiliti, Executive Director, IISS-US and Corresponding Director, IISS-Middle East.
IISS-US events are for IISS members and direct invitees only. For more information, please contact events-washington@iiss.org or (202) 659-1490.
6. Will Democratic Governance Take Hold in the Middle East? IRI, 3-5 pm May 10
Agenda
9:00 am | Identifying the Hallmarks of 21st Century Conflict and How to Manage Conflict in Complex, Chaotic, and Fragile Environments
- Ambassador Rick Barton, Keynote Address
Assistant Secretary of State for Conflict and Stabilization Operations - Robert Ricigliano, Introduction
Board Chair, Alliance for Peacebuilding - Richard Solomon
President, U.S. Institute of Peace - Melanie Greenberg
President and CEO, Alliance for Peacebuilding - Pamela Aall
Provost, Academy for International Conflict Management and Peacebuilding, U.S. Institute of Peace
10:00 am | Results of the USIP-funded Peacebuilding Mapping Project
- Elena McCollim
Joan B. Kroc School of Peace Studies, University of San Diego - Necla Tschirgi
Joan B. Kroc School of Peace Studies, University of San Diego - Jeffrey Helsing, Discussant
Dean of Curriculum, Academy for International Conflict Management and Peacebuilding, U.S. Institute of Peace
11:20 am | How Other Fields Manage Complexity — And What Peacebuilding Can Learn From Them
- Bernard Amadei
Founder, Engineers without Borders - Simon Twigger
Department of Physiology, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee - Daniel Chiu
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Office of the Secretary of Defense - Timothy Ehlinger
Department of Biology, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee - Sheldon Himelfarb, Moderator
Director, Center of Innovation: Science, Technology and Peacebuilding,
U.S. Institute of Peace
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The coming week’s peace picks
Too much this week, and most of it happening Wednesday:
1. Are economic sanctions the key to resolving the nuclear dispute? CSIS, February 27, 6-8 pm.
The Project on Nuclear Issues (PONI) is pleased to invite you to a debate on the recent sanctions imposed on Iran. These sanctions target Iran’s banking sector and are widely believed to have had significant effects not just on Iran’s ability to acquire materials for its nuclear program, but also its energy sector and economy as a whole. Although many agree that Iranian development of a nuclear weapon would have serious security implications for the Middle East, questions about whether or not this is truly Iran’s intent and what the United States should do about it remain hotly contested. Does diplomacy still offer a means of resolving this issue and, if so, are the economic sanctions being passed on Iran making a diplomatic solution harder or easier to achieve?
Two highly distinguished scholars will come to CSIS to present opposing views on this issue and debate the policy of sanctioning Iran on its merits. The debate will feature:
Senior Fellow, Saban Center for Middle East Policy, Brookings Institution
and
Resident Scholar, American Enterprise Institute
Dr. Maloney will present her argument that sanctioning Iran has become counterproductive and that the U.S. “cannot hope to bargain with a country whose economy it is trying to disrupt and destroy.” Mr. Rubin will take the opposing view that “only overwhelming pain” will convince the Iranian leadership to cooperate fully with the IAEA.
A cocktail reception with appetizers will begin at 6:00pm and the debate will commence at 6:30pm.
RSVP to David Slungaard at dslungaard@csis.org.
Webast: For those that cannot attend, the debate will live streamed. A link to the webcast will posted on this page on the day of the debate.
This event is the 13th installment of PONI’s ongoing Live Debate Series, which is an extension of the PONI Debates the Issues blog. The objective of the series is to provide a forum for in-depth exploration of the arguments on both sides of key nuclear policy issues. Please join us for what promises to be an exciting debate on a crucial issue of concern for the nonproliferation community, international security analysts, and regional specialists focusing on the Middle East.
2. Policing Iraq, USIP, February 29, 9:30-11:30 am
Under Saddam Hussein, a complex web of intelligence and security institutions protected the regime and repressed the Iraqi people. Underfunded and mismanaged, the Iraqi police were least among those institutions and unprepared to secure the streets when Coalition Forces arrived in 2003 and disbanded the rest of the security apparatus. Iraq’s police forces have made important strides, and some 400,000 Iraqi police have been trained and stationed across the country. However, with the U.S. drawdown in Iraq, the future of the Iraqi police and U.S. police assistance is uncertain.
On February 29, the United States Institute of Peace and the Institute for the Study of War will co-host a panel of distinguished experts who will discuss the history of the Iraqi police and the U.S. police assistance program in Iraq. This public event will introduce a new USIP Special Report by Robert Perito on “The Iraq Federal Police: U.S. Police Building under Fire.”
Speakers
- General Jim Dubik (U.S. Army, ret.), Panelist
Senior Fellow, Institute for the Study of War
Former Commander, Multi National Security Transition Command-Iraq - Dr. Austin Long, Panelist
Assistant Professor, Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs
- Ginger Cruz, Panelist
Former Deputy Inspector General, Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) - Robert Perito, Moderator
Director, Security Sector Governance Center, U.S. Institute of Peace
Author, USIP Special Report, “The Iraq Federal Police: U.S. Police Building under Fire” - Tara Sonenshine, Introduction
Executive Vice President, U.S. Institute of Peace - Marisa Cochrane Sullivan,Introduction
Deputy Director, Institute for the Study of War
3. Webs of Conflict and Pathways to Peace in the Horn of Africa: A New Approach? Woodrow Wilson Center, 6th floor auditorium, February 29, 10-11:30 am
The Horn of Africa is one of the world’s most conflicted regions, experiencing over 200 armed conflicts since 1990. In recent months, the region has been afflicted with drought, famine, refugee migrations and military confrontations. All of these dynamics have catapulted the Horn of Africa upwards on the priority list for US policymakers.
In response to this on-going crisis, the Wilson Center’s Project on Leadership and Building State Capacity established a Horn of Africa Steering Committee in 2010 that focused on developing a regional US policy framework for the Horn. A conflict mapping report that analyses the major patterns, cross-cutting issues, and interrelationships in the Horn’s ongoing armed conflicts was subsequently commissioned, as well as a set of recommendations for US policy in the region going forward.
On February 29, 2012, the Leadership Project, in partnership with Alliance for Peacebuilding and Institute for Horn of Africa Studies and Analysis (IHASA) The overall objective of the recommendations publication is to employ a conflict resolution-oriented approach to a US regional framework for the Horn, including the need to promote good governance, increase human security (not just state or regime security), strengthen regional cooperation, and boost economic development and regional economic integration.
This event will be taking place at the Woodrow Wilson Center in the 6th Floor Auditorium on February 29th from 10:00am-11:30am. Please RSVP to leadership@wilsoncenter.org.
Program Agenda
Scene-Setter
Paul Williams, Associate Professor, George Washington University
Discussants
Akwe Amosu, Director, Africa Advocacy, Open Society Institute (Invited)
Chic Dambach, Chief of Staff, Congressman John Garamendi, CA
Raja Jandhyala, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Bureau for Africa, US Agency for International Development
Ambassador David Shinn, Former Ambassador to Ethiopia and Professor, George Washington University
Location:
Event Information
When
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
10:30 AM to 12:00 PM
Where
Falk Auditorium
The Brookings Institution
1775 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, DC
Map
Participants
Panelists
Suzanne Maloney
Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy, Saban Center for Middle East Policy
Natan B. Sachs
Fellow, Foreign Policy, Saban Center for Middle East Policy
Shibley Telhami
Nonresident Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy, Saban Center for Middle East Policy
5. Presidential Elections in Russia – What’s Next?, Carnegie Endowment, February 29, 12:30-2 pm
Dmitri Trenin, James F. Collins
Register to attend
With Russia’s presidential election less than a month away, Vladimir Putin is facing the most serious challenge since the establishment of his “power vertical.” Tens of thousands of people have taken to the streets across Russia, undeterred by plunging winter temperatures. Moscow is also facing challenges abroad—its recent veto of the United Nations Security Council resolution condemning the Syrian regime has threatened its relations with much of the Arab world, and the U.S.-Russia “reset” appears stuck in neutral.
Dmitri Trenin and Ambassador James F. Collins will discuss how Russia’s presidential elections will influence its policies.
6. China’s International Energy Strategies: Global and Regional Implications, Elliott School (Lindner Family Commons) February 29, 12:30-1:45 pm
Philip Andrews-Speed, Fellow, Transatlantic Academy, the German Marshall Fund of the United States; Associate Fellow, Chatham House
Discussant: Llewelyn Hughes, Assistant Professor of Political Science and International Affairs, GW
China is now a major player in the international energy arena. Imports of all forms of energy are increasing; national energy companies are investing around the world; and the government is active in different forms of energy diplomacy. These behaviors are driven by a range of interests from within and outside China. The external political consequences are rather greater than the economic ones, and vary around the world. China is a key player, along with Japan, in the progress of energy cooperation in East Asia.
RSVP at: http://go.gwu.edu/ASFeb29
Sponsored by Sigur Center for Asian Studies
7. Assessing U.S. Foreign Policy Priorities Amidst Economic Challenges: The Foreign Relations Budget for Fiscal Year 2013, 2172 Rayburn, February 29, 1:30 pm
Full Committee
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Chairman
You are respectfully requested to attend the following open hearing of the Full Committee to be held in Room 2172 of the Rayburn House Office Building.
The Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
U.S. Department of State
8. To What Extent Is Iran a Threat to Israel? 1055 Thomas Jefferson Street NW, Suite M100 February 29, 4-6 pm
9. Measuring and Combating Corruption in the 21st Century, SAIS Rome building rm 200, March 2, 12:30-2 pm
Summary: Nathaniel Heller, co-founder and executive director of Global Integrity, will discuss this topic. For more information and to RSVP, contact developmentroundtable@jhu.edu.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
From rebellion to revolution
The Irmgard Coninx Stiftung at the Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung is circulating this notice for scholars, activists and journalists:
16th Berlin Roundtables on Transnationality, October 17 – 20, 2012
From Rebellion to Revolution: Dynamics of Political Change Submission deadline is June 30, 2012.
Based on an international essay competition, we will invite approximately 45 applicants to discuss their research, concerns and agendas with peers and prominent scholars in Berlin. The competition is open to students and scholars (max. up to 5 years after Ph.D.), journalists and activists interested in revolutionary processes (e.g. government agencies, NGOs).
The Irmgard Coninx Foundation will cover travel to and accommodation in Berlin.
Conference papers can address but are not limited to the following topics:
– dynamics of political/system change
– democratization and human rights in revolutionary processes
– violence
– mass mobilization
– (new) media and revolution today
– role of elites and elite competition/coalitions
– role of military and police forces
– economic and political reasons for rebellion and their course
– cultural and religious factors influencing revolutions
– demographic and social background of revolutions
– foreign military and humanitarian intervention
– revolution/rebellion as analytical and normative concept
Discussions will take place in three workshops chaired by Wolfgang Merkel (Humbold-Universität zu Berlin/WZB), Christoph Stefes (University of Colorado Denver/WZB), Jeff Goodwin (New York University) and Sonja Hegasy (Zentrum Moderner Orient).
The conference will be accompanied by evening lectures by Nancy Fraser (The New School for Social Research) and Amr Hamzawy (requested, University of Cairo/Freedom Egypt Party).
Conference participants are eligible to apply for one of up to three three-month fellowships to be used for research in Berlin at the WZB.
For further information on the conference and the background paper:
http://www.irmgard-coninx-stiftung.de/revolutions.html
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
This is called retrenchment
We all anticipated this State of the Union speech would not focus on international issues, but here is my short list of more important things not mentioned or glossed over:
- West Bank settlements (or Palestinians)
- North Korea
- Euro crisis
- Africa or Latin America (not even Cuba),
- Bahrain or Saudi Arabia, virtually no Egypt, Tunisia or Yemen
- China (except as an unfair competitor)
- Turkey, Mexico, Brazil, India or even Russia (except as an emerging market)
- Pakistan (except as an Al Qaeda haven)
- Strait of Hormuz
That’s a pretty spectacular list, even without noting the absence of NATO, Japan, allies, Europe, the UN…
A few notable items that were mentioned:
- Strong on regime change in Syria (putting Assad in the same sentence with Qaddafi could have implications) and on exporting democracy and free markets in general
- Positive about peaceful resolution of the dispute with Iran over nuclear weapons, while keeping all options on the table
- Trade agreements with South Korea, Panama and Colombia
- Burma as the hope of the Pacific!
Of course the President also mentioned withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, security cooperation with Israel, blows delivered against Al Qaeda, and the troops (no mention of civilians serving abroad this time around I’m afraid).
If this is a prelude to the campaign, as rightly it should be, it presages an ever more economically focused foreign policy, with security issues narrowed to a few top priorities and little focus on diplomacy except on a few specific issues. This is a vision for restoring American economic strength at home, not increasing–or perhaps even maintaining–its commitments abroad. This is called retrenchment.
PS: I should have mentioned that Richard Haas calls it “restoration.” That’s a more positive word, but the substance is the same.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Governing well is the best revenge
I was asked to speak on a panel this afternoon (2-3 pm) about the evolution of democracy in the Balkans at the AID Democracy and Governance conference at George Washington University. Here are my instructions from the organizers, and the notes I plan to use, though I confess I often depart from them:
Balkans Democracy
GWU, 12 December 2011
Organizers’ instructions: We will be looking for your views on the common challenges and opportunities for democratization within your designated sub-region. What have been the obstacles or inhibitors of democratization? To what extent does the ‘neighborhood’ itself influence possibilities for political liberalization? What are realistic goals and/or scenarios for improvement on democracy and governance in the near to medium term? Are there region-specific approaches that should be considered? What might assistance efforts and democracy, human rights and governance programs do to address key challenges in this sub-region?
1. Looked at in a 20-year time frame, democracy in the Balkans has to be judged as a success.
2. In 1991, Slovenia and Croatia were at war, Bosnia was close, Serbia was a somewhat liberal autocracy, Montenegro and Kosovo were under Milosevic’s thumb, Macedonia was shaky, Albania was just emerging from a miserable dictatorship, Romania and Bulgaria were not much better off.
3. Let me count the ways things have improved: four of these countries are EU members or about to be, five are members of NATO (two more are qualified).
4. Two use the Euro, at least two others have their own currency pegged to the Euro.
5. Only Serbia, Kosovo and Bosnia remain in a kind of uncertain transition phase, even if Albania, Romania and Bulgaria continue to have problems meeting European expectations.
6. How did this happen? The big obstacles to democracy disappeared: Tudjman succumbed to natural causes, Milosevic to an election, Ceausescu to execution, the Bulgarian communist regime to a series of see-saw elections.
7. The neighborhood was unquestionably a big influence: Slovenia set out with determination to become an EU member, European and American assistance to Montenegro had a big influence inside Serbia, international intervention worked somewhat well in Bosnia and Kosovo, the Christmas warning and UNPREDEP gave Macedonia the breathing space it needed, Italian assistance saved Albania more than once.
8. Above all: the prospect of membership in NATO and the EU, while sometimes too weak to overcome domestic political strife, has proven a magnet that never entirely stops working, even if it at times seems inadequate.
9. The remaining problems can be solved: Bosnia needs constitutional reform, Serbia needs to acknowledge the loss of Kosovo, Kosovo needs treat its Serbs and other minorities well and reintegrate the north in a cooperative effort with Belgrade.
10. There is no reason why all those who want to be NATO members should not be within five years.
11. For the EU, it will take longer: Montenegro in less than 5 years, Serbia and Albania in 5-10 years, Kosovo in 15 and Bosnia in 10 years from whenever it fixes its constitution.
12. The best assistance efforts can do now is to support civil society, in particular watchdog functions.
13. However long it takes, whatever the obstacles and disappointments, governing well is the best revenge.
RSS - Posts
