Tag: Israel/Palestine
The Gaza war in regional context
While the news media is mainly focused on the exchanges of rocket and air attacks between Israel and Gaza, my guess is that the broader regional picture will be decisive in determining the course and outcome of this latest outbreak of war in the Middle East. Here is a rundown of that broader picture:
1. Egypt: Cairo is trying to broker a ceasefire, with rhetorical support from the Arab League, but the Egyptian Prime Minister’s visit to Gaza Friday made it clear that the Muslim Brotherhood-led government will be more sympathetic to Hamas than Hosni Mubarak. Still, Egypt is in a tight spot: continuation of the war will attract militants to Gaza and the Sinai as well as send an already weak Egyptian economy into a tailspin. While Hamas has roots in the Muslim Brotherhood, a democratic regime in Egypt has to worry that Egypt’s citizens, sympathetic as they are to the plight of the Palestinians, will not want to sacrifice too much on their behalf. A ceasefire could restore Egypt’s role as a key regional player.
2. Syria: There has already been an exchange of artillery fire between the Syrian regime and Israel, something that hasn’t happened in a long time. Bashar al Asad may well look to military action on the Golan front in an effort to rally his remaining support and try to divert attention from his war against the Syrian revolution, now more than a year and a half old. The Syrian army won’t have a lot of spare capacity to challenge Israel, but it won’t want to be left out of the fight if the war continues.
3. Jordan: The protest movement against the rule of King Abdullah has intensified. The monarchy will not want to divert security forces to a fight against Israel, with which it maintains good if not warm relations. If the protests are successful, the king will be weakened further. A more constitutional monarchy might well be less friendly to Israel, but still unwilling to risk conflict.
4. Hizbollah: On the Lebanese front, Hizbollah is the main military force. It is already heavily engaged fighting against the revolution in Syria, but it could presumably make Israel’s situation more difficult by joining in the rocket barrage. Its record fighting Israeli ground forces is significantly better than Hamas’, so the Israelis would hesitate to engage on both fronts. But Hizbollah will be reluctant to aid Hamas, which has fallen out with the Syrian regime Hizbollah is supporting.
5. Gulf Cooperation Council: The Saudis and the other GCC states have not generally engaged directly against Israel, but the visit last week of the Emir of Qatar to Gaza (and his promise of financing) suggest that they may play a behind the scenes role bankrolling Hamas and others willing to challenge Israel. This could significantly attenuate the quiet but growing accommodation between Israel and the Sunni Arab world.
6. Turkey: Turkey and Israel seemed headed for rapprochement that would cure the 2010 rift over the Israeli attack on a Turkish aid flotilla headed for Gaza. This now seems much less likely. Turkey’s Islamist government will have to give at least verbal support to Hamas and hesitate to appear to paper over its differences with Tel Aviv.
7. Iran: Many of the larger rockets in Hamas’ arsenal come from Iran, which must be enjoying watching the Israelis engage in Gaza rather than carrying out the threat to destroy Tehran’s nuclear facilities. Iran will no doubt provide Hamas, Hizbollah and Syria as much assistance as it can spare in its sanctions-weakened state, hoping to keep the Israelis preoccupied.
8. The wider Arab world: Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Yemen and Sudan all have their own problems that preclude more than rhetorical engagement in the Palestinian cause. Marc Lynch notes that mobilization in the Arab world so far is limited but could well intensify. The Arab street, which presumably has a louder voice today than before the Arab awakening, is certainly sympathetic to the Palestinians. And it is far more likely to support Hamas’ more aggressive military approach to Israel than the Palestine Liberation Organization’s diplomatic push for membership for membership in the United Nations.
Bottom line: Egypt likely has the decisive role in determining whether this war remains, like the one in 2008/9, a bilateral affair or turns into a wider conflict with more permanent consequences. But Iran, Hizbollah, and Turkey are also important players. If Israeli ground action lines up all the regional forces in favor of Hamas, the unintended consequences could be dramatic.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stay tuned
With Hamas rockets striking near Jerusalem and Israel bombing Gaza and mobilizing ground forces, it looks as if another Gaza war is in the offing. It is hard to understand how this will benefit either Palestinians or Israelis, but I credit foreignpolicy.com with trying to provide answers. On the Israeli side, the answer comes in an interview with former general Shlomo Brom, who sees the answer in deterrence:
What I mean by deterrence is manifesting to Hamas and other armed groups that the costs they will pay much outweigh the benefits that they are deriving from the launch of these rockets. And for that, you need from time to time a Cast Lead Operation.
Cast Lead was the name of the last Gaza ground invasion, in the winter of 2008/9.
On the Hamas side, the answers come from Hussein Ibish:
The [rocket] attacks are part of the case for the transfer of paramount leadership away from the exiles and to the Hamas political and military leadership in Gaza, which portrays itself as doing the ruling and the fighting.
He adds:
If the PLO goes forward with its initiative at the United Nations [to push for membership] and Israel and the West react with significant punitive measures, Hamas is better positioned than ever to be the direct political beneficiary. Indeed, it will never have been closer to its cherished aim of seizing control of the Palestinian national movement — and possibly even the PLO itself — from its secular nationalist rivals.
So what we’ve got here is an Israeli need to restore credible deterrence in the lead-up to a January 22 election and a Hamas Gaza interest in gaining political ground, vis-a-vis both its own “external” leadership and the PLO.
War rarely goes according to plan. The current situation in nearby parts of the Middle East is so fluid and volatile–especially in Egypt, Syria and Jordan–that it is easy to anticipate that there will be unexpected consequences. Already we’ve seen two supposed taboos–against rocket attacks on Jerusalem and against Syria firing into Israel–violated. There may be a lot more surprises in store, not only for Israelis and Palestinians but also for Americans and Europeans. Stay tuned.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Tidewater here I come
Most peacefare readers know me as a foreign policy person. I’ve worked for the United Nations, the State Department and United States Institute of Peace. I now teach post-war reconstruction in the conflict management program of Johns Hopkins’ School of Advanced International Studies. I’ve blogged over the last two years from Sarajevo, Pristina, Baghdad, Cairo, Tripoli and Benghazi.
NPR’s “Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me” included a bit last weekend reminding me of just how boring to most people that is. Drew Carey was guest hosting:
CAREY: The last presidential debate was supposed to be a conversation about foreign policy, but President Obama and Mitt Romney kept turning it back to the economy, jobs, and education here in the United States. Thankfully, moderator Bob Schieffer did an excellent job, steering the debate back to issues Americans couldn’t care less about like foreign policy.
(LAUGHTER)
CAREY: Seriously, when was the last time you heard someone say, “Can you turn off the game, I want to watch the foreign policy.”
(LAUGHTER)
CAREY: “Hold all my calls unless it’s about foreign policy.” The worst is when your wife comes home early and you’re watching foreign policy.
It’s funnier if you listen to it.
Later this week I’ll be blogging from Suffolk, Virginia, where I’ll be campaigning for President Obama. A neighbor asked me the other day why I have an Obama/Biden yard sign. She is mostly concerned about abortion and supports women’s reproductive rights. My own response was more multi-facted. I prefer the President not only for that reason but for many others: his intention to rebalance foreign and defense policy, his commitment to preserving the social safety net for the poor and elderly, his support for education and infrastructure, and his willingness to redress inequities that plague American society. My patriotism tells me we all owe a great deal to America and should be prepared to pay back what we can.
But that isn’t necessarily going to help me in Suffolk, a town founded in the 18th century on the edge of the Great Dismal Swamp, where escaped slaves once took refuge. Today Suffolk’s population of about 85,000 is 50% White, 42% African American and the rest Asian, Hispanic, mixed and other. Two mainsprings of the local economy are peanut processing and the U.S. military, especially the Navy and the remnants of what used to be Joint Forces Command, as well as military contractors and suppliers. Median household income is over $65,000 per year. Almost a quarter of firms are Black-owned and 30% woman-owned. Three-quarters of the population owns its own homes, which have a median value of over $250,000. This is an ethnically mixed, relatively prosperous place that depends on both private enterprise and the U.S. government for its livelihoods. Money Magazine named it number 9 on its list of “where the jobs are,” due to a 43% increase (!) in employment from 2000 to 2011.
I’m anxious to hear what the citizens of Suffolk and surrounding communities have to say. What are their main concerns? What do they want from a president? How do they think the Federal government can help or hinder their prosperity and well-being? How has President Obama done in their view? Are they supporting Obama or Romney? What would convince them to support the President? How can I help them make that decision, or if they’ve already made it how can I be sure they can get to the polls and vote?
My initial thinking is that many people will be concerned about the defense budget, especially for naval expenditures, and taxes, especially on the middle class.
Romney and Ryan have advocated major increases in the defense budget over the next decade, with particular emphasis on the navy. But in FY 2013 (which began October 1), their proposal gives defense spending no more than an increase for inflation, while the administration proposes to straight-line the defense budget. There isn’t likely going to be much difference once the Congress gets around to passing a budget. Only in the out-years do Romney and Ryan propose increases for defense. There are also substantial increases for defense in Obama administration plans. All the “cuts” are from projected increases, not from current spending.
The Romney/Ryan budget proposal depends on reducing tax deductions that are likely to be important to people in Suffolk, especially the mortgage and charitable deductions. It is unlikely that there are many salaried employees in Suffolk with household incomes over $250,000 who would see tax increases under the President’s proposals. But there are probably quite a few small businesses in that category that file as sole proprietorships. Their owners will not have been shy about talking to their employees about the impact of tax increases on small business. But do those small businesses want to see infrastructure and education spending cut to the bone? Imagine Hurricane Sandy without Federal backup for the states and local communities.
I’ll be reading the The Suffolk News-Herald for the next six days, trying to get myself into the frame of my Virginia neighbors. It reports that Suffolk, which weathered the hurricane well, swung hard to Obama over McCain in the last election (by 13 per cent), but no one knows what will happen this time around. Donations to Romney are running marginally ahead of Obama’s. Virginia is still up for grabs, though Polltracker at the moment has Obama up by two percentage points and some.
The front line in this contest runs through Tidewater Virginia. I am pleased to be heading there.
PS: Polltracker this morning says the race is tightening in Virginia, with the President still up by a point and some.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
More than fiscal crisis in Palestine
Despite all of the media attention Israel and Palestine usually receive, no one is talking about Palestine’s fiscal crisis. Kate Seelye of the Middle East Institute (MEI) opened a panel hosted by MEI and Johns Hopkins SAIS on “The Political and Economic Implications of the Palestinian Authority’s Fiscal Crisis” by noting the presidential debates made it clear this issue will only receive less attention in the future, regardless of who is elected. The panelists explained that the world cannot afford to put this issue aside. Unless progress is made a two-state solution may become impossible.
Hussein Ibish, senior fellow at the American Task Force on Palestine and the event’s moderator, summarized the fiscal crisis: the failed Palestinian UN bid in September of 2011 caused a crisis in the donor community, which provides one billion dollars to the Palestinian Authority per year. The Palestinian Authority has been unable to pay state employees on time. Oussama Kanaan of the International Monetary Fund pointed to a confusing aspect of this problem: the amount of money that the Palestinian Authority needs to pay all of its employees is relatively small, so why has no donor come forward? There is a $400 million deficit, assuming the United States pays the $200 million it pledged (which is not certain given Palestine’s announcement that it will petition in November to become a nonmember observer). At a recent donor meeting in New York, France came forward, but only with $10 million.
When the risks are so high, why is there resistance to action? Kanaan hypothesized that donors are unwilling to commit until the peace process has been revitalized. This was true during the Palestinian fiscal crisis of 2007 so the donor community, Israel, and Palestine met in December of 2007 in Paris to lay out a transition plan. Israel committed to gradually relax restrictions on the movement of goods and people and Palestine promised to strengthen its institutions. The World Bank and the IMF measured progress based on benchmarks over the period between 2008 and 2010. The results exceeded expectations, but in 2012 after Palestine’s failed UN bid and the expiration of the three year plan, the international community finds itself without a strategy. The advances made between 2008 and 2010 are unraveling.
Kanaan offers two possible solutions: convene another meeting like the Paris one in December 2007 or quit struggling for a transition solution and start work on a permanent plan for peace and stability.
Brookings Institution’s Khaled Elgindy supports the latter solution. “The peace process is dead,” he said. It is time to look for different strategies. The peace process failed because it was unbalanced, disjointed and detached from reality. The different application of the Quartet principles and the Road Map illustrates the imbalance. The former is applied as if it had the strength of a Security Council Resolution, but the UNSC-endorsed Road Map has been ignored and destroyed by Israel with Quartet support, he said.
The peace process was built on contradictions. The Palestinian Authority is a government without a state. It is treated as representing all of Palestine when there is a divide between the West Bank and Gaza. The peace process actually facilitated the occupation of Palestine and its dependence on foreign aid. It is impossible to have a healthy economy under occupation, especially when the state is not in control of 60% of its territory or the movement of people and goods. The failure of the peace process is intimately connected to the failure of legitimacy. Years of failed negotiations, the Palestinian Authority’s inability to represent all of Palestine, and the lack of Palestinian control of Gaza eroded the Palestinian Authority’s leadership.
The failures of the peace process and leadership pushed US/Palestinian relations into the “realm of infantilization,” said Elgindy. Elgindy quoted a State Department official in 2012 saying that what matters to the peace process is that the prime minister and the president remain in power. This remark is troubling at a time when the United States is supporting citizen-led movements to make governments more responsive to the people. Elgindy’s solution is that we let the peace process go and focus on doing no harm, building consensus, and ending the occupation.
Robert Danin of the Council on Foreign Relations agreed with Elgindy and Kanaan on the problematic lack of a working peace process and Israel’s failure to relax restrictions enough. Danin emphasized that there is a lot happening on the ground, though the international political conversation doesn’t reflect this. Though the United States pulled back in 2011, other states have been working to keep a more serious crisis from developing. Usually political progress precedes changes on the ground, but the Palestinian Authority met the Paris benchmarks marking it a stable, functioning government but now has no political process to support it. Israel won’t make concessions without being asked. A Netanyahu aide told Danin that there was no incentive to help if Israel was not going to receive anything for its concessions. Danin argued that the solution is to take action before all faith in a two-state solution dies, but with a new conceptual approach where economics and politics are taken together.
Though Danin believes time might really be running out for a two-state solution, Elgindy argued that the peace process and a two-state solution are not the same. The death of one does not mean there is no hope for the other. Danin reported that in 2001 and 2002 during the intifada the international community thought the peace process was dead, but with effort it was revitalized. Prime Minister Salam Fayyad also said recently that he would accept a deal like the one offered by Prime Minister Olmert in 2008. This goes to show, Danin said, there is a difference in the Middle East between dead, really dead, and so dead there’s no hope. Hopefully the peace process is just “dead.”
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
A sad commentary, even if my man won
It’s hard to write more than 140-character tweets about last night’s “foreign policy” debate. Governor Romney lined up behind President Obama on almost all current policy issues. He even liked foreign assistance, gender equality, democracy promotion and diplomatic efforts to end Iran’s progress toward nuclear [weapons?] capability. Not to mention their agreement on drones, sanctions, withdrawal from Afghanistan and support for Israel. And they agreed that America’s strength abroad depends on the health of its economy and educational system at home. We’ve got a bipartisan foreign policy, whether we like it or not.
The real problem is that the Ryan budget, which Romney supports, is not aligned with what the Governor advocated. This is particularly clear on foreign aid, which the Ryan budget guts. I realize this is a wonkish concern, but it is also a real one. Priorities not reflected in budget proposals are not real priorities. We can be sure that a Romney presidency would not do what Romney says, because he would not fund it. He would prefer a massive military buildup, on top of the massive military buildup of the past ten years.
The disagreements last night were almost entirely about past events. Romney wanted to leave many more troops in Iraq than Obama and blames the president for the failure to reach a status of forces agreement. The fact that the Iraqis were not willing to bend on legal jurisdiction over the Americans remaining went unmentioned. By the way: the issue is not “immunity,” as most of the press would have it. American troops remain liable in U.S. courts for criminal acts committed abroad, even if the “receiving country” agrees to waive its jurisdiction. The administration resisted tightening Iran sanctions, until of course it no longer resisted because it thought the timing right.
If you want to check the facts, the Washington Post offers a good rundown. I don’t think there was much advantage or disadvantage in the errors, though it is a bit troubling that Romney does not know that Syria does not border Iran, which has ample routes “to the sea.” I wish Obama had not exaggerated the increase in exports to China. The numbers are pretty good without embellishment.
I agree with Peter Beinart: George W. Bush won this debate. Both Obama and Romney defined American foreign policy purely in military terms. This is a serious misreading of the challenges we face as well as the instruments needed to meet them. While pointing repeatedly to problems like Mali’s Islamist insurgency, Iran’s nuclear program, Pakistan’s failing state and Egypt’s economic deterioration, neither talked about the civilian instruments required to resolve them. Diplomacy, foreign aid, international law enforcement, multilateral financial and other institutions simply don’t register on the presidential level, even with my preferred candidate. That itself is a sad commentary on what we call foreign policy, bipartisan or not.
PS: Here is a Voice of America piece I participated in before the debate:
PPS: And here is the piece KSA2 (an English-language Saudi station) did the night of the election:
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
This week’s peace picks
There are many options this week, including several with a focus on the approaching US elections.
1. Iraq Energy Outlook, Monday October 22, 9:30 AM – 11:00 AM, CSIS
Venue: CSIS, 1800 K Street NW, Washington DC, 20006, B1 Conference Room
Speakers: Fatih Birol, Jabir Habeb
The CSIS Energy and National Security Program is pleased to host Dr. Fatih Birol, Chief Economist and Director of Global Energy Economics at the IEA, to present highlights from the IEA’s recent World Energy Outlook Special Report, the Iraq Energy Outlook.
Iraq is already the world’s third-largest oil exporter. It has the resources and intention to increase its oil production vastly. Contracts are already in place.Will Iraq’s ambitions be realised? And what would the implications be for Iraq’s economy and for world oil markets? The obstacles are formidable: political, logistical, legal, regulatory, financial, lack of security and sufficient skilled labour. One example: in 2011, grid electricity could meet only 55% of demand.
The International Energy Agency has studied these issues with the support and close co-operation of the government of Iraq and many other leading officials, commentators, industry representatives and international experts. The report examines the role of the energy sector in the Iraqi economy today and in the future, assesses oil and gas revenues and investment needs, provides a detailed analysis of oil, gas and electricity supply through to 2035, highlighting the challenges of infrastructure development and water availability, and spells out the associated opportunities and risks, both for world oil markets and for Iraq’s economy and energy sector.
RSVP for this event to energy@csis.org.
2. Religion, Violence, and Coexistence, Monday October 22, 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM, USIP
Venue: USIP, 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC
Speakers: Suzan Johnson Cook, Haris Tarin, Marc Gopin, Manal Omar, Susan Hayward
The Internet release of a trailer for the anti-Islam film “The Innocence of Muslims” recently sparked protests around the world, some of which turned violent. These events serve as a stark reminder of the relationship between freedom of expression, religious coexistence, religious freedom, violence and security.
On October 22, 2012, the U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP) will host a panel discussion about civil society’s role in preventing and addressing provocative statements of religious bias and violent responses to it. The panelists will discuss the complementarities and tensions between the freedoms of expression and religion, use of the media in fomenting religious discrimination, and how to work with the media to promote respect for all religious traditions. The conversation will focus on how these issues are playing out in the context of political transitions occurring throughout the Middle East and North Africa, and the way in which civil society and the U.S. government can collaborate constructively to advance peaceful religious coexistence, freedom, and security.
This public discussion is co-sponsored with the Office of International Religious Freedom at the U.S. Department of State.
Register for this event here.
3. Adaptable Autocrats: Regime Power in Egypt and Syria, Monday October 22, 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM, Woodrow Wilson Center
Venue: Woodrow Wilson Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004, 6th Floor
Speaker: Joshua Stacher
Why did the uprisings in Egypt and Syria turn out so differently? In his recent book, Adaptable Autocrats, Joshua Stacher argues the different outcomes are a product of how executive power flowed before the protests began. While popular mobilization challenged both regimes, Egypt’s Mubarak could be replaced as the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) slid into the executive’s role to adapt the system, while the option of changing the ruling coalition still has not occurred in Syria. Based on years of field research in Egypt and Syria, Stacher lays out a template for understanding the Arab uprisings and the turmoil that has followed.
Register for this event here.
4. AFSA Book Notes: “America’s Other Army”, Monday October 22, 2:00 PM – 3:30 PM, American Foreign Service Association
Venue: American Foreign Service Association, 2101 E Street NW, Washington, DC 20037
Speaker: Nicholas Kralev
“America’s Other Army” brings the high-flying world of international diplomacy down to earth and puts a human face on a mysterious profession that has undergone a dramatic transformation since September 11, 2001. Through the stories of American diplomats, the book explains how their work affects millions of people in the United States and around the world every day, and how it contributes directly to U.S. security and prosperity. It shows a more inclusive American diplomacy that has moved beyond interacting with governments and has engaged with the private sector, civil society and individual citizens. Having visited more than 50 embassies and interviewed about 600 American diplomats, author Nicholas Kralev reveals a Foreign Service whose diversity and professional versatility have shattered old perceptions and redefined modern diplomacy. But he also depicts a service not fully equipped to address the complex challenges of the 21st century.
RSVP for this event to events@afsa.org.
5. Book Discussion: Powerful Peace: A Navy SEAL’s Lessons on Peace from a Lifetime at War, Monday October 22, 6:00 PM – 7:00 PM, CSIS
Venue: CSIS, 1800 K Street NW, Washington DC, 20006, B1 A/B Conference Room
Speakers: J. Robert DuBois, Rick “Ozzie” Nelson
“Nowhere is the cost of failure higher than in the life-and-death struggle of armed conflict. Now J. Robert Dubois harnesses that real-world sense of wartime urgency to guide our search for solutions to challenging problems. He takes on a crucial and unprecedented mission for a retired Navy SEAL: the relentless pursuit of interpersonal and international peacekeeping as an imperative to global security. A treatise for policy makers and warriors, mediators and educators, Powerful Peace is also a compelling and practical guide to problem solving for every engaged citizen.” Please join the CSIS Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Program on the evening of October 22 for a discussion with J. Robert DuBois regarding his new book, Powerful Peace, as well as his insights into the importance of peacemaking at the global and personal level.
Register for this event here.
6. Decision 2012: The Foreign Policy Debate, Monday October 22, 8:00 PM – 11:00 PM, George Washington School of Media and Public Affairs
Venue: GW School of Media and Public Affairs, 805 21st Street NW, Washington DC, 20052, Jack Morton Auditorium
Speakers: Doug Wilson, Richard Engel, Anne Gearan, Susan Glasser, Noah Shachtman
Join us at the Jack Morton Auditorium for pre-debate insight from four of America’s most respected and experienced national security correspondents — and immediately following, for the final presidential debate.
7:30 PM – 8:00 PM Reception
8:00 PM – 9:00 PM Panel Discussion
9:00 PM – 10:30 PM Debate Watch
10:30 PM – 11:00 PM Analysis and Closing Remarks
Register for this event here.
7. Connecting to Diaspora Communities Through Web Portals: Opportunities and Limitations, Tuesday October 23, 9:00 AM – 10:00 PM, QED Group
Venue: QED Group, LLC, 1250 Eye Street NW, Washington, DC 20005, Suite 1100
Speakers: Eric Guichard, Molly Mattessich
Diaspora communities have played a longtime role in the development of their countries of origin in areas as diverse as business development, financial investments, philanthropy, volunteerism, advocacy, etc.
For instance, the amount of money diaspora communities send to their home countries as remittance far exceed that of official development aid. In 2010, the globally recorded amount in remittance flows to developing countries was $325 billion and the World Bank estimates that amount to reach an estimated $404 billion a year by 2013. Regionally, African diaspora communities contribute an estimated $40 billion in remittances annually to the continent. Similarly, philanthropy from the US to developing countries was estimated at $39 billion in 2010 by the Index of Global Philanthropy and Remittances.
These staggering amounts have triggered a change in recent years among the formal donor community as diaspora communities are increasingly recognized as a credible and meaningful contributor to development. Given the significant contribution of diaspora communities, a key issue facing the donor community has become how to engage and partner effectively with diasporas? In this area of technological hyper-development, web portals have become omnipresent in any development venture and diaspora-driven development is not different. This seminar will present two such portals—Homestrings, a private investment platform, and Africa Rural Connect , an online global philanthropic network—and examine their effectiveness in engaging diasporas in development.
Register for this event here.
8. Applying Peace Economics in Dangerous Places, Tuesday October 23, 10:00 AM – 12:30 PM, USIP
Venue: USIP, 2301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20037
Speakers: Jurgen Brauer, J. Paul Dunne, Clare Lockhart, Todd Moss, Raymond Gilpin
Creating a sound economic policy and a stable macroeconomic framework is essential to societies recovering from violent conflict, yet few practitioners have the background needed to apply economic concepts effectively. USIP’s new publication titled “Peace Economics: A Macroeconomic Primer for Violence-Afflicted States” provides a concise but broad overview of practical ways that sound macroeconomic fundamentals could be used to build stability in states that are affected by violent conflict.
The discussion extends beyond economic principles into the wider realm of social reconstitution, social contract, and social capital. Co-authors, Jurgen Brauer and J. Paul Dunne, examine recent case studies and illustrate the applicability of concepts presented in the book.
Register for this event here.
9. National Security Challenges from an Israeli Perspective, Tuesday October 23, 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM, Heritage Foundation ****THIS EVENT HAS BEEN CANCELED.
Venue: Heritage Foundation, 214 Massachusetts Avenue NE, Washington, DC 20002, Lehrman Auditorium
Speakers: Yossi Baidatz, Steven P. Bucci
Israel, long America’s closest ally in the Middle East, faces growing national security challenges from Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and various radical Islamist groups that have flourished during the so-called “Arab Spring.” The collapse of Egypt’s Mubarak government, Syria’s intensifying civil war and growing strains inside Jordan have added greater uncertainty to an already volatile region. Iran continues to make substantial progress in enriching uranium for a nuclear weapon, as well as expanding its arsenal of ballistic missiles, some of which can reach Israeli targets. Iran also has transferred increasingly sophisticated rockets to Hezbollah and Hamas, each of which has used them to bombard Israeli civilians.
Please join Major General Yossi Baidatz, Commandant of the Israeli National Defense College, as he offers his insights in assessing Israel’s security environment and the important role of US-Israeli security cooperation.
Register for this event here.
10. The Political and Economic Implications of the Palestinian Authority’s Fiscal Crisis, Tuesday October 23, 3:30 PM – 5:00 PM, Johns Hopkins SAIS
Venue: Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, 1619 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Rome Building Auditorium
Speakers: Robert Danin, Khaled Elgindy, Oussama Kanaan, Hussein Ibish
The Middle East Institute’s George and Rhonda Salem Family Foundation and the SAIS Conflict Management Program are proud to host Robert Danin, Khaled Elgindy, and Oussama Kanaan for a discussion about the fiscal crisis facing the Palestine Authority and the political implications of the PA’s deteriorating economic situation. In mid-September, the IMF and the World Bank issued a report saying that the Palestinian financial crisis will worsen unless foreign funding increases and Israel eases restrictions on economic activity. Neither solution looks imminent and protests in response to the economic hardships have turned into an indictment of President Mahmoud Abbas’s policies, raising questions about the future of the PA’s leadership. Danin, Elgindy, and Kanaan will examine the economic and political fallout stemming from the latest crisis and explore the role of the international community in finding a way out.
Register for this event here.
11. The Rise of Extremism in Greece and Its Impact on Minorities, Tuesday October 23, 4:00 PM – 5:30 PM, United Macedonian Diaspora
Venue: United Macedonian Diaspora, 1510 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005, Suite 900
Speakers: Archimandrite Nikodim Tsarknias, Sali Bollati, Stacy Burdett, Eugenia Natsoulidou, Sevin Elekdag
European Union member-state Greece is home to Macedonian and Turkish minorities, with sizeable Albanian, Roma and migrant populations and religious communities such as Catholics and Jews. Known as the cradle of democracy, Greece has seen a significant democratic deficit especially towards its minorities. Recently, the Chrysi Avgi (Golden Dawn), the Greek neo-Nazi political party, which denies the Holocaust ever occurred, has risen in popularity, given the deepening economic crisis in the country. The right wing extremist group has secured 18 seats – 9 percent of the total – in the Greek parliament against a backdrop of increased anti-Semitic and xenophobic rhetoric throughout the country.
Is the rise of extremism in Greece a new phenomenon or embedded within Greek society? What does this mean for the minority communities of Greece?
Greece chaired the OSCE in 2009, and now is vying for a seat on the UN Human Rights Council. In July, the EU appointed as its first Special Representative for Human Rights, the previous Greek Foreign Minister Stavros Lambrinidis.
RSVP for this event to tgzirishvili@umdiaspora.org.
12. Jordan in the Crosshairs, Tuesday October 23, 6:00 PM – 7:15 PM, Elliott School of International Affairs
Venue: Elliott School of International Affairs, 1957 E Street NW, Washington, DC 20052, Lindner Family Commons, Room 602
Speakers: Marwan Al-Muashar, Curtis Ryan, Edward Skip Gnehm
Although the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan has so far weathered the region’s political upheaval, rising domestic unrest combined with regional pressure stemming from the Syrian conflict pose serious challenges to Jordan’s stability. The panelists will discuss the internal and external pressures shaping Jordan’s contentious political process, assessing the prospects of political reform and potential for greater unrest.
Register for this event here.
13. Fortress Israel: The Inside Story of the Military Elite Who Run the Country – and Why They Can’t Make Peace, Wednesday October 24, 4:00 PM – 5:30 PM, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Venue: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036
Speaker: Patrick Tyler
Former Washington Post and New York Times reporter Patrick Tyler speaks about his new book “Fortress Israel: The Inside Story of the Military Elite Who Run the Country–and Why They Can’t Make Peace.”
RSVP for this event to info@fmep.org.
14. Foreign Policy and the Presidential Election: A Post-Debate Analysis, Wednesday October 25, 4:30 PM – 5:30 PM, Brookings Institution
Venue: Brookings Institution, 1775 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Falk Auditorium
Speakers: Martin Indyk, Susan Glasser, Robert Kagan, Kenneth G. Lieberthal, Suzanne Maloney, Bruce Riedel
With just two weeks to go before the U.S. election, President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney will engage in their final presidential debate on Monday, October 22. In this next debate, the candidates will focus on a wide range of foreign policy issues, including the U.S. mission in Afghanistan, U.S. counterterrorism efforts, the Iran crisis, and U.S.-China relations. Given the tone of the Obama-Romney town hall meeting and the critical U.S. and global security issues on the agenda, the foreign policy debate promises to be equally intense.
On October 24, Foreign Policy at Brookings, in association with Foreign Policy magazine, will host a discussion on the issues raised during the next presidential debate. Susan Glasser, editor-in-chief of Foreign Policy magazine, will moderate the panel, which will include Brookings Senior Fellows Robert Kagan, Suzanne Maloney, Kenneth Lieberthal and Bruce Riedel. Brookings Vice President Martin Indyk will offer opening remarks.
After the program, the panelists will take audience questions.
Please register for this event here.
15. Human Rights Perspectives on American Elections: Free or Fair?, Thursday October 25, 12:00 PM – 1:20 PM, AU Washington College of Law
Venue: AU Washington College of Law, 4801 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20016, WCL Room 602
Speakers: Patrick Merloe, Marcia Johnson-Blanco, Hadar Harris
What does it mean to have ‘free and fair elections,’ and will the 2012 elections in the United States be free and fair? The Center for Human Rights & Humanitarian Law and the Program on Law & Government will host a discussion on international standards of free and fair elections as viewed from a human rights perspective, and examine how these standards apply to election policy in the United States. Specific topics will include human rights-related issues emerging in domestic and international elections, such as transparency, fairness of process, the right to political opinion, and the right to participate in government. Speakers will also address the current obstacles to full enfranchisement in the upcoming U.S. elections, such as voter identification laws and restrictions on early and absentee ballots. This event will feature Patrick Merloe, Senior Associate and Director of Electoral Programs of the National Democratic Institute, and Marcia Johnson- Blanco, Co-Director of the Voting Rights Project of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. The discussion will be moderated by Hadar Harris, Executive Director of the Center for Human Rights & Humanitarian Law.
RSVP for this event to humlaw@wcl.american.edu.
16. Women After the Arab Awakening: Making Change, Thursday October 25, 2:00 PM – 3:30 PM, Brookings Institution
Venue: Brookings Institution, 1775 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, Saul Room/Zilkha Lounge
Speakers: Tamara Cofman Wittes, Lina Ahmed, Marianne Ibrahim, Randa Naffa, Souad Slaoui
Women played an integral role in the Arab uprisings, and the continued empowerment of women will be critical to the emergence of democracy in the region. Gender rights and women’s equality are among the most consequential and controversial issues facing newly elected governments across the Arab world. Some fear that the election of Islamist parties will turn back the clock on women’s rights, but others see more open politics as a new opportunity for efforts to achieve equality in the Arab world. How has the Arab awakening affected the women of the region? How are activists and politicians seeking progress for women in this uncertain and evolving landscape?
On October 25, the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings, with Vital Voices Global Partnership and the Project on Middle East Democracy, will host activists from Morocco, Egypt, Lebanon and Jordan who are advocating for women’s rights in a variety of ways: combating child marriage, working to repeal gender-discriminatory laws, promoting gender equality in the new Egyptian constitution, and protecting the rights of women workers. Brookings Senior Fellow Tamara Cofman Wittes, director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy, will provide introductory remarks and moderate the discussion.
After the program, the panelists will take audience questions.
Register for this event here.
17. Playing with Fire: Pakistan at War with Itself, Thursday October 25, 3:30 PM – 5:00 PM, Elliott School of International Affairs
Venue: Elliott School of International Affairs, 1957 E Street NW, Washington, DC 20052, Suite 605
Speaker: Pamela Constable
Pamela Constable, Foreign Correspondent and Former Deputy Foreign Editor, The Washington Post
RSVP for this event to security@gwu.edu.
RSS - Posts
