Number of results to display per page
Search Results
42. Mid-Year Update: 10 Conflicts to Worry About in 2021
- Author:
- Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
- Publication Date:
- 08-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
- Abstract:
- In ACLED’s special report on 10 conflicts to worry about at the start of 2021, we identified a range of flashpoints and emerging crises where violent political disorder was likely to evolve or worsen over the course of the year: Ethiopia, India & Pakistan, Myanmar, Haiti, Belarus, Colombia, Armenia & Azerbaijan, Yemen, Mozambique, and the Sahel.1 Our mid-year update revisits these 10 cases, tracking key developments in political violence and protest activity during the first half of 2021 and analyzing trends to watch in the coming months.
- Topic:
- Political Violence, Conflict, Protests, and Political Crisis
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, India, Yemen, Colombia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Haiti, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Myanmar, Belarus, Sahel, and Global Focus
43. Violence Targeting Women in Politics: Trends in Targets, Types, and Perpetrators of Political Violence
- Author:
- Roudabeh Kishi
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
- Abstract:
- The addition of identity types to ACLED data on political violence targeting women sheds new light on the physical threats to women’s participation in political processes, such as running for or holding office, supporting or voting for political candidates, leading human rights campaigns or civil society initiatives, and more. This report analyzes the expanded data to unpack key trends in violence targeting women in politics. Download the expanded data and read the updated Political Violence Targeting Women FAQs for more information about ACLED methodology.
- Topic:
- Political Violence, Politics, Women, and Violence
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
44. ACLED 2020: The Year in Review
- Author:
- Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
- Abstract:
- One year since the official start of the pandemic in March 2020, COVID-19 has killed more than two million people and brought at least half the earth’s population under lockdown (New York Times, 11 March 2021; New York Times, 3 April 2020). The health crisis has had major impacts on worldwide conflict and disorder patterns, contributing to an overall decrease in political violence levels last year even as it fueled an increase in demonstration activity. And while the pandemic’s effects have been global in scale, they have not been felt equally across conflict contexts: although violence declined on the aggregate level, it rose in nearly half the world’s countries. As vaccine distribution accelerates and countries relax public health restrictions, conflict levels are expected to increase throughout 2021(for more, see ACLED’s special report: Ten Conflicts to Worry About in 2021). Last year, ACLED expanded data collection to Latin America and the Caribbean, East Asia, the United States, and all of Europe, achieving near global coverage. Our 2020 annual report reviews the past 12 months of data on political violence and demonstration activity around the world.
- Topic:
- Political Violence, COVID-19, Health Crisis, and Demonstrations
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
45. A Year of COVID-19
- Author:
- Roudabeh Kishi
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
- Abstract:
- March 2021 marks the first anniversary of the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). One year on, this report explores ACLED’s special coverage of the pandemic’s impact on political violence and protest trends around the world – analyzing changes in demonstration activity, state repression, mob attacks, overall rates of armed conflict, and more through the COVID-19 Disorder Tracker.
- Topic:
- Political Violence, Conflict, COVID-19, and Demonstrations
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
46. Are we facing a wave of conflict in high-income countries?
- Author:
- Sarah Cliffe, Daniel Mack, Céline Monnier, Nendirmwa Noel, Paul von Chamier, and Leah Zamore
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Center on International Cooperation
- Abstract:
- The recent wave of violent protests and unrest across the developed world – the storming of the US Capitol during the electoral college process and the riots in the Netherlands, among others – questions the assumption that high-income countries have become immune to large-scale internal political violence. Are we facing a new wave of high-income conflict? At a minimum, increased violent unrest, political assassinations, and domestic terrorism in the next ten years seem possible, unless governments focus on avoiding impunity and establishing shared understanding of facts, reducing inequality and prejudice, and building institutional resilience. This analysis examines whether these recent events augur a wider shift in conflict risk to high-income countries, akin to the shift seen from low to middle-income countries 20 years ago. Given these events, this analysis systematically reviews conflict risks in high-income countries, as well as offers a framework that has been widely applied in the developing world to examine the risk factors for violent conflict in wealthy countries, including second generation impacts of COVID-19.
- Topic:
- Conflict, Protests, COVID-19, and Civil Unrest
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus and United States of America
47. How can we work towards economic recovery for all? Financing for Development: the issues, challenges, and opportunities in 2021
- Author:
- Sarah Cliffe, Karina Gerlach, and Leah Zamore
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Center on International Cooperation
- Abstract:
- 2021, we all hope, will be the year of recovery. If COVID-19 vaccines are rolled out at scale, including in the developing world, global economic recovery will be large. But that in itself ensures neither that all countries will be included in the recovery, nor that all people within each country will see the gains. A rising tide, as we have seen only too well since US president John F. Kennedy first used the phrase in 1963, does not lift all boats. Elsewhere, CIC has analyzed the high demand for transformative policies in high- and low-income countries alike since the COVID-19 crisis began, including policies for domestic action on inequality and socioeconomic exclusion. This piece takes a more global view and considers how to ensure that all countries benefit, and examines the issues, challenges, and opportunities in financing for development. It looks first at the key political messages that explain why 2021 should be a year of urgent, ambitious global action for shared economic recovery; secondly at the measures under discussion (which are expanded in an annex); thirdly at the political interests at play; and fourthly at foreseeable scenarios for agreement. Last, we outline the calendar of relevant policy meetings this year and the challenge of orchestrating progress between them.
- Topic:
- Governance, Reform, Finance, Multilateralism, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
48. It’s Time to Go Back to Basics of Governance
- Author:
- Nanjala Nyabola
- Publication Date:
- 07-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Center on International Cooperation
- Abstract:
- The COVID-19 pandemic is an opportunity to re-evaluate the principles or ideas that are at the heart of theories of government, that is the fundamentals of governance and public theory. What is government for, but also what should government do and how. Engaging with the crucial philosophical questions of governance is integral to building back better: going back to basics is a major step in figuring out how to prevent mistakes from happening again. The social contract is one such principle: the idea of a social contract is central to answering the question of what governments are for: explaining why people obey laws, providing answers to why we live in societies, and why we abide by social rules and norms. Recognizing the ongoing debates, national and international, around the meaning and origins of the term social contract, this paper by Nanjala Nyabola tries to point to some of the important thinking from the south and from non-western sources and traditions that have helped shape modern understanding of social contract theory. It is not intended to be a comprehensive review, in such a short paper, but rather a selection that reflects the richness and variety of such sources and how they have impacted thinking throughout the ages. Overall, looking at ideas of social contracts outside Western philosophical tradition reminds us that it is not just about the form of the social contract or that all political organizations must be identical. These theories also remind us that compulsion and punishment are not a strong foundation for strong systems of governance. We have to create societies that people want to live in.
- Topic:
- Security, Governance, Reform, Fragile States, and Multilateralism
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
49. Treaty Allies Matter for US Foreign Policy Experts—but They Are Not Indispensable
- Author:
- Sibel Oktay, Paul Poast, Dina Smeltz, and Craig Kafura
- Publication Date:
- 08-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Chicago Council on Global Affairs
- Abstract:
- The Council's polling experts examine how American foreign policy experts think of the term "allies," and whether variations in thinking matter for US foreign policy decisions. “America is back,” President Joseph Biden pronounced at the State Department in February 2021. His comment ostensibly meant the United States was returning to the international fold after leaving a global leadership void during the Trump years. The previous administration had downplayed—even discounted—American alliances as key US foreign policy tools. “We will repair our alliances and engage with the world once again, not to meet yesterday’s challenges, but today’s and tomorrow’s,” Biden stated. At the NATO summit four months later, Biden reiterated his administration’s key message and commitment to the alliance. Emblematic of this commitment, he and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson also signed a “New Atlantic Charter” recommitting both nations to their “alliances and partners.” The United States is unique in the world in terms of security alliances. The country enjoys “the largest and most enduring military footprint” in recent history. From military bases to providing training and material assistance, this footprint is largely enabled through allies. Hence, it is perhaps unsurprising that recent surveys show a perception among Americans that alliances largely benefit the United States. But what is meant by the term “allies”? Given the variety of military partnerships and relationships maintained by the United States, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that the term “ally” is used to describe countries across this range of relationships. Some countries have a formal defensive treaty with the United States, while others are merely recipients of US military financial aid. How do American foreign policy experts think of the term “allies,” and does variation in such thinking matter?
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Public Opinion, Partnerships, and Alliance
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus and United States of America
50. How the United States Can Support Nascent Political Parties
- Author:
- Patrick Quirk and Jan Surotchak
- Publication Date:
- 05-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Council on International Policy (CIP)
- Abstract:
- Supporting democracy and human rights overseas is front and center in the Biden administration’s foreign policy. The White House has committed to hold a “summit for democracy” this year, vocally condemned human rights abuses by China, and called for budget increases in foreign assistance and diplomacy critical to execute its democracy agenda abroad. As the Biden team designs this agenda, it will take stock of existing democracy assistance approaches and toolkits to make sure they address the current landscape of threats (i.e., a rise in Russian and Chinese malign influence) and changing needs of democracy partners on the ground (i.e., training on new technology). One area that is in desperate need of an update is how the U.S. helps strengthen political parties abroad, something it has done since the 1980s. The U.S. approach to supporting parties has not kept pace with the evolution of these organizations over the last ten years. Increasingly, political parties are taking novel forms that arise from so called “people power” movements and often focus more on mobilizing voters than formulating policy. One of the four most common types of parties today are those that emerge from mass protest movements and widespread latent dissatisfaction with traditional parties. Examples include the Five Star Movement in Italy, the Union to Save Romania, the New Conservative Party in Latvia, and Semilla in Guatemala. Getting support to this party type ‘right’ is important because many of the countries where these entities are emerging matter for U.S. interests. In both the Czech Republic and Slovakia – NATO allies on the front line of countering Russian and Chinese influence – new, anti-establishment parties are running the government, as traditional parties have struggled with accusations of corruption and failure to meet citizen needs. In Mexico and Brazil, both major strategic partners of the United States, emergent political organizations have taken power. In Iraq, citizens protesting government corruption and inefficiencies have formed several new parties to contest the October 2021 elections and challenge the political establishment. Yet in these and other contexts, the United States lacks an approach to structure its support of such nascent parties. Here, we outline recommendations for selecting which parties to support and then a framework to maximize effectiveness of U.S. assistance to them.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, International Cooperation, Democracy, Political Parties, Influence, and Partisanship
- Political Geography:
- North America, Global Focus, and United States of America