1 - 50 of 50
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. EU peace mediation in the 2020s: From intervention to investment
- Author:
- Tyyne Karjalainen
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- The European Union is renewing its Concept on Strengthening EU Mediation and Dialogue Capacities after more than a decade. The new concept is being launched at a time when international peace mediation is at risk of lagging behind in the face of accelerating power politics. The United Nations Security Council seems to be paralysed, and many peace processes frozen solid. Regional actors, such as the EU, now have a window of opportunity to strengthen their role, albeit amid difficult circumstances, as learnt, for example, in Ukraine and Syria. This Working Paper suggests that the EU has special abilities to build on in peace mediation, including exceptional resources for capacity-building and mediation support. Capable of harnessing the resources of the member states, civil society and private mediation actors alike, the EU can build tailor-made, multi-level processes for resolving conflicts, and make the essential change-makers pull together. However, there is still room for improvement in EU action, for example in the evaluation of mediation, to which end this research sheds light on several concrete steps that the EU can take in order to optimize its efforts.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, United Nations, European Union, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Ukraine, Middle East, and Syria
3. On Iran: Don’t Snap Back, Step Up
- Author:
- Alistair Millar
- Publication Date:
- 08-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Fourth Freedom Forum
- Abstract:
- The Trump administration was handed a resounding defeat in the United Nations Security Council at the end of last week when it offered a new resolution to indefinitely extend the UN arms embargo on Iran… Not only is the outcome of this vote embarrassing for the United States, it was the first salvo in a dangerous game of brinksmanship that is likely to be the biggest test of the Security Council’s resolve in the 75-year history of the United Nations.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, United Nations, UN Security Council, and Donald Trump
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
4. The Implications of an Iran Sanctions Snapback
- Author:
- Richard Nephew
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- For several months, it has seemed likely that the Trump administration would elect to pursue the reimposition, or snapback, of UN Security Council (UNSC) sanctions against Iran. For those less steeped in the terminology, the concept of sanctions “snapback” is one developed as part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). It refers to the ability of the United States and other partners to quickly reimpose the sanctions that were suspended as part of the quid pro quo that saw Iran accept significant restrictions and transparency requirements for its nuclear program. Conceptually, this was necessary because Iran had the ability to restart its nuclear program if the United States or others were seen as cheating on the deal. The United States and its partners needed some assurance that, if Iran were found to be cheating, they could react just as swiftly. On August 20, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo finally submitted the notification that, according to the US government, would trigger a 30-day timeline for the reimposition of these sanctions. In the US view there is now no stopping the return of the UNSC’s original Iran sanctions regime, though there may be some procedural wrangling over how and when the measures will be reimposed. It is not clear, however, whether this will be the case. A fair amount of analysis has gone into the fundamental question of whether the United States has the standing to trigger snapback, which is an issue I explored in 2019.[1] European, Russian, Chinese, Iranian, and other observers argue that the United States has no such standing, because, under the terms of the UN Security Council resolution that created the snapback mechanism (UNSCR 2231), it is no longer a “participant” of the JCPOA following its withdrawal in 2018. Even former National Security Advisor John Bolton—who was in large part responsible for the US withdrawal from the JCPOA—tends to agree with this reading.[2] The Trump administration obviously disagrees. It is an important question, and one that speaks to the underlying credibility and integrity of the US snapback decision as well as its results. But, ultimately, there is no way of finding a conclusive answer. International law being what it is, there are no authoritative arbiters available to determine whether the United States or its many critics are right. Snapback is happening and will have consequences, we now need to shift to considering what comes next. I see four main outcomes that are directly relevant to this decision and the future of US sanctions policy and negotiations.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, United Nations, Military Strategy, Sanctions, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
5. Lebanese Women and the Politics of Representation
- Author:
- Carmen Geha
- Publication Date:
- 02-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
- Abstract:
- Lebanese women have been leaders in the revolution that has shaken Lebanon since October 2019. This paper argues that the next stage will be critical if women want to transform their involvement into equal rights. For them to do so, they need to move beyond informal revolutionary politics to formal electoral and party politics with meaningful and substantive representation.
- Topic:
- Gender Issues, Human Rights, United Nations, Social Movement, Feminism, and Revolution
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Lebanon, and Beirut
6. Yemen’s Accelerating Economic Woes During the COVID-19 Pandemic
- Author:
- Sana'a Center for Strategic Studies
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Sana'a Center For Strategic Studies
- Abstract:
- Since early 2015, when the onset of war led to the cessation of large-scale oil exports, Yemen has been almost completely dependent on three main external sources to secure foreign currency inflows and stimulate economic activity: foreign humanitarian aid, Saudi financial support to the Yemeni government, and – by far the most significant – remittances from Yemeni expatriates, most working in Saudi Arabia. All three of these foreign currency sources have dramatically declined in 2020. The Saudi response to the COVID-19 global pandemic, in concert with record low oil prices, led to historic economic contractions and spending cuts in the kingdom, in turn undermining the ability of hundreds of thousands of Yemenis to work there and send money home. This occurred alongside a steep decline in international donor funding for the Yemen relief effort and the Central Bank of Yemen in Aden effectively exhausting the US$2 billion Saudi deposit it received in 2018. Roughly half the population in Yemen was already food insecure before the onset of the current armed conflict. The general economic collapse the war precipitated led to millions more requiring emergency food assistance to survive. The current acute shortage of foreign currency sources has profound implications for the value of Yemen’s domestic currency, and the country’s ability to finance fuel and basic commodity imports, and is likely to lead to the rapid intensification of the humanitarian crisis. This paper presents policy recommendations to address this situation for the United Nations and other international stakeholders, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, as well as the internationally recognized Yemeni government and the de facto authorities in Sana’a (the armed Houthi movement, Ansar Allah).
- Topic:
- United Nations, Economy, Conflict, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia
7. Palestinian Refugees of Syria’s Yarmouk Camp: Challenges and Obstacles to Return
- Author:
- Roger Asfar
- Publication Date:
- 01-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
- Abstract:
- On 22 September 2018, a boat carrying 39 refugees sank while sailing illegally from the Lebanese coast towards Cyprus. Five-year old Syrian-Palestinian Khaled Nejme drowned in the incident, drawing attention to the plight of Palestinian refugees from Syria seeking refuge in Lebanon. Once considered lucky compared to Palestinian refugees in neighboring countries, Palestinian refugees from Syria are now experiencing secondary displacement and are among the most vulnerable refugee groups in Lebanon.1 This paper attempts to provide a better understanding of the attitudes toward the return of Palestinian refugees displaced from Syria. More specifically, the paper addresses the challenges faced by Palestinian refugees displaced from Syria’s Yarmouk camp and currently residing in Lebanon. Since the Syrian regime and its allies have retaken control of Yarmouk, and amidst increasing calls from Lebanon for the “voluntary return of refugees”, what are Syrian-Palestinian refugees’ prospects of return? What are some of the major obstacles preventing their return? And what are some of the basic conditions to be met for a truly voluntary return to be encouraged? To answer these questions, the authors conducted a series of interviews in Shatila camp and Ain el-Hilweh between 26 June and 16 September 2018.2 The interviews were constructed in a way that allowed ample space for the representation of different political positions, ideological orientations, social backgrounds, and age groups.
- Topic:
- United Nations, Diaspora, Immigration, and Refugees
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Syria
8. The View from Aden: A Shadow State between the Coalition and Civil War
- Author:
- Omar Said
- Publication Date:
- 04-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
- Abstract:
- Four years into the war that engulfed Aden since March 2015, the city in the South of Yemen might look tranquil and safe in the eyes of foreign observers as the interim capital of the internationally recognized government of Abd Rabou Mansour Hadi. To its inhabitants, however, it is a satellite out of orbit with no institutions or a state to govern or uphold the rule of law and where civilians face many challenges daily. Civilians were relieved, in July 2015, when Popular Resistance Forces (a mix of different factions from Aden, independent, Salafists, reformers and followers of many factions from the Southern Movement) and forces of the Arab Coalition (led by Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirate, UAE), defeated the Saleh-Houthi forces, expelling them from the city. They began to dream of a normal life and a fresh start for real institutions that will build a modern civilian state and remedy their decades long suffering, exclusion, marginalization, and inability to run their own city. Simultaneously, fighters raised the flags of Saudi Arabia and UAE along with the flag of the former People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen. Meanwhile, elements loyal to the Southern Movement renewed their demands of secession of Southern Yemen from the North. These hopes died shortly after, however. The mandate of the interim government intertwined with that of the National Council, and so did the interests of the Coalition states that sponsor these two bodies. As a result, Aden slipped into a state of insecurity with a multiplicity of armed militias and widespread corruption. This paper seeks to describe the fragmentation process of the Yemeni State, four years after the Coalition’s offensive to restore legitimate authority. It highlights the practices of Abd Rabou Mansour Hadi and his government in running the country and how rivalry between Saudi Arabia and its ally, the UAE, translated, on the ground, in the form of a contest for authority between the Interim Yemeni Government and the Transition Southern Council. The paper also highlights corruption, insecurity, and the rise of civilian protests against the status quo in Aden.
- Topic:
- Corruption, United Nations, Fragile States, Protests, and International Community
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and UAE
9. Lebanon: Anger in Palestinian Refugee Camps Gives Rise to a New Mobilization for Dignity
- Author:
- Marie kortam
- Publication Date:
- 08-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
- Abstract:
- Those who visited Palestinian camps in Lebanon last month could not have missed a new upsurge in the popular mobilization on Palestinian streets. Their enthusiasm can be sensed in the spirits of the youth, their chants, and round-the-clock occupation of public spaces. This upsurge in mobilization was not only the result of the Lebanese Labour Minister’s implementation of his plan1 to combat businesses employing foreign labour without a permit – after giving them one month to regularize their situation.2 It was also the outcome of an accumulated sense of frustration, injustice, humiliation, indignation, deprivation and finally, anger that crystallized in these latest rounds of collective political action. The question then remains: why have Palestinians in Lebanon reached a breaking point at this stage, and why did the movement take this shape? There is no doubt that this anger accumulated gradually. First, it arose from the political-security arrangement for Palestinians in Lebanon, along with the historical absence of a socio-political contract with the Lebanese state. Second, it is the outcome of the deprivation, oppression, racism, and discrimination against Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, which was finally exacerbated by international resolutions hostile to the Palestinian cause, threatening the refugee cause and the right of return. Moreover, the economic situation of Palestinian refugees has deteriorated and was further compounded after the USA cut off its funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA). However, alone these factors are not enough to fully explain this mobilization. These latest developments are also the product of a degree of practical awareness among the Palestinian youth and their discourse which explains their involvement in a movement demanding civil rights and an arrangement in which Palestinians are an agent of change against injustice. This movement is also proof of the existence of a new paradigm of the oppressed, who no longer identifies with the oppressors and becomes dependent on them, but instead seeks to break free from their oppression, and in so doing, spontaneously and effectively imposes a new social formula and project. This paper discusses the emergence of this popular mobilization and its transformation into a social movement, the challenges it has faced, and how its actors built a common framework for action to address their status as oppressed. It relies on field interviews – formal and informal – with actors and politicians, participatory observation, the analysis of organized groups, and contributions via WhatsApp and Facebook. The paper focuses on the movement in Ain al-Hilweh camp as one of the largest Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, with its political and security context that distinguishes it from other camps.
- Topic:
- United Nations, Diaspora, Social Movement, Refugees, Social Media, and Repression
- Political Geography:
- United States, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Lebanon
10. Reconstructing Iraq: Where Do We Stand
- Author:
- Dlawer Ala'Aldeen
- Publication Date:
- 03-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Middle East Research Institute (MERI)
- Abstract:
- This month last year, the Kuwaiti government hosted a ‘Conference for the Reconstruction of Iraq’. It was attended by the United Nations Secretary General, António Guterres, along with dozens of foreign ministers and large numbers of other government and business representatives. The timing was perfect for Iraq. The country had recently announced the military defeat of the Islamic State (IS) and was enjoying an unprecedented level of optimism and all-round international good will. Until then, Iraq had for a number of years been suffering from a severe economic crisis, precipitated largely by decades of poor management of state resources, never-ending wars and crises, and the drop in oil prices. Hence, the country needed help and, luckily for the Iraqis, its neighbours were willing to help because failure to address reconstruction needs would add to the country’s fragility and chronic instability.
- Topic:
- United Nations, Military Strategy, Reconstruction, and Islamic State
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iraq, Middle East, Baghdad, and Kurdistan
11. Breaking the Cycle of Shame in Iraq
- Author:
- Henrietta Johanssen
- Publication Date:
- 05-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Middle East Research Institute (MERI)
- Abstract:
- With Iraq’s displacement crisis, violence against women and girls has reached new levels of cruelty. However, with a forthcoming transition into stabilisation and the signed commitment to implement UNSCR 1325 for Women, Peace, and Security, both Iraq and Kurdistan Region now have the momentum to pave a new route to safeguarding and promoting women. This policy brief discusses the sexual and gender based violence in Iraq, and the centrality of ‘honour’ and ‘shame’, to tackling legal, structural, and communal barriers to women empowerment.
- Topic:
- United Nations, Women, Gender Based Violence, Feminism, and Sexual Violence
- Political Geography:
- Iraq and Middle East
12. Durable Solutions for Syrian Refugees in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq
- Author:
- Abdullah Yassen
- Publication Date:
- 08-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Middle East Research Institute (MERI)
- Abstract:
- Forced displacement from Syria has resulted in one of the largest refugee populations worldwide, and the most protracted displacement in the Middle East. In the presence of the complex security dynamics in the region, durable solutions are difficult and require careful considerations. Using a multi-site qualitative and participatory methods, this research examines: (a) the feasibility of voluntary repatriation, local integration, and resettlement in a third country for Syrian refugees. (b) the ‘State’ practice of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI) in terms of refugee protection and its response to their entitlement to education, health care, employment, and residency. The report highlights certain flaws in the Syrian refugees’ predicament which the KRI government, international organisations and the international community urgently need to address to implement an effective solution to the crisis. The findings also show that the preferred durable solution for the majority of the Syrian refugees is onward migration and resettlement in third countries. Both local integration and voluntary repatriation were viewed as largely unworkable, since the KRI, as part of Iraq, is not signatory to the Refugee Convention, and current local legislations are inadequate to regulate asylum. Importantly, voluntary return to Syria is still impeded by security concerns and the lack of development in their regions of origin.
- Topic:
- Migration, United Nations, Refugees, Displacement, and Resettlement
- Political Geography:
- Middle East and Syria
13. Netanyahu and the Temporary International Presence in Hebron (TIPH)
- Author:
- Lior Lehrs
- Publication Date:
- 02-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Mitvim: The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
- Abstract:
- On Janury 28, 2019, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced he was terminating the mandate of the Temporary International Presence in Hebron (TIPH), an observer force established in 1994 after the massacre of Muslim worshipers in Hebron by the Israeli settler Baruch Goldstein. In January 1997, an agreement was signed between the Government of Israel, headed by Netanyahu, and the PLO setting out terms of the TIPH mandate. The sides repeatedly extended the agreement for over 20 years. The observers do not have military or policing functions, and they do not bear arms. Their task is to monitor and report on events and convey classified reports to each side, and to the TIPH contributing states. Netanyahu’s decision, to a large extent influenced by domestic pressure in the runup to the April 9 elections, generated expressions of concern and condemnation by the international community, both by the force’s contributing states such as Norway and Italy, and by Germany, the EU and the UN Secretary General. The reactions noted that the observer force had been an element of the Oslo process and played an important role in the volatile and sensitive city of Hebron, warning against the repercussions of its removal. Changing and adapting the mandate of the observer force should be conducted in a dialogue with the Palestinian Authority and TIPH states, and not dictated as a unilateral Israeli political decision.
- Topic:
- Treaties and Agreements, United Nations, Territorial Disputes, Conflict, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Hebron
14. The Attack on Syria in Response to the Use of Chemical Weapons: The Legal Dimension
- Author:
- Pnina Sharvit Baruch
- Publication Date:
- 04-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
- Abstract:
- The combined attack by the United States, Britain, and France on Syrian targets following the Assad regime's use of chemical weapons has sparked extensive debate on the strike’s strategic aspects, and how, if at all, the offensive will affect the situation and the balance of power in Syria. The attack has also aroused a legal discussion, which once again highlights the limitations of the existing rules of international law when it comes to dealing with situations where the use of force is not based on the authorization of the Security Council or derived from the right to self defense. In this context, the forceful response, in and of itself, particularly being a combined attack by a number of key states, could have an impact on the development of international law with regard to the rules regarding possible legal justifications for the use of force between states.
- Topic:
- United Nations, Military Strategy, UN Security Council, and Chemical Weapons
- Political Geography:
- United States, United Kingdom, Europe, Middle East, France, Syria, and North America
15. The US should have Left the UN Human Rights Council Years Ago
- Author:
- Eran Lerman
- Publication Date:
- 06-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- The UNHRC was hopelessly biased, obsessed with Israel, and highly tolerant towards a full range of human rights abusers.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, United Nations, UN Human Rights Council (HRC), and Humanitarian Crisis
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America
16. Iran’s Involvement in the Western Sahara
- Author:
- Omer Dostri
- Publication Date:
- 09-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Iran’s goal in its activity in the Western Sahara is to subvert Morocco, a moderate Sunni state, as part of the Iranian regime’s policy of spreading the Shi’ite revolution.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, United Nations, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Iran, Middle East, Israel, Morocco, and Western Sahara
17. Pakistan and its Militants: Who is Mainstreaming Whom?
- Author:
- James M Dorsey
- Publication Date:
- 10-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
- Abstract:
- Pakistani militants of various stripes collectively won just under ten per cent of the vote in the July 2018 parliamentary elections. Some represented long-standing legal Islamist parties, others newly established groups or fronts for organisations that have been banned as terrorists by Pakistan and/or the United Nations and the United States. The militants failed to secure a single seat in the national assembly but have maintained, if not increased, their ability to shape national debate and mainstream politics and societal attitudes. Their ability to field candidates in almost all constituencies, and, in many cases, their performance as debutants enhanced their legitimacy. The militants’ performance has fueled debate about the Pakistani military’s effort to expand its long- standing support for militants that serve its regional and domestic goals to nudge them into mainstream politics. It also raises the question of who benefits most, mainstream politics or the militants. Political parties help mainstream militants, but militants with deep societal roots and significant following are frequently key to a mainstream candidate’s electoral success. Perceptions that the militants may stand to gain the most are enhanced by the fact that decades of successive military and civilian governments, abetted and aided by Saudi Arabia, have deeply embedded ultra-conservative, intolerant, anti-pluralist, and supremacist strands of Sunni Islam in significant segments of Pakistani society. Former international cricket player Imran Khan’s electoral victory may constitute a break with the country’s corrupt dynastic policies that ensured that civilian power alternated between two clans, the Bhuttos and the Sharifs. However, his alignment with ultra-conservatism’s social and religious views, as well as with militant groups, offers little hope for Pakistan becoming a more tolerant, pluralistic society, and moving away from a social environment that breeds extremism and militancy. On the contrary, policies enacted by Khan and his ministers since taking office suggest that ultra- conservatism and intolerance are the name of the game. If anything, Khan’s political history, his 2018 election campaign, and his actions since coming to office reflect the degree to which aspects of militancy, intolerance, anti-pluralism, and supremacist ultra- conservative Sunni Muslim Islam have, over decades, been woven into the fabric of segments of society and elements of the state. The roots of Pakistan’s extremism problem date to the immediate wake of the 1947 partition of British India when using militants as proxies was a way to compensate for Pakistan’s economic and military weakness. They were entrenched by Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in the 1970s and General Zia ul-Haq’s Islamization of Pakistani society in the 1980s. The rise of Islamist militants in the US-Saudi supported war against Soviet occupation troops in Afghanistan and opportunistic policies by politicians and rulers since then have shaped contemporary Pakistan.
- Topic:
- Islam, Religion, Terrorism, United Nations, Violent Extremism, Secularism, and Domestic Policy
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, United States, and Middle East
18. The Revolution in Civil-Military Affairs
- Author:
- Anthony H. Cordesman
- Publication Date:
- 02-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center for Strategic and International Studies
- Abstract:
- The U.S. has learned many lessons in its wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria—most of them the hard way. It has had to adapt the strategies, tactics, and force structures designed to fight regular wars to conflicts dominated by non-state actors. It has had to deal with threats shaped by ideological extremism far more radical than the communist movements it struggled against in countries like Vietnam. It has found that the kind of “Revolution in Military Affairs,” or RMA, that helped the U.S. deter and encourage the collapses of the former Soviet Union does not win such conflicts against non-state actors, and that it faces a different mix of threats in each such war—such as in cases like Libya, Yemen, Somalia and a number of states in West Africa. The U.S. does have other strategic priorities: competition with China and Russia, and direct military threats from states like Iran and North Korea. At the same time, the U.S. is still seeking to find some form of stable civil solution to the conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria—as well as the conflicts Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan and West Africa. Reporting by the UN, IMF, and World Bank also shows that the mix of demographic, political governance, and economic forces that created the extremist threats the U.S. and its strategic partners are now fighting have increased in much of the entire developing world since the attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon in 2001, and the political upheavals in the Middle East and North Africa in 2011. The Burke Chair at CSIS has prepared a working paper that suggests the U.S. needs to build on the military lessons it has learned from its "long wars" in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other countries in order to carry out a new and different kind of “Revolution in Civil-Military Affairs,” or RCMA. This revolution involves very different kinds of warfighting and military efforts from the RMA. The U.S. must take full advantage of what it is learning about the need for different kinds of train and assist missions, the use of airpower, strategic communications, and ideological warfare. At the same time, the U.S. must integrate these military efforts with new civilian efforts that address the rise of extremist ideologies and internal civil conflicts. It must accept the reality that it is fighting "failed state" wars, where population pressures and unemployment, ethnic and sectarian differences, critical problems in politics and governance, and failures to meet basic economic needs are a key element of the conflict. In these elements of conflict, progress must be made in wartime to achieve any kind of victory, and that progress must continue if any stable form of resolution is to be successful.
- Topic:
- Civil Society, United Nations, Military Strategy, Governance, Military Affairs, and Developing World
- Political Geography:
- Africa, United States, Iraq, Middle East, West Africa, Somalia, and Sundan
19. 70 Years to the UN vote on Partition: Looking back, looking ahead
- Author:
- Emmanuel Navon
- Publication Date:
- 11-2017
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- The 70th anniversary of the UN resolution on the partition of British Palestine is an opportunity to debunk a myth about this resolution, and to rethink Israel’s policy toward the United Nations. The General Assembly (GA) vote on 29 November 1947 was a recommendation and not a binding decision (like all GA resolutions). It became moot the moment it was rejected by the Arab League. The Security Council did not act to implement the GA resolution, even though it knew that the Arab League opposed the resolution and that it was preparing for war. Israel would not have become independent had the Jews not built a society and an economy for decades, and had they not won the war imposed on them by the Arab League. In 1947, Israel got lucky at the UN: Stalin wanted to end Britain’s presence in Palestine (to him, any British and Western retreat was a victory); Truman was determined to override the State Department (“Dealing with them was as rough as a cob” he said); and France was eager to give Britain a taste of its own medicine (the French blamed the British for the independence of Syria and Lebanon in 1944). There were very few independent Arab and Muslim states back then (Africa, the Middle-East, and Southeast Asia were mostly under European colonial rule). Decolonization and the Cold War changed this configuration to Israel’s disadvantage. The number of Arab and Muslim states rocketed, and the Soviet Union successfully recruited them to fight “imperialism” (Soviet foreign policy became openly pro-Arab in 1953, and Egypt became a Soviet ally in 1955). After the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the Arab world used not only the oil blackmail but also its “automatic majority” at the UN to isolate Israel. This diplomatic warfare culminated in the November 1975 GA resolution that condemned Zionism as a form of racism. Despite the end of the Cold War and peace agreements between Israel, Egypt, and Jordan, the political hijacking of the UN never abated. The 2001 UN Conference against Racism in Durban turned into an anti-Israel festival, and the replacement of the Human Rights Commission by the Human Rights Council (HRC) in 2006 only made things worse for Israel (and for human rights). Special UN agencies such as UNESCO are still manipulated by the Palestinians and the Arab states to gang-up against Israel. Yet Israel is not helpless, and there are ways of taming the hijacking of the UN.
- Topic:
- International Cooperation, United Nations, Territorial Disputes, Conflict, and Decolonization
- Political Geography:
- Middle East and Israel
20. Implementing the Responsibility to Protect: Domestic Processes and Foreign Assistance
- Author:
- Cecilia Jacob
- Publication Date:
- 07-2017
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Australian National University Department of International Relations
- Abstract:
- On 28–29 October 2016, the Department of International Relations at The Australian National University, along with the Asia Pacific Centre for the Responsibility to Protect at the University of Queensland, and with support from the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, hosted the conference Implementing the Responsibility to Protect: Domestic Processes and Foreign Assistance. The conference was attended by academics, including leading experts in the field, and members and representatives of a wide range of government agencies, the diplomatic community, international organisations, and civil society organisations. Two distinguished keynotes were delivered by the Honorable Gareth Evans, ANU Chancellor and co-chair of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS), and Ivan Šimonović, Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect to the UN Secretary-General (SASG). The purpose of the conference was to bring together policymakers, practitioners, and scholars working on areas related to the implementation of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), primarily in the areas of state-level responsibility to prevent mass atrocities and protect civilian populations (what we call Pillar One of the R2P), and international assistance to states to fulfil this responsibility (Pillar Two). Recognising that the principle of R2P has gained significant traction within the international community since it was first introduced in the 2001 report The Responsibility to Protect, the conference sought to transcend longstanding debates over acceptance and legitimacy of R2P as a norm. Rather, it sought to clarify what the implementation of R2P entails for the policy and practitioner community, and to push forward new lines of academic inquiry and research that could support the implementation agenda. At its heart, R2P implementation is about strengthening the capacity of states to prevent atrocities from occurring in the first place. Prevention requires enhancing the resilience of societies that face the risk of atrocities through improved access to security, justice, and the rule of law. Effective mass atrocity prevention requires going local – understanding the dynamics of mass atrocities in their specific historical and social contexts; and going international – ensuring that international actors effectively align their priorities, strategies, and resourcing on atrocity prevention in ways that support local and national needs. This is an ambitious agenda, and experts from a range of fields were invited to address the practical implications of implementing R2P across numerous sites. The central themes included atrocity prevention, international accountability, human rights, international humanitarian law, justice for legacies of violence, foreign policy, development cooperation, peacekeeping, and civil–military assistance. The conference brought together different communities working on aspects that support the goals of R2P in order to enhance knowledge across thematic divides, and contributed to clarifying the practical implications that commitment to R2P implementation entails for these communities across the spectrum. This report contains the text of the keynote speeches, and condensed summaries of the panel discussions. These can be read together to provide a comprehensive synthesis of the debates occurring across the spectrum, or can be read as stand-alone sections for those with specific interest in a particular aspect of the R2P implementation.
- Topic:
- Genocide, Human Rights, International Cooperation, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Middle East, Asia, North Korea, Philippines, Syria, and Congo
21. Is Kurdistan Independence Inevitable?
- Author:
- Yerevan Saeed
- Publication Date:
- 09-2017
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Middle East Research Institute (MERI)
- Abstract:
- On 25 September, residents of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI) will cast their votes in a referendum that may trigger an official process of separating Kurdistan from Iraq. International friends and foes alike have opposed the controversial Kurdish move, contending that the referendum will fuel further instability in Iraq, and cause repercussions across the Middle East. The Kurdish bid for independence is not unique, however. Ethnic groups in Asia, Europe, and Africa have in the past pursued their own dreams of statehood — some with success, while others ended in failure. Whatever the outcome, the process is often costly in terms of both its human toll and economically. For that reason, the secession of any region from its parent state has to be justified on strategic, political, and economic terms. For their part, Kurdish leadership asserts that Baghdad’s mentality of power monopoly has not changed and the long-term potential for future violence against Kurds remains high. For them, the only viable, albeit risky, path is to seek complete sovereignty. The stakes are high all round, and the international community could have a constructive role to play. Conversely, international disengagement leaves both Baghdad and Erbil exposed to greater uncertainty in the near future. Iraq and Kurdistan could follow the model of Kosovo, East Timor, or South Sudan, all of which realised their statehood but to varying degrees of stability; or, instead, the catastrophic pathways taken by the Biafra region of Nigeria and Katanga in Congo (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo). Though South Sudan is still reeling from its civil war and ongoing territorial disputes, international intervention has been key in preventing clashes between Khartoum and the new state. Some important steps included the signing of the North/South Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2005, and the active participation of the United Nations in the referendum process in 2011. Likewise, international support was a determinant in amicable separation of East Timor from Indonesia in UN-sponsored referendum in 1999, as well as the separation of Kosovo from Serbia in 2008. By the same token, instead of mounting further pressure on Erbil to cancel the poll, it could be more constructive for all stakeholders to assist Baghdad and Erbil to reach a mutually acceptable agreement. This is likely to be beneficial for all sides. A deal would mitigate the chance of violent conflict between Kurdish forces and the Iraqi army, and could save the UN and major powers from investing blood and treasure in case of a potential later conflict. It would also remove Kurdistan from international legal limbo and provide a more viable route for diplomatic recognition. In contrast to these experiences, the anticipated absence of international engagement means a unilateral declaration of independence by Erbil could prove costly for all sides. This is evidenced by the declaration of independence of the Biafra Region in Nigeria in 1967–1970. The Igbo-dominated region of Biafra did not hold a referendum to pursue its dream of statehood. Instead, the 300 members of the joint Consultative Assembly of chiefs and elders voted in favour of secession from Nigeria on 26 May, 1967. The following day, the same Consultative Assembly passed a binding resolution, forcing the head of the Eastern region of Nigeria, Colonel Emeka Ojukwu, to declare independence unilaterally on 30 May, 1967. Despite some international support from African and European countries, the move was met with harsh military and economic warfare against the infant republic by the Nigerian government, leading to a three year conflict. One million people, including many civilians Biafrans civilians died, primarily from starvation. Further evidence of the potential danger can be found in the case of Katanga. When Moise Tshombe declared Katanga province as an independent republic from Congo on 11 July, 1960, the move was initially supported by Belgium, and came just two weeks after the Congo’s independence. Tshombe famously said, “We are seceding from chaos,” referring to the messy state of affairs of postcolonial Congo. However, the republic, located in the mineral heartland of Congo, failed to receive diplomatic recognition — even from Belgium, and faced strong opposition from Congo and the international community. The events descended into political turmoil, and forced the UN to deploy peacekeeping forces. In addition, the competing interests and support for different groups from the US, Soviet Union, Belgium, and other powers further complicated the crisis from 1960–1965. It took three years to defeat Tshombe and reintegrate Katanga into Congo, with a high human and economic toll . Beyond these examples and above all, the right of the Kurds to pursue statehood can be historically and legally justifiable. At the dawn of the last century when the Ottoman Empire crumbled, Kurds were deprived of statehood by the Great Powers. They were subject not just to marginalisation, but to genocide as well. Even so, following the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Iraqi Kurdish leaders actively participated in the political processes in Baghdad, helping rebuild the Iraqi state and contributing to the defeat of terrorism. From their point of view, Baghdad has not lived up to its commitments to the 2005 constitution. Furthermore, the Kurds in Iraq believe they have strong grounds legal for a Kurdish state. Under the UN Charter, they have the right to self-determination. Finally, legal scholars argue that the principle of “territorial integrity” — enshrined in the UN Charter — is not unbreakable, should a country oppress a particular ethnic group and refuse to provide equal citizenship. International and regional powers have expressed understanding for the Kurdish aspirations for statehood, but are concerned the result could lead to violence. However, if instability is the concern, they are well-positioned to facilitate an amicable outcome between Erbil and Baghdad. Kurdish leaders have said that they have reached a point of no return with regard to their status quo within Iraq. Yet, they have shown flexibility in a willingness to postpone the referendum, should the international community offer alternatives or agree to officially support a legally binding referendum in the future. Indeed on 14 September, 2017, envoys of the US, UK and UN, in coordination with Baghdad, presented an ‘alternative to the referendum’ to the KRG President. Details of the ‘alternative’ is not known but short of providing political and economic incentives and security assurances, it is hard to see the current momentum for the referendum coming to an end
- Topic:
- United Nations, Election watch, Conflict, and Independence
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Iraq, Middle East, and Kurdistan
22. The UN and Sustainable Peace in Syria - Still Worth Debating
- Author:
- Patrycja Sasnal
- Publication Date:
- 11-2016
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Global Political Trends Center (GPoT)
- Abstract:
- Against all odds and despite its unimpressive effectiveness record, the United Nations remains the sole formal authority willing to and capable of facilitating a sustainable peace in Syria. The paper will analyse the role of the United Nations in Syria, and that of the major powers that most influence the UN and global events. It will examine to what extent past conflicts and their resolution are relevant to today’s Syrian war and whether the UN has learnt from its engagement in previous conflicts and scholarly research on it. It also argues that the Trump administration may be ready to let Bashar al-Assad retake the urbanised belt of Western Syria and then push the UN to mediate in the conflict with only a fraction of the opposition involved, which would de facto legitimise the government in Damascus anew, or recognise the end of the civil war altogether.
- Topic:
- United Nations, Syrian War, Crisis Management, International Community, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Middle East and Syria
23. First Doha Meeting on Security in Afghanistan
- Author:
- P. Cotta-Ramusino
- Publication Date:
- 05-2015
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
- Abstract:
- Pugwash held a non-official meeting on Security in Afghanistan in Doha on 2-3 May 2015. The meeting involved more than 40 participants, all of whom represented only him/herself and not any Institution or group
- Topic:
- Security, Civil Society, Regional Cooperation, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, United States, and Middle East
24. The Key to Pressuring Assad Is UNSCR 2118
- Author:
- Andrew J. Tabler
- Publication Date:
- 02-2014
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- By focusing on the Syrian regime's faltering commitment to eliminate its chemical weapons, Washington can decisively push Damascus and Russia toward real progress on larger issues -- and also set the table for limited military strikes if they prove necessary.
- Topic:
- Treaties and Agreements, United Nations, and Armed Struggle
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Washington, Middle East, and Syria
25. Why Europe must stop outsourcing its security
- Author:
- Richard Gowan and Nick Witney
- Publication Date:
- 12-2014
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on International Cooperation
- Abstract:
- The EU claims to be in the business of “crisis management” – ready if need be to make “robust” military interventions to control conflict, especially in its neighbourhood. In practice, it now prefers to “outsource” such interventions to others, notably the United Nations and African Union (AU), limiting itself to supporting roles. This is not just shabby; it also saps Europe's influence in a world in which European interests and values are increasingly contested. And it places too great a burden on organisations such as the UN and AU. Unless the EU rediscovers a willingness to bear the costs and risks of military operations to control conflict, Europe can expect everintensifying refugee pressure on its southern borders. Although military force will not help in Ukraine or the turmoil of the Middle East, the EU could make a big difference if it were prepared to do more in crisis management in Africa. The EU could contribute to or complement UN or AU efforts in a variety of ways. Responding to the crisis in UN peacekeeping, Ban Kimoon has ordered a review. New EU High Representative Federica Mogherini should do the same, involving outside experts in a stock-take of international efforts to control conflict to Europe's south and commissioning specific proposals to get the EU back to playing a properly responsible security role.
- Topic:
- Human Welfare, Humanitarian Aid, United Nations, and Refugee Issues
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Europe, Ukraine, and Middle East
26. Ugly Truths: Saddam Hussein and Other Insiders on Iraq’s Covert Bioweapons
- Author:
- Amy Smithson
- Publication Date:
- 04-2013
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
- Abstract:
- Although the inspections of the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), which operated from April 1991 to October 1998, unmasked Iraq’s biological weapons program and revealed a considerable amount of detail about its planning, organization, and execution, various factors about the program remain unclear. These gaps in information persisted through the activities and reporting of both the United Nations Monitoring, Verification, and Inspections Commission, which existed from December 1999 until the outbreak of the second Gulf War in March 2003, and the Iraq Survey Group, which reported on the remnants of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction capabilities after the 2003 Gulf War.1 To deepen understanding about Iraq’s biological weapons program, a team of analysts from the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies (CNS) identified a number of research questions that, if answered, would provide a more comprehensive account of Iraq’s biological and chemical weapons programs. The twenty research questions ran the gamut of relevant topics. Specifically with regard to the bioweapons program, the research questions sought to clarify the reasons behind Iraq’s choice of biowarfare agents and delivery systems, the timeline and technical specifics for certain activities, possible interaction with governments and biowarfare experts outside of Iraq, the management of the program, and the details of how Iraq disposed of its biological munitions and bulk biowarfare agent. In an effort to answer some or all of these questions, CNS’s staff turned to the records of the Conflict Records Research Center (CRRC) database. In mid-July 2011, the time in which CNS’s staff reviewed the CRRC records for information pertinent to Iraq’s biological weapons program, it should be noted that a relatively small fraction of the documents in the possession of the CRRC had been translated into English and made available in the CRRC database. Accordingly, the review of the database did not turn up a tremendous number of documents providing insights about Iraq’s biological weapons program. Nonetheless, the review uncovered several documents that shed light largely on the political management of Iraq’s bioweapons program and how Iraq’s leaders tried to cope with UNSCOM’s inspections. This report, which begins with a brief review of the search methodology, otherwise presents the research findings in rough but not exact chronological order. To help the reader quickly grasp the relevance of the research findings in a history that is complicated and sometimes full of technical detail, the research findings are interlaced with background derived largely from Germ Gambits: The Bioweapons Dilemma, Iraq and Beyond (Stanford University Press, 2011). Germ Gambits, which tells the tale of UNSCOM’s bioweapons inspections in Iraq, is based primarily on interviews with UNSCOM inspectors, buttressed by UNSCOM documents and secondary materials. Therefore, any citation to Germ Gambits is based on numerous authoritative sources. Because this report provides the unadulterated Iraqi view on certain topics, in a certain sense it is like seeing the other side of the coin that Germ Gambits presents. CNS Senior fellow Amy E. Smithson, PhD, wrote Germ Gambits and was the principal researcher reviewing the biological weapons-related documents in the CRRC database.
- Topic:
- United Nations, Weapons of Mass Destruction, Nonproliferation, Conflict, and Biological Weapons
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
27. UN Peacekeeping: The Next Five Years
- Author:
- Richard Gowan and Megan Gleason
- Publication Date:
- 09-2012
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on International Cooperation
- Abstract:
- This paper, commissioned by the Permanent Mission of Denmark to the United Nations, analyzes current trends in United Nations peacekeeping and makes predictions about the development of UN operations over the next five years (to 2017). It covers (i) the changing global context for UN operations and efforts to enhance the organization's performance over the last five years; (ii) trends in troop and police contributions; (iii) projections about potential demand for UN forces in various regions, especially the Middle East and Africa, in the next five years and (iv) suggestions about the types of contributions European countries such as Denmark can make to reinforce UN missions in this period.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Conflict Prevention, International Relations, International Cooperation, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- Africa and Middle East
28. Shaky Foundations: An Assessment of the UN's Rule Of Law Support Agenda
- Author:
- Bruce Jones and Camino Kavanagh
- Publication Date:
- 11-2011
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on International Cooperation
- Abstract:
- As we began the process of drafting this review, citizens across the Middle East and North Africa took to the streets to demand an end to the abusive practices of the security services, more representative and responsive government institutions, the protection of their rights, greater access to economic opportunity, participation in decision-making, and access to justice. They began demanding, in short, the rule of law.
- Topic:
- Security, Cold War, Democratization, International Cooperation, Post Colonialism, United Nations, and Peacekeeping
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Arabia, and North Africa
29. The September UN Vote on Palestine: Will the EU Be Up to the Challenge?
- Author:
- Riccardo Alcaro and Andrea Dessì
- Publication Date:
- 09-2011
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Istituto Affari Internazionali
- Abstract:
- Frustrated by years of inconclusive peace talks, the Palestinians are turning to the United Nations to gain recognition as an independent state. Their bid is opposed by Israel and the United States, with the latter threatening to block any bid for full UN membership in the UN Security Council. To bypass the US veto, the Palestinians plan to request recognition to the UN General Assembly, where they are sure to get the two-third majority of votes needed for the approval of the resolution. While legally non-binding, a favourable vote in the UNGA would be a political boost for the Palestinians' cause - or so they hope. Full EU backing would give critical political weight to the Palestinians' claim. EU states are deeply divided on the issue of Palestinian membership of the UN but instead of opposing the initiative altogether, the EU has been engaging the Palestinian leadership in the hope of modifying its stance. Should the EU fail to persuade the PA to give up on its request for full UN membership, it should abstain in bloc while tabling a concurring resolution that would spell out clearly the parameters for renewed peace talks.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, United Nations, and Territorial Disputes
- Political Geography:
- United States, Europe, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine
30. Betting on Perseverance Why the Double Track Approach is Still the Best Way to Deal with the Iranian Nuclear Conundrum
- Author:
- Riccardo Alcaro
- Publication Date:
- 10-2010
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Istituto Affari Internazionali
- Abstract:
- The standoff over Iran's nuclear programme, suspected of harbouring secret military ends, is widely considered a major flashpoint. A nuclear Iran – as the argument goes – would dramatically alter the regional balance in the Gulf, providing the Islamic Republic with a formidable deterrent against external aggression, while augmenting its ability to exert influence on its neighbours and eliminating the strategic advantage of its rival Israel, the only nuclear-armed state in the Middle East. An Iranian bomb could also trigger a regional nuclear arms race since such countries as Turkey, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, might feel compelled to emulate Iran. This would in turn result in the eventual collapse of the international nuclear non-proliferation regime based on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Given the stakes, it comes as no surprise that curbing Iran's nuclear programme has rapidly become a foreign policy priority for western powers, Israel, and the majority of Arab states, which have a history of rivalry with and mistrust of Persian and Shia-dominated Iran.
- Topic:
- Nuclear Weapons, United Nations, and Sanctions
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt
31. Women and Men: Hand in Hand Against Violence Strategies and approaches of working with men and boys for ending violence against women
- Author:
- Ola Ataya
- Publication Date:
- 11-2010
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Oxfam Publishing
- Abstract:
- Violence against women (VAW) hinders the realization of a wide range of development goals, from the elimination of poverty to the fulfillment of human rights. In Arab countries, many forms of VAW exist and are perpetuated by the deep-rooted sociocultural factors.
- Topic:
- Gender Issues, Human Rights, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- Middle East and North Africa
32. Cyprus: Reunification or Partition?
- Publication Date:
- 09-2009
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- Three decades of efforts to reunify Cyprus are about to end, leaving a stark choice ahead between a hostile, de facto partition of the island and a collaborative federation between the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities living in two constituent states. Most actors agree that the window of opportunity for this bicommunal, bizonal settlement will close by April 2010, the date of the next Turkish Cypriot elections, when the pro-settlement leader risks losing his office to a more hardline candidate. If no accord is reached by then, it will be the fourth major set of UN-facilitated peace talks to fail, and there is a widespread feeling that if the current like-minded, pro-solution Greek and Turkish Cypriot leaders cannot compromise on a federal solution, nobody can. To avoid the heavy costs this would entail for all concerned, the two leaders should stand shoulder to shoulder to overcome domestic cynicism and complete the talks, Turkey and Greece must break taboos preventing full communication with both sides on the island, and European Union (EU) states must rapidly engage in support of the process to avoid the potential for future instability if they complacently accept continuation of the dispute. A real chance still exists in 2009-2010 to end.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Ethnic Conflict, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Turkey, and Middle East
33. Special Report No. 215: Whither Peace Operations?
- Author:
- Donald C. F. Daniel
- Publication Date:
- 10-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- Much progress has been achieved over the last decade and a half in the development and use of peace operations as a tool to quell conflicts, but there are limits to how much more progress can be expected. The number of troop contributors and troops deployed to peace operations has recently reached unprecedented highs, but the bulk of troops came from a limited number of states. The relationship between the United Nations and non-UN peacekeepers seems for the most part complementary. Nonetheless, the rise in non-UN peace operations has probably led to the United Nations becoming too dependent on too small a base of lesser-developed states. The characteristics of most troop contributors (e.g., type of governance, national quality of life, ground-force size) correlate with their level of contribution, but even politically willing nations with the “right” characteristics can likely deploy only a small percentage of their troops to operations at any one time. While Europe and Africa have achieved the most progress in developing institutional capacities, each continent confronts problems of interinstitutional relations and resource shortages. Russia's hegemonic role in Eurasia and the United States' historical legacy in Latin America have hindered development of comprehensive institutional capacities for peace operations in each region. East Asia may slowly be moving beyond ideational strictures that crippled efforts to develop regional capacities. Institutional progress is not expected in South Asia and the Middle East, and states of each region should not be expected to send military units to intraregional operations. Nearly all South Asian countries, however, will be major players in UN operations. A few exceptions aside, Mideast states will remain bit players on the world scene. Demand for easy or moderately challenging operations will generally be met, but the hazardous missions most apt to occur will be called for by states possessing the wherewithal to take them on and bring others along.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Conflict Prevention, International Cooperation, Peace Studies, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Russia, United States, Europe, South Asia, Eurasia, Middle East, East Asia, and Latin America
34. Making Sense of a Senseless War
- Author:
- J. Peter Pham
- Publication Date:
- 04-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Human Rights Human Welfare (University of Denver)
- Abstract:
- In a report on the United Nations-supervised disarmament process in Sierra Leone, veteran Washington Post correspondent Douglas Farah described the pathos of the ragged Revolutionary United Front (RUF) fighters: many were barely into their teens, straggling into a processing center in the diamond-rich eastern district of Kono with little more than ill-fitting rags draped over their emaciated bodies (Farah 2001). There was little evidence that these broken youths had, just a short while earlier, been part of one of the most brutal and effective insurgencies in the world, one whose strategy was predicated on terror in its most primordial expression. Farah's piece was headlined, “They Fought for Nothing, and That's What They Got,” a succinct description of a conflict that struck many as senseless, despite its heavy toll in lives and property.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, United Nations, and War
- Political Geography:
- Iraq and Middle East
35. The U.S. and Iran After the NIE
- Author:
- Farideh Farhi
- Publication Date:
- 12-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- The release of the National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iran’s nuclear capabilities, intentions, and policies created shock waves as well as sighs of relief in Washington and elsewhere. The assessment that Iran stopped its weapons program in 2003, and that its declared enrichment program cannot be converted as easily or as quickly as assumed for use in a military program, immediately brought into question the notion that Iran’s nuclear program needs to be dealt with immediately and only through coercive mechanisms. Amid a notable amount of “spinning” the NIE’s conclusions, a slew of questions are in play regarding if and how the U.S. should alter its hard-edged policies toward the Islamic Republic. A consensus seems to have developed that the report has taken the military option off the table and made the sanctions process at play in the U.N. Security Council more difficult to pursue effectively. These dynamics gave longstanding proponents of direct and unconditional dialogue with Iran new opportunity to re-state their case.1 Calls for such negotiations also came from surprising new corners. In the words of Robert Kagan, co-founder of the hawkish Project for the New American Century, “it is hard to see what other policy options are available. This is the hand that has been dealt. The Bush administration needs to be smart and creative enough to play it well.”2
- Topic:
- Security, Intelligence, Nuclear Weapons, United Nations, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
36. Co-chairmen's report of brainstorming "Implementing the un general assembly's counter-terrorism strategy: addressing youth radicalisation in the Mediterranean region. Lessons learned, best practices and recommendations"
- Publication Date:
- 07-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Istituto Affari Internazionali
- Abstract:
- The Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI) and the Center for Global Counter Terrorism Co-operation (Center) convened a brainstorming on 11 - 12 July in Rome on “Implementing the UN General Assembly's Counter-Terrorism Strategy: Addressing Youth Radicalisation in the Mediterranean Region. Lessons Learned, Best Practices and Recommendations.” The event was organised in co-operation with the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Centro Studi sul Federalismo (Turin), with the support of the Compagnia di San Paolo. The participants included experts from the UN and other multilateral bodies, officials from the Italian and German governments, and academic and other non-government experts from the United States, Europe and the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. The meeting also included a roundtable of representatives of the “Consulta Giovanile per il Pluralismo Religioso e Culturale” (Youth Consultative Council), a youth advisory board recently established by the Italian Ministries of Youth and Sport and Interior to enhance the role of youth in promoting dialogue and tolerance among different cultures and religions. The Rt. Hon. Giovanna Melandri, the Italian Minister for Youth Policies and Sport addressed the brainstorming.
- Topic:
- Civil Society, Islam, Science and Technology, Terrorism, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- United States, Europe, Middle East, and North Africa
37. UNIFIL: Old lessons for the new force
- Author:
- Richard Gowan
- Publication Date:
- 06-2007
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on International Cooperation
- Abstract:
- Peacekeeping is a repetitive business. All too often, international forces are required to return to crumbling states that have already played host to one or more peace operations – and in some cases seem to have become dependent on outside interventions. Take Haiti, to which five separate UN missions have been deployed in the last fifteen years. Or Timor-Leste, which remained stable for less than five months after the UN departed in December 2005 – UN police are back there now, alongside Australian troops. Or, looking at a longer timeframe, think of the Democratic Republic of Congo. In the 1960s, the UN deployed nearly 20,000 troops to the former Belgian colony. Today, it has similar-sized force back in the country - few analysts believe it should withdraw soon. And then there is Lebanon. Next year will be the thirtieth anniversary of the UN's first deployment to the south of the country. After last summer's crisis and the ensuing surge of UN troops, there may be blue helmets around to mark such anniversaries for a while yet. And it is possible to identify a series of recurring patterns in Lebanese peacekeeping.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Conflict Prevention, Peace Studies, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- Turkey, Middle East, and Lebanon
38. Israel/Hizbollah/Lebanon: Avoiding Renewed Conflict
- Publication Date:
- 11-2006
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- International Crisis Group
- Abstract:
- UN Security Council Resolution 1701 halted the month- long fighting between Israel and Hizbollah but did little to resolve the underlying conflict and, if poorly handled, could help reignite it. The resolution has held remarkably well, with only limited violations. However, the temptation by either party to overreach could trigger renewed fighting. The greatest threats would be attempts by Israel or UN forces (UNIFIL) to use 1701 as a blunt means of disarming Hizbollah in the south or by Hizbollah to test UNIFIL's resolve. 1701 should be seen as a transitory instrument that can stabilise the border by containing both sides' military impulses until bolder action is taken to address both domestic Lebanese matters (reforming and democratising the political and electoral systems; building a strong sovereign state and army; resolving the question of Hizbollah's armaments) and, especially, regional issues (in particular re-launching the Syrian track and engaging Iran). In short the international community must be modest in implementing 1701 for as long as it is not prepared to be ambitious in its regional diplomatic efforts.
- Topic:
- Security, Treaties and Agreements, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, Lebanon, and Syria
39. Fast Forward to the Past? The Line in the Sand from Iraq to Iran
- Author:
- Ramesh Thakur
- Publication Date:
- 08-2006
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Centre for International Governance Innovation
- Abstract:
- In this paper, Ramesh Thakur examines the implications of the Iraq War for the UN, shows how the goals being pursued in Iraq have been undermined by the means, and argues that the liberation of the people from Saddam Hussein's brutal regime was a collateral benefit amidst much damage to principles, institutions and relations. His thesis is that the Iraq War has complicated the international community's efforts to fashion a robust collective response to the nuclear challenge posed by Iran. The war's legacies include diminished Western credibility in highlighting an Iran threat, narrower policy options in responding to the nuclear challenge, and an Iran that is simultaneously politically stronger in Iraq, richer due to rising oil prices, and more emboldened and motivated on national security.
- Topic:
- United Nations and War
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Iran, and Middle East
40. Channel Surfing: Non-engagement as Foreign Policy
- Author:
- Barbara K. Bodine
- Publication Date:
- 08-2006
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- The adoption of Security Council Resolution 1701 brought a halt to the month-long Israeli-Hezbollah war. UNIFIL will be greatly expanded with a more vigorous mandate to back Lebanese assertion of full sovereignty and control over southern Lebanon and the disarmament of Hezbollah’s militia and missile sites. But is an agreement hammered out in Manhattan sustainable on the ground? Was success in New York confirmation that the Bush administra- tion has come to terms with the utility of the United Nations and the facility of our friends and allies? Or does the agreement’s ambiguity and fragility underscore the costs of dogged non-engagement with our adversaries, even in times of crisis?
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, United Nations, Military Strategy, and Hezbollah
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, and Lebanon
41. The Future of UN State-Building: Strategic and Operational Challenges and the Legacy of Iraq
- Author:
- Kirsti Samuels and Sebastian von Einsiedel
- Publication Date:
- 05-2004
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- International Peace Institute
- Abstract:
- Whether by accident or design, the United Nations increasingly finds itself in operations that seek to build or re-build the institutions of a state. This report discusses the challenges facing the UN in such state-building activities in the post-Iraq environment. Three sorts of challenges are reviewed: those arising from a lack of conceptual clarity on the aim of state-building, those resulting from the transformed strategic environment, and those operational and strategic challenges inherent to the complex task of state-building.
- Topic:
- Development, Government, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- Iraq and Middle East
42. America Adrift? Myths and Realities About the United States in the New World
- Author:
- Joseph M. Grieco
- Publication Date:
- 11-2004
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Centre for International Peace and Security Studies
- Abstract:
- The war in Iraq continues; its wisdom and consequences for the United States and the Middle East cannot yet be fully assessed. Still, it may be said that the lead-up to the war largely put to rest the view that an American president can readily respond to external threats with unilateral military force, and need not take into account the views of allies and the United Nations. Presidents, even those with unilateralist inclinations, such as that at present, are constrained to remain committed to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the UN Security Council because large majorities of the American public want their government to have allies and UN authorization when the United States goes to war. Americans are likely to want allies and international authorization because their possession increases the chances of pre-war coercive diplomatic success and, if war is necessary, success during and after it at lower cost. They may also want allies and international authorization for another reason, namely, to obtain a "second opinion" on the wisdom and the intentions of their leaders in taking them down a path that may end in war.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, NATO, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iraq, America, and Middle East
43. Securing Afghanistan: Entering a Make-or-Break Phase?
- Author:
- T.X Hammes and Robert B. Oakley
- Publication Date:
- 03-2004
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Abstract:
- To appreciate Afghanistan's predicament, it is essential to understand that all Afghan politics are tribal. Thus, while Afghans share a genuine national identity, their immediate concern in any political process is to advance or preserve the welfare of their ethnic or extended family group. Further, since the Russians and British artificially imposed the country's international borders, the tribes are not wholly contained within Afghanistan. They straddle the borders with surrounding nations. Thus, tribal politics are also international politics.
- Topic:
- Security, NATO, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, Russia, and Middle East
44. The UN Security Council and Iraq
- Author:
- Christopher D. O'Sullivan and M. James Wilkinson
- Publication Date:
- 02-2004
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Columbia International Affairs Online
- Abstract:
- The United Nations Security Council has, in the words of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, “come to a fork in the road . . . (that) may be a moment no less decisive than 1945.”i The US Administration precipitated the crisis when, unable to secure Council approval for using armed force against Iraq, it fashioned its own “coalition of the willing” and drove Saddam Hussein from power. The events surrounding the US action and its aftermath have spawned a vigorous debate over President Bush's policies and whether the Security Council in its present -- or any other -- form can play a serious role henceforth in the quest to ensure international peace and security.
- Topic:
- United Nations
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iraq, Middle East, and Arabia
45. The Progress of UN Disarmament in Iraq: An Assessment Report
- Author:
- David Cortright, Alistair Millar, George A. Lopez, and Linda M. Gerber
- Publication Date:
- 01-2003
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Fourth Freedom Forum
- Abstract:
- After two months of increasingly intensive inspection activity, UN weapons monitors in Iraq, by their own account, have achieved considerable progress in establishing the disarmament process mandated in Security Council Resolution 1441 (2002). During his 27 January update to the Security Council, UN inspections chief Dr. Hans Blix reported that "Iraq has on the whole cooperated rather well so far" with UN inspectors. "It would appear from our experience so far that Iraq has decided in principle to provide cooperation on process, notably access." Although Baghdad has not fully disclosed its weapons activities as required by UN resolutions, and many unanswered questions remain, weapons inspectors have established an effective disarmament verification system in Iraq. They have asked for the "unified resolve" of the Security Council to support an ongoing inspection process. In contrast with the experience of UN weapons monitors during the early 1990s, the inspectors with the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have received unfettered access to Iraqi facilities and have been able to conduct more than 350 on-site inspections. They are employing the world's most advanced technology for detecting nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons and are installing an ongoing monitoring system that will provide permanent surveillance of Iraq's weapons activities.
- Topic:
- United Nations, War, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
- Political Geography:
- Iraq and Middle East
46. Nuclear Dimensions of the Iraqi Crisis
- Author:
- Morten Bremer Maerli
- Publication Date:
- 05-2003
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- In accordance with Resolution 1441, unanimously passed by the UN Security Council, Iraq on November 7th, 2002, submitted a declaration of its activities concerning weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Copies of the declaration were forwarded to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and later to the permanent members of the Security Council. The declaration described the various methods used by Iraq in trying to produce nuclear material suitable for weapons, as well as the many sites involved in the nuclear program. In the nearly 12,000-page document Iraq claimed that it had no current WMD programs. However, intelligence analysts from the United States and other nations immediately began to scrutinize the document, and senior US officials quickly rejected the claims made by Iraq.
- Topic:
- Security, Nuclear Weapons, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iraq, and Middle East
47. The emperor has some clothes on: fairy tales, scary tales and Weapons of Mass Destruction
- Author:
- Toby Archer
- Publication Date:
- 07-2003
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- The debate on the invasion of Iraq revolved around so-called “Weapons of Mass Destruction” (WMD). Thousands of lives were lost, hundreds of billions of dollars spent, alliances fractured, and international relations thrown into turmoil. The debates raged over whether WMD were there or not; whether the UN inspectors should have more time to find them or not; whether Iraq having or seeking WMD justified invasion or not, amongst other issues. There were a myriad of differing positions on the value of the war, but the idea that WMD are a distinct and special class of weapons has remained essentially uncontested.
- Topic:
- Politics, United Nations, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
- Political Geography:
- Iraq and Middle East
48. Sanctions, Inspections, and Containment: Viable Policy Options in Iraq
- Author:
- David Cortright, Alistair Millar, and George A. Lopez
- Publication Date:
- 06-2002
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Fourth Freedom Forum
- Abstract:
- Concerns are growing that Iraq may be rebuilding its capacity to develop and use weapons of mass destruction. After more than three years without UN inspections, the uncertainties and risks associated with Iraq's weapons programs have increased. The urgency of these issues has prompted widespread calls for the resumption of UN weapons inspections, and has led U.S. officials to threaten military attack. The U.S. threats are also motivated by a desire to overthrow the government of Iraq. Pundits in the United States have raised a chorus of calls for military action to topple Saddam Hussein. Many leaders in the region support the goal of disarming Iraq, but as U.S. vice president Dick Cheney learned during his March trip to the Middle East, most of these same leaders oppose U.S. military action against Iraq. States in the region fear the consequences of a U.S.-led war, especially in light of the profound security crisis in the Middle East. These realities suggest the need for viable alternative strategies to resolve the Iraq crisis and protect regional security. This report presents policy options available to the United States for addressing security concerns in Iraq. It examines the issues associated with the threat of weapons development in the region and offers a series of policy options for reducing and containing that threat without resort to military force. The report does not dwell on the uncertainties and risks of waging war on Iraq without international consent. These have been amply examined in other articles and commentaries. The paper concentrates instead on robust alternatives to the use of force. The policy options outlined here include: Reforming UN sanctions to tighten controls on oil revenues and military-related goods while further easing restrictions on civilian economic activity; Facilitating the return of UN weapons inspectors to complete the UN disarmament mandate and reestablish an Ongoing Monitoring and Verification (OMV) system; and Creating an "enhanced containment" system of externally based border monitoring and control if Iraq refuses to allow the resumption of weapons inspections. The report begins with an assessment of Iraq's capacity for developing weapons of mass destruction. It then examines options for controlling Iraq's weapons potential through economic statecraft, United Nations weapons inspections and diplomatic engagement with neighboring countries.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iraq, and Middle East
49. Key Judgments (from October 2002 NIE) - Iraq's Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction
- Publication Date:
- 10-2002
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
- Abstract:
- We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade. (See INR alternative view at the end of these Key Judgments.)
- Topic:
- International Relations, United Nations, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
- Political Geography:
- Iraq and Middle East
50. Smart Sanctions: Restructuring UN Policy in Iraq
- Author:
- David Cortright, Alistair Millar, and George A. Lopez
- Publication Date:
- 04-2001
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Fourth Freedom Forum
- Abstract:
- This study proposes a narrowly defined and tightly implemented set of smart sanctions focusing on weapons and military-related goods, as an alternative to the current faltering comprehensive sanctions regime. Such a modernized sanctions regime would need to be sustainable over the long term via the support of key UN Security Council members and frontline states. It would remain in effect until such time as Iraq complies fully with the relevant Security Council resolutions and fulfills its disarmament obligations.
- Topic:
- Security, Peace Studies, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- Iraq and Middle East