Accepting an American-Iranian Dialogue
July 24th, 2008 by Sarah
Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi makes his first official visit to Washington and warns that Israel would not rule out any course of action regarding Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
Meanwhile, Aluf Benn at Haaretz derides the Bush administration for drastically shifting its policy toward Iran, but ultimately recommends that “instead of making the mistake of holding on to the false hope that Bush will actually order the bombing of Iran, Israelis should start looking at the positive aspects of an American-Iranian dialogue, while insisting that Israel’s vital interests not be undermined.”
Posted in Iran, Israel, Military, US foreign policy | Comment »
Palestinian Security Forces as a Move Towards Peace
July 23rd, 2008 by Sarah
Anthony Cordesman in an op-ed in the New York Times argues that the U.S. should help build a Palestinian security force in order to promote peace between Palestinians and Israelis. “Unless there are effective Palestinian security forces, Israel will never trust in a Palestinian state or be able to act on the quiet progress being made toward reaching a final settlement.”
Along those lines, Cordesman denounces the State Department for acting as a “key barrier to the first real step toward peace,” by preventing U.S. actors from “working in the field and developing critical personal relationships with Palestinian officers and officials.”
Posted in Israel, Mideast Peace Plan, Military, Palestine, US foreign policy | Comment »
Reasonable Expectations in Afghanistan
July 23rd, 2008 by Adam
Ralph Peters writes in USA Today that the U.S. needs to have realistic goals in Afghanistan because the complexity of the reality on the ground makes it difficult to fulfill America’s lofty objectives. The porous Afghan-Pakistan border and Afghanistan’s tribal, multi-ethnic nature make it unlikely that it will become truly peaceful, even with a long-term presence of foreign troops. Peters suggests that the U.S. should aim for a situation in Afghanistan that is relatively peaceful and only plagued by manageable problems that do not threaten global security.
Posted in Afghanistan, US foreign policy | Comment »
POMED Notes: Islamist Parties and Democracy
July 22nd, 2008 by Sarah
Yesterday, the International Forum for Democratic Studies and the National Endowment for Democracy invited Hillel Fradkin, Amr Hamzawy, Laith Kubba, and Tamara Cofman Wittes to assess the rise of Islamist parties and its implications for democracy in the region. All of the speakers agreed with Wittes’ statement that Islamist parties “are not evolving in a vacuum. The U.S. is part of this, and rather than just sitting here, we must take responsibility for what happens next.”
Marc Plattner of the International Forum for Democratic Studies and Vice President at the National Endowment for Democracy moderated the event.
For POMED’s full notes, click here.
Posted in Event Notes, Islam and Democracy, Islamist movements, Political Islam, Political Parties, US foreign policy | Comment »
POMED Notes: “The Implications of the Opening Steps for a Diplomatic Path Between the United States and Iran”
July 22nd, 2008 by Adam
On Tuesday, the Center for Strategic & International Studies held a discussion regarding the recent developments in the negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program and what implications these developments could have on U.S. policy. Panelists included Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter, Gen. Brent Scowcroft (Ret.), former National Security Advisor to Presidents Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush, and David Ignatius, Associate Editor and Columnist for the Washington Post. Bob Schieffer, CBS News’ Chief Washington Correspondent and host of Face the Nation served as moderator.
For POMED’s complete notes on this discussion, click here.
Posted in DC Event Notes, Diplomacy, Event Notes, Iran, US foreign policy | Comment »
U.S. Policy After The Israel-Hezbollah Swap
July 22nd, 2008 by Sarah
Andrew Exum at Middle East Progress recommends that the U.S. continue to arm and train Lebanon’s armed forces “to serve as a viable instrument of the state,” and warns against a drastic change in policy. “The real danger here is that U.S. policy might overcorrect in one of two directions: either the United States could enter into direct negotiations with Hezbollah to undetermined ends or the United States could redouble efforts to arm Hezbollah’s internal enemies in the hopes that their domestic position will be weakened. The former option is foolish, while the latter is suicidal.”
Graeme Bannerman argues at Common Ground News Service that by restoring a governing consensus among Lebanon’s the three largest groups - Maronites, Sunnis, and Shi’a - the Doha Agreement began the process of separating the interests of the Shi’a community from that of Hezbollah. “As more and more Shi’a believe their community interests are protected by the government, and as more and more become less comfortable with Hezbollah policies, Hezbollah leadership will either begin to lose popular support or have to change their policies.”
Posted in Hezbollah, Lebanon, US foreign policy | Comment »
The Status of Al-Qaeda
July 22nd, 2008 by Sarah
This week’s edition of The Economist focuses on the status of al-Qaeda worldwide.
The issue addresses the current debate over CIA Director Michael Hayden’s claim of a “near strategic defeat” of the terrorist organization, its growing strength in Pakistan, its ability to recruit and export its ideology, the contrast between home-grown terrorism in Europe and the U.S., the effects of maintaining Guantanamo Bay on fighting global terrorism, tactics explored by Saudi Arabia to tackle terrorism, and al-Qaeda’s self-destructive tendencies.
Posted in EU, Military, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Terrorism, US foreign policy, al-Qaeda | Comment »
A Bush Policy Shift?
July 22nd, 2008 by Sarah
At National Interest Online Barbara Slavin reviews President Bush’s recent decision to send Undersecretary of State Bill Burns to participate in talks with Iran, alongside the P5+1. Either “President Bush believes diplomacy will not work but realizes he must at least go through the motions to avoid criticism that he is rushing to war,” or “with the situation in Iraq somewhat stabilized and Western economic sanctions beginning to bite in Iran, the administration believes it has sufficient leverage to negotiate and that Iran is receptive to a deal.”
Iran currently has 2 weeks to formally respond to the incentive package.
The Economist asserts its own interpretation. “Having Mr Burns in Geneva, it is hoped, will underline the seriousness of the offer to negotiate, but also Iran’s need to choose.”
Posted in Diplomacy, Iran, US foreign policy | Comment »
A Frozen Freeze-for-Freeze
July 21st, 2008 by Sarah
Paul Richter and Borzou Daragahi in the L.A. Times report that Iran has refused to say whether it would suspend its uranium enrichment program as a precondition to negotiations over its nuclear program. Iran has been given a 2-week deadline to provide its final answer.
Michael Rubin in the Wall Street Journal argues that “diplomacy is not wrong, but President Bush’s reversal [by sending a U.S. representative to talk with Iran] is diplomatic malpractice on a Carter-esque level that is breathing new life into a failing regime.” Additionally, Rubin argues that “Washington is signaling to Tehran that it need not adhere to three current U.N. Security Council resolutions. Rather than reinforce diplomacy, the White House reveals that its red lines are illusionary.”
An editorial in the Arab News, however, suggests that even if Iran eventually refuses to accept the incentives package, “the very fact that Iran and the US got together at one table for the first time concerning the nuclear issue represents a huge turnaround for both sides and provides distinct signs that a collision course is being averted.”
Meanwhile, UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown calls on Iran to either halt its nuclear program or face stronger sanctions. “We stand ready to lead in taking firmer sanctions and will ask the whole international community to join us.”
Posted in Diplomacy, EU, Iran, US foreign policy | Comment »
The New Arab Diplomacy
July 21st, 2008 by Adam
Marina Ottaway and Mohammed Herzallah of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace have an interesting paper examining how Arab regimes have been undertaking diplomatic efforts on their own, even against Washington’s interests, in order to fill the region’s diplomatic vacuum. The paper states that regional players see U.S. policy as ineffective and believe that undertaking their own efforts is better than waiting for U.S. assistance in defusing regional crises. They conclude that it still has yet to be determined whether this shift will last beyond this administration.
Posted in Diplomacy, US foreign policy | Comment »
2008: Editorials Criticize Obama on Iraq
July 18th, 2008 by Matt
First, the Washington Post takes aim, decrying Obama’s “foolish consistency” on a timetable for withdrawal, and predicting that it will be extremely difficult to achieve in the manner Obama presents it. The Post also criticizes Obama’s “irrational” and “indifferent” behavior toward the grander strategic ramifications of the war, reiterating how Iraq is “vital” to U.S. security interests, as it sits at the “strategic center” of the Middle East on “some of the world’s largest oil reserves”. Matt Yglesias sarcastically rebuts the notion that we should care about Iraq because of oil strategy:
“Oops, did I say democracy promotion? I meant to say that Iraq has a lot of oil so we need to try to micromanage its future. And yet it’s precisely this impulse — the belief that we desperately need to retain “influence” in oil-possessing parts of the world that got us into the corrupt bargain with the Arab autocracies that produced the conditions under which al-Qaeda arose and began targeting us. Remember when Iraq was supposed to be part of a drive for reform that changed that dynamic? Oh for the heady days of the Arab spring.”
Also, The Wall Street Journal rips Obama’s “judgment” on the surge.
Posted in Democracy Promotion, Election 08, Iraq, US foreign policy, US politics | Comment »
It Isn’t Over for America in the Middle East
July 18th, 2008 by Amanda
At the Middle East Strategy at Harvard, Richard N. Haass rebuts comments made by his readers in response to an earlier statement about the end of the American era in Middle East region. He sought to clarify his remarks by asserting that the US will continue to be the leading foreign power for the foreseeable future, albeit that its influence has declined markedly and its political position has changed. He remarks that unlike previous decades “the United States will not be able to insist on what it wants or shape events as much as it would like.”
Posted in US foreign policy | Comment »
My, How Times Have Changed
July 18th, 2008 by Amanda
The Bush Administration has attempted a near about face in its diplomatic relations with Iran, according to a New York Times editorial. While its policy has shifted away from the “dangerous fantasy of bombing away Iran’s nuclear ambitions” to engaging in talks in Tehran for the first time in 30 years, Kevin Drum at Washington Monthly wonders why more people aren’t getting as excited as he is about the historical move.
Adam Blickstein at Democracy Arsenal noticed. He discusses the latest policy actions as well as speculation over US ambitions to “establish a US interest section -a halfway house to setting up a full embassy.” Meanwhile, FP Passport discovers the positive outcomes of roundball diplomacy.
Well-timed is the release of a new book by Thomas Powers entitled Iran: The Threat. He posits that “the United States appears to have lost its capacity to think clearly” with regard to its war with Iran rhetoric.
Posted in Diplomacy, Iran, US foreign policy | Comment »
Where is America on Turkish Democracy?
July 18th, 2008 by Amanda
According to opinion by Aliza Marcus and Andrew Apostolou in the Washington Post, “Turkey’s political crisis has taken a turn for the worse” as the nation’s Constitutional Court is likely to ban Prime Minister Erdogan and his AKP party from government participation. They consider this a drastic measure that is certain to spark “political instability in an important U.S. ally.”
Despite the country’s importance for America in the region at large, “the U.S. government has been curiously quiet about this assault on Turkey’s democracy”. Marcus and Apostolou affirm that “if the United States is serious about promoting democracy in Muslim countries, it should stand up for Turkey’s democratically elected government.”
Posted in Democracy Promotion, Islam and Democracy, Secularism, Turkey, US foreign policy | Comment »
Perilously Pakistan
July 18th, 2008 by Amanda
Continuing on the topic of Pakistan’s stock exchange riot on Thursday, Financial Times analyzes the possible causes for the outburst in a country that is “beset by a deepening political and economic crisis”. Foreign powers can assist the troubled nation with economic assistance, “yet, the solutions really lie at home” when it comes the the political upheaval. The power struggle between the newest power heads Asif Ali Zardari and Nawaz Sharif is compromising stability, and “unless the party leaders come together for the sake of their country, Pakistan’s elected party leaders may find that the crisis consumes them too.”
At American Footprints Nadezhda believes that the instability has finally forced the Bush Administration “[to] become seriously spooked about Pakistan.”
Posted in Pakistan, US foreign policy | Comment »
On Saving Afghanistan
July 18th, 2008 by Amanda
Time Magazine discusses the stagnation and deterioration of development in Afghanistan and what the US should do to get the nation back on its feet. The article suggests that troop build-up is not the panacea; “A smarter strategy would focus on two elements: more effective aid and a more limited military objective.” It continues that the US ought to strengthen foreign policy through “smaller and more creative” means of “nation-building [and] governance”.
Foreign Policy examines President Hamid Karzai’s position as the Afghani government slips into a deepening pattern of corruption. FP thinks that with the 2009 Presidential elections around the corner, Karzai should embark on a bureaucratic “house cleaning” with help from the United States, declaring that eliminating corruption is a matter where “active American support is critical”.
Posted in Afghanistan, US foreign policy | Comment »
2008: Iraqis Offer Views On Obama
July 17th, 2008 by Matt
Sabrina Tavernise and Richard Oppel, Jr. report for The New York Times on the complicated sentiments expressed by 18 Iraqis informally polled on their feelings toward Barack Obama in advance of his upcoming visit. Although several of those asked say they feel a certain closeness and identifiability with Obama as a person, some (mostly in the Iraqi government or military) express apprehension over his plan to withdraw American forces should he be elected president.
Posted in Election 08, Iraq, Public Opinion, US foreign policy, US politics | Comment »
2008: Dennis Ross Joining Obama on Mideast Trip
July 17th, 2008 by Matt
Time magazine’s Massimo Calabresi reports on Barack Obama’s choice to have Dennis Ross accompany him on his Middle East trip, what Ross’ presence might mean to Arab and Israeli observers, and whether or not Ross might have a future role on Obama’s negotiating team for the Arab-Israeli peace process.
Posted in Election 08, Israel, Mideast Peace Plan, Palestine, US foreign policy, US politics | Comment »
2008: Separating Terrorism From Islamic Extremism
July 17th, 2008 by Matt
Over at TAPPED, Ezra Klein homed in on a particular passage on Islamic extremism in Barack Obama’s interview with Fareed Zakaria that Klein says shows a distinct difference between McCain and Obama on this issue:
“One of the clear distinctions between the Left’s approach to terrorism and the Right’s approach to terrorism is that the Left wants to limit the scope of the conflict, while the Right wants to expand it. So though it was only al Qaeda who attacked us on 9/11, Romney and Giuliani and McCain and plenty of their colleagues want to zoom out from al Qaeda to terrorism, and from terrorism to Islamic extremism. Rather than this being an effort to hunt down al Qaeda, it becomes a war to hunt down al Qaeda, destroy Hezbollah, eradicate Hamas, overthrow Saddam Hussein, change the regime in Tehran, crush the Muslim Brotherhood, and confront Syria, and whatever else Bill Kristol thought of while eating his Cheerios that week.”
Posted in Election 08, Hamas, Hezbollah, Muslim Brotherhood, Terrorism, US foreign policy, US politics, al-Qaeda | Comment »
Sanctioning Iran
July 17th, 2008 by Sarah
Senators Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Richard Shelby (R-AL) announce bipartisan Iran sanctions legislation that would “authorize states and local governments to divest from companies that do business with Iran’s oil and gas sectors and cut off shipment through other countries of sanctioned technology.”
Olivier Guitta at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies argues that specific sanctions against Iran’s energy sector could be the most powerful tool to avert military escalation. “An international export ban of refined petroleum products to Iran, coupled with an embargo on the 2.5 million barrels per day (3 percent of world consumption) that Iran exports” could plunge Iran “in a deep economic and social hole that could jeopardize the regime.”
Posted in Iran, Oil, US foreign policy | Comment »
