Arab Voices: What Are They Saying to Us and Why Does It Matter? ~ James Zogby

Middle East Institute, December 8, 2010

Summary by Debie Waggoner

“There are 350 million people who are a freaking mystery to us.” ~James Zogby

Zogby is a lively and intelligent speaker. I hope this summary does him justice.

Why did I write this book? Because I hear the debate about Arabs and Muslims in the American press, but it does not reflect the Arabs that I know in the Middle East. I wanted to point out that Americans should care about the Middle East because we’ve committed more money, troops, and resources to it than any other region in the world since Vietnam.

It also gave me the opportunity to poll Arabs and use actual data about the perceptions that Arabs have and then separate it by gender, age, and country if I wanted to. It’s interesting that as American troops entered Iraq in 2003, we (Zogby International) polled Americans to see how many could identify Iraq on a map: 11%. In 2008, we did the poll again: 37% of Americans could identify Iraq on a map.

Thousands of American troops have died in the last 8 years in a country that only one-third of Americans can even find on a map.

We also polled Iraqis during the last years of the Bush Administration and they were clearly unhappy with the way they had been treated by American troops and the polls showed their discontent. A few days later, Dick Cheney goes on “Meet the Press” and talks about how this great polling company called Zogby has data that shows the Iraqis are perfectly happy with the way things are going. He completely falsified the results and once again, lied to the American people.

A poll of Americans in 2010 shows that 80% think that Arabs hate Americans. In a poll of Arabs, 63% stated that they like American freedoms, education, democracy, movies, and science, but more than 90% do not like American policies towards Arabs. Therein lies the fine line: the Arabs like Americanisms, but feel slapped by our policies. Zogby says, "One Arab told us, I feel like a jilted lover.”

Why? Because of the Palestinian dilemma. Arabs see videos of Palestinian (predominantly Arab) children suffering in refugee camps and those children look just like their children. Do they obsess about it? Some do, but many are just like you and I: they go to work, they watch movies, they have family gatherings, they worry about their health and their loved ones. But they also see the news and unlike American news, which rarely if ever, depicts Palestinians suffering, Arab news stations show the Palestinian families watching their homes being destroyed by Israeli bulldozers to make room for more Israeli settlements. Do most Americans understand the significant of these actions in the Arab mind? No and so we don’t understand a region of the world with which we have so much to do.

Zogby pointed out that the American education system has a severe knowledge gap. The simple fact that the vast majority of Americans cannot even identify Iraq on a map makes a pretty strong argument for a review of our education system. He advocates for a new National Defense Education Act that would encourage study of critical languages such as Arabic and change the American historical viewpoint that first there was Europe and then there was America and that’s all you need to know. Don’t forget how much the Arabs contributed to European cuisine and the Arab scholars who helped generate the Renaissance. As Zogby stated, “There are 350 million people who are a freaking mystery to us.”

Why aren’t Arabs living in the United States being utilized to help shape policy or at least understand the Arab mindset and culture? Zogby’s answer: “Politics. And it’s a shame. I wish more were involved in shaping policy. And, I wish the career Foreign Service officers were making policy decisions, but they don’t and they know what’s going on over there.”

(From the back of the room, “They write good cables!”)

His take on so-called “Middle East” experts on news stations: “Many of those “experts” have written a book about the Middle East, but have never in their lives actually traveled to a country there and often have had little interaction with people who grew up in the Middle East.

Final Thoughts: I haven’t read Zogby’s book yet, but judging from the variety of points he wanted to get across, it’s bound to be a good read and is certain to have some great personal stories in it. The gist of today for me was that we Americans can point the finger and ask, “Why don’t they understand us? Why are we the ones looking like failures? Because, as Zogby stated, ‘The problem starts at home.’ Let’s educate ourselves on the Middle East, its history, its cultures, its people and…ahem…its geography.

YPFP: Media & Foreign Policy-A Discussion with Price Floyd

By Debie Waggoner

“Julian Assange should be arrested for espionage, but there’s no turning back to a time before websites likes Wikileaks.” ~ Price Floyd

Floyd gave a brief overview of his career path; he began working at the Department of State in 1989 and eventually became Director of Media Affairs. He recounted his first experience working with the media and how it made him realize how someone like him could work behind the scenes to craft a message. It all began with his involvement in Secretary Albright’s first trip to Israel; Floyd was responsible for ensuring the media and the Secretary were in the proper places for her to be photographed paying respects at the grave of revered former Prime Minister, Itzak Rabin. The next day, Israeli newspapers had her photo on every front page in the country; and Floyd was hooked.

During the G.W. Bush years, Floyd said his department did everything in its power to communicate with Americans about the Administrations' policies. He granted 1,000 interviews a year (3 a day) for mid and top level officials, but the polls kept dropping. Finally, someone told him that if you are trying television, radio, newspaper, and internet to sell a product and no one buys it, then you need to take a look at your product. Floyd says this concept was life changing; he went back to his superiors and acknowledged that the Bush Administration may need to change some of its policies. Naturally, that did not go over very well and Floyd resigned. “No matter where you are, you have a voice. Don’t be afraid to stand up for what you believe.”

Five Communication Questions to Ask:

1. What is the message?

2. Who is the audience?

3. How can I reach them?

4. Who is going to do the speaking?

5. How am I going to measure the result or impact of the message?

If there is bad news about to be leaked about your organization, your communications team should put it out into the media first and acknowledge its mistakes and note improvements. Pretending bad news is not a big deal to consumers and constituents only makes the matter worse.

His analysis of Republicans: Historically very disciplined about staying on message and during the GWB years, “the Administration stayed on message regardless of reality.”

Democrats: “Historically horrible at discipline and staying on message, but good at communicating in general. The Obama Administration has done a pretty good job of balancing staying on message and adapting to realities.”

In light of WikiLeaks:

Floyd stated that the way the government communicates will need to change, but he is not sure how. He said, “Most likely, the government will not do a lot to change the policies and just hope it does not happen again.”

Best Point of the Night: The State Department documents revealed on WikiLeaks only proves the strength of our public diplomacy efforts. Instead of damaging the relationship of the United States, most of our friends and allies were understanding and even commented that they said even worse things about the U.S. and its representatives. True-and I would add that if it happened to the U.S., it could happen to any government-it could be China or Germany’s turn next to have documents leaked, so don’t be too harsh.

Strategic Culture: YPFP Hosts Dr. Kerry Kartchner with the Defense Reduction Agency

Summary by Debie Waggoner
How Well Do We Understand and Utilize our Knowledge of Cultures?

Although the topic was “Challenges of International Security and Non-proliferation”, Kartchner focused primarily on the notion of “strategic culture.” To most of those in the room, the term strategic culture was new, but it is basically what it sounds like: utilizing understanding of a culture for strategic purposes. Sounds simple, but we Americans tend to be clueless about other cultures; this lack of understanding seriously hampered the efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, but could help us better understand the actions of the Iranian leadership.

First, one must understand a state or region’s culture—its common historical narrative pulled from its religion, historical defeats and victories, traditional beliefs and practices that separate it from other states or regions. Those in the diplomatic sphere will use their understanding of a culture strategically in order to facilitate successful diplomatic interaction. The military experts will use their understanding of a culture strategically to ensure their troops are able to use this information for bettering relations with locals and perhaps even use this information to outfox their enemies. As Kartchner stated, “Strategic culture does not predict, but it helps provide context and understanding of identity, values, perceptions that can serve those making decisions.”

Kartchner touched on non-proliferation primarily as it relates to Iran. He said that deterrence will not work with Iran, but that their capabilities must be limited, its enemies should build an alliance, and pre-emptive strikes should be considered. (What?!)

Why the extreme viewpoint? According to Kartchner, Iranian Shia Muslims believe that the end of the world is nigh and that Iran is likely going to be the “one” to get it all started. An Armaggedon-like war will engulf the world; Iran (Persia) will emerge victorious and the Twelfth Caliph and Jesus Christ will come back to earth. Kartchner asked, “How does anyone deter a nation whose leaders believe this and are basically touting their desire to start an Armageddon because it was foretold?” Kartchner referred to a letter sent by Ahmadinejad to President G.W. Bush in 2006 telling him that all the world should convert to Islam and its problems will be resolved. If not, then the wrath of God will be upon those who do not. Of course, his letter was ignored—but it clearly indicates that Ahmadinejad is going to be a very difficult leader to reason with and all evidence points to him becoming increasingly radical. I had never heard this narrative on Shia Islam before and naturally find it shocking and alarming.

This was Kartchner’s main point—if we do not understand all the aspects that motivate those in power, we cannot hope to find solutions or have any idea what move the other might make next.

McCain on the Future of the U.S. India-Relationship: “India should be given Permanent Membership on the U.N. Security Council.”

Summary by Debie Waggoner
Carnegie Endowment, November 5, 2010

As President Obama departs for New Delhi tomorrow, McCain discusses India’s increasingly important relationship with the United States. The question is, does Obama second his thoughts?

McCain began by emphasizing the “bipartisan success that began with Clinton and continues to this day” in solidifying the strategic and common-values relationship between the U.S. and India. He gave special credit to current Indian Prime Minister Singh for working through the tough political environment in India to secure the Nuclear Civilian Agreement. He praised India for its peaceful rise and commitment to security and democracy.

Security: McCain addressed the enormous tensions between Indian and Pakistan and touched on the Mumbai attacks. McCain touted Singh for his “restraint that exemplified statesmanship” after the Mumbai attacks when the world knew that Pakistani terrorists were behind the bloodbath. (Would the U.S. have exercised the same restraint?) McCain discussed the importance of the U.S. finishing the mission to help build an Afghanistan that is no longer a terrorist safe-haven, but instead able to govern itself enough to be a respected member of the international community. India fears that the U.S. will withdraw too soon, leaving its border with Afghanistan even more perilous than it was before. Pakistan also expects the U.S. to withdraw too soon, McCain stated, explaining that it is the main reason Pakistani military officials continue to secretly provide support to extremists who are anti-India. “If the U.S. quits Afghanistan, the consequences will be terrible for the U.S., but even worse for India.” He also mentioned that the U.S. and India share a goal of “shaping China’s rise.”
Democracy (vs. China): “Are my remarks [for a more secure India] also directed at China?” McCain emphasized that he was not trying to provoke China by tooting India’s horn, but rather recognized that both the U.S. and India seek a peaceful relationship with China. However, he did point out that “China’s recent actions have been concerning.” Such as: undermining multi-lateral agreements on sanctions with Iran, refusing to allow a “realistic” currency valuation change, contesting borders with India (this has been going on for decades), and its new assertiveness in the region (why not? It has the economy to do so). He claimed that China has resolved all of its land border disputes with every other nation except India. (I highly doubt that this is an accurate statement, as China has had border disputes with nearly all of its neighbors for years.) There were representatives from China’s state-run Xinhua news agency in attendance, so I’ll be curious to see what they write about this speech. Undoubtedly, it will make the U.S. appear anti-China, as it often does, and this speech certainly did nothing to dissuade that-although it was not a direct attack on the Chinese.

After 45 minutes of making points on our common interests: security and democracy, McCain got to the main point: India should be granted permanent membership on the U.N. Security Council. Without dwelling on this statement, he moved on to talk about the importance of strengthening democratic institutions within India and around South Asia. He concluded by cautioning against “demonizing India-outsourcing is part of the global economy; India is not out to ‘steal’ American jobs. And India’s political leaders should do more to support its relationship with the U.S. by not using it as a ‘political club’ and instead, promoting it. It’s this simple my friends, if the 21st Century is going to be defined more by peace than war…it will be because of a strong U.S. –India alliance. There’s nothing [the U.S. and India] cannot accomplish together.”

Concluding Thoughts: China, don’t take this personally, but the U.S. clearly sees India as a way to balance your rising power and its going to milk that relationship for all its worth in the coming decades. And-China, you haven’t exactly been the most cooperative nation—not nearly as cooperative as India. But, we still need you to hold our billions in debt, so we’ll find a way to reach out to you later. India-we do like you, but you are not as supportive of individual liberty and human rights as McCain claimed. You are working on it though. Pakistan-the U.S. is supporting you economically, but the security threats of extremists seem to win you over more than our billions of dollars in aid. I hope we can figure out how to truly get you onboard.

Oh and that bit about India joining the Security Council…China? What do you say? Not a big deal, right?

UNDP Roundtable: Iraq’s Development Challenges

Summary by Debie Waggoner

Panelists---
Christine McNab:
Deputy Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General & UN Resident Coordinator and Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq

John Desrocher:
Director, Office of Iraq Affairs, US Department of State

Leslie Campbell,
Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa, National Democratic Institute (NDI)

www.ndi.org

Quote of the Discussion: “You’ve all heard the saying, ‘If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.’ Well, the same can be said for Iraq, ‘If you think reconstruction is expensive, try a failed state.” ~ Christine McNab

McNab: UNDP, needless to say, has a lot of work to do in Iraq; things look bad on the news, and they are in some places. However, reconstruction is progressing. Biggest concerns: Jobs, Water supply, Security, Banking system, Healthcare, Education, Legal Development. For example, there are 30,000 jobs in the oil fields in southern Iraq; however 3 million jobs are needed and it’s one of the most dangerous regions of Iraq, not to mention most Iraqis do not have the needed skills. She manages the multi-donor trust fund of $1.3 billion dollars from donors in the international community-all of which has been allocated over the years for reconstruction. The majority of U.S. funds have gone to humanitarian needs for Internally Displaced People (IDPs) and refugees seeking to return. As for security (a church attacked yesterday, 8 bombs went off in Baghdad this afternoon, etc.) it clearly remains a huge worry. UN officials try to blend into the civil service as much as possible, but they cannot conduct reconstruction work behind walls-the risks are real. The south is not safe for foreigners, but the north is (Kurdistan). McNab, from Sweden, stated, “It is heartwarming to go out traveling around with the American soldiers; many of whom are on their third or fourth tour. They tell me they were there when the fighting was intense back in 2003/2004 and now they want to be there to see the reconstruction happening. A soldier told me this right after he had been shot, but had been saved by his flak jacket.”
Her two prong approach to increasing safety for UN folks:
1. Printed and Online social media communication-many Iraqis do not understand the work the UN is doing and the help they are there to provide
2. Provide solutions to specific issues-one of which is safer transport for UN staff

Desrocher: The USG is working in almost every sector of Iraq to help bring it up to speed. One of the biggest concerns is building the capacity of the courts through a US project called Commercial Law Development which aims to train judges and court administrators on the best practices for legal and regulatory affairs-without a proper legal system, contracts and titles of ownership become worthless and businesses do not want to invest in a country/region where the laws are not upheld, particularly when it comes to enforcing contracts. Iraq has also passed its own laws internally to support contract laws. We have to remember that Iraq has been economically isolated since before the sanctions in the 90s-most large enterprises were state-owned, so private businesses are just beginning to take off and develop. Obviously, infrastructure has taken a major hit-not only roads and bridges, but basic healthcare and education. Many of the more educated Iraqis fled during the worst parts of the conflict. Agriculture is a huge part of the economy, or could be, but the approach is out-dated. The banking system is also just beginning to develop and link in to the international network.

Campbell: On Politics in Iraq- “The invasion was a bad idea, but it would be extremely irresponsible to have left Iraq until it is functioning like a “normal” country.” He stated that he was one of the first people into Iraq in 2003 and remembers the naiveté of foreigners--including himself-- that things would progress more quickly in the development arena.
Good news today: women and youth are participants in the political process-even if Iraqi men do not take it seriously; there are the required 25% female members of Parliament. Speaking of Parliament-oh yeah-it has been at an impasse for the past 7 months, much to the frustration of the Iraqi people. When the Parliament was working, it worked well-legislation was passed and decisions were made “unlike any other Arab Parliament where nothing gets done.” There are hundreds of political parties (maybe a good thing, maybe not) but people feel free to express themselves and vote for whomever they wish.

Bad news: The frustration is that those that are in office are perceived as self-centered politicians who do not have the Iraqi public’s best interests in mind (according to interviews by NDI). Parliamentarians tend to travel to neighboring countries to gain publicity and to prove their legitimacy-this creates a problem because there is no true head of state (the President is not perceived as such), so Parliamentarians feel they can speak for the Iraqi government. He mentioned twice that Nouri al-Malaki should have stepped aside when he was voted out, but has thrown off the democratic process by refusing to step down when the election was declared fair by all monitors.

Final Note: Concern for the Youth-ONLY 20% are able to study or work-the other 80% are a major concern. These young people are the future of Iraq, but they are uneducated and lack opportunities for experience. The UN is knocking on the doors of every major corporation planting itself in Iraq and asking them to create internships for young Iraqis. A great idea, but not enough.
And, so the work continues-

Women's Economic Empowerment in the Middle East

Center for A New America: Beyond Platitudes-

Women’s Economic Empowerment in the Middle East
By Debie Waggoner
Panelists: Fida Adely, Amjad Atallah, Doa’a Brahimi, Nadereh Chamlou, Fatima Irshaid
Special Guest: Cherie Blair, wife of former Prime Minister of the UK, Tony Blair
Moderated by Steve Clemons of New America

Steve Clemons began the discussion by saying, “It’s easy for DC-types to talk at 30,000 feet” about critical issues in the world, but many people on this panel have on-the-ground experiences. And he was right, especially when it came to his first speaker:

Fatima Irshaid, with Tomorrow’s Youth Organization, spoke about her field work in the Palestinian territory of Nablus. She discussed the process of how the organization began with focusing on early childhood education for refugees and then realized that the mothers were also in need of education. The women wanted to know more about nutrition, exercise, computers, and then asked for ways to earn a living. TYO has continued to expand its services to the women and children in the refugee camps. The major caveat for the women refugees who want to be involved with TYO is that it only accepts women into the program whose families are onboard. If a woman’s male guardian (husband, father, uncle, brother, etc.) does not want her attending classes that will give her computer skills or any other job skills, TYO does not try to assist the woman anyway. This makes sense, for logistical and probably for safety’s sake. The last thing a non-profit wants to do is stir up a hornet’s nest in a community where it is trying to help-but this laid the foundation for the core issue that was discussed at this event: evolving the mindset of men towards women in the Middle East.

Fida Adely, a professor at Georgetown, questioned the limits of the macro-economic analysis of labor and economic participation of women. She acknowledged that in many countries, women are heavily involved in the non-formal labor market (cleaning services, selling items out of her home or in a small market setting). Thus, the stats show that in many Middle Eastern/North Africa (MENA) states, such as Yemen, that women have very little economic participation; however, in reality, women do much more work than men in some of these countries. She also raised an excellent question: “How do women in the MENA region perceive themselves?” In many of these countries, women see it as a sign of prosperity when they do not have to work. This raises the point, that women’s economic empowerment is not simply being employed; it is having the power of decision-maker. When a woman not only has economic independence, but the freedom to make her own life choices, only then is she truly empowered.

Naderah Chamlou, Economist, stated that there were findings that women in MENA were held back more by marriage than by children. By this she meant that the act of getting married correlated with a lack of participation in the labor market and lack of economic independence, despite more women in MENA being highly educated. The younger generation was considerably more conservative about women’s issues than previous generations-a disturbing trend. One of three men were found to be opposed to married women working outside of the home and only one in ten women were opposed to the idea.

Special Guest, Cherie Blair put forth the possibility that the conservatism amongst young men could be due to the fact that young men were always entitled to jobs in most of the MENA region, whereas women have to work harder to breakthrough this cultural divide and prove themselves. The boys see the girls getting the highest grades (Women often receive the top grades in 90% of classes in MENA) and know that as women they will be a threat to what men perceive as jobs they are “entitled” to. Whenever people feel a perceived entitlement threatened, they of course, take steps to eliminate that threat, and one step could be that young men are reverting to increasingly conservative positions on women’s equality. She stated that while a formal declaration of women’s equality would be an enormous step forward, unless the law backs it up, it would do little good.

The sole man on the panel, Amjad Atallah, gets kudos for being the co-founder of Women for Women International, and for stating that, “Women have remained afterthoughts when it comes to politics, religion, and the economy in MENA societies. Societies survive not because of men out buying weapons, but because of women, who hold everything together during conflict and turmoil.” I would add, so as not to disparage those men who have gone out and fought to protect their families-without those who are willing to defend, there would be no societies left for the women to hold together. But I see Atallah’s point and especially agree that would seem to remain afterthoughts in MENA domestic policy.

Doa’a Brahimi concluded the pre-question speaking by adding that the countries in MENA should not be so easily lumped together-there are many different countries in the region-some with much more progressive women’s movements than others.

Summary and Final Thoughts: Men’s attitudes in the Middle East/North African region need to evolve, that was the conclusion. Right now, the general attitudes of men seem to embrace one of two backward thinking approaches: 1. The men run the show and the women need to remain in their traditional domestic roles. 2. Fine, let the women take advantage of other opportunities, as long as men are first provided for, their needs met, and the women do not get their opportunities before the men do.

My question is: what incentive do men in the MENA region have for supporting women’s economic empowerment and women’s equality? Why should they “evolve”? They are the dominant gender in that region and are accustomed to women serving them and obeying them. Who would want to give up that power? I think the women themselves will have to be the movers and shakers; the men will not evolve unless circumstances create an atmosphere where evolution is inevitable. Education will only do so much as the statistics have shown. The women have to unite and create a movement for their own empowerment.

Summary of YPFP’s Tools of the Trade: Starting and Running Foreign Policy Organizations

September 22, 2010
By Debie Waggoner

Panel: Olivier Kamanda-Founder of Foreign Policy Digest
David Burd-Co-Founder of Earth Aid
Saul Garlick-Founder of ThinkImpact

The discussion centered around how these three young men took their ideas and/or their friends’ ideas, developed them, and created organizations that have flourished. As moderator, Joshua Marcuse mentioned in his introduction segment: in addition to hearing why and how to start an FP organization, you will hear why you should not.
Kamanda’s advice: There is a risk whenever you put ideas out there that are not fully formulated-make sure you are willing to take that risk and to formulate your ideas as much as possible. Two types of people end up reading FPD: those who are already aware of and interested in FP issues and those who come across it almost by accident and realize that they are somehow connected to these issues/topics. Focus on empowering people-give them information that will help them understand what is happening and make decisions on what to support and what not to support. Pay attention to the people you are serving (your audience) and the people you have working for you. Manage relationships. Put your thoughts on paper and continually revise your ideas. Figure out what you can handle and what you will need others to handle. Understand the legal status of your organization and marketing. And, he said, the biggest thing he did not realize he was neglecting when he started out: MONEY. Volunteers are great, but a lot more accountability comes into play when people are receiving a pay check.
And, identify what you are not willing to compromise on. And don’t be afraid to approach “big names”. FPD got the CEO of Google to make a promotional statement for FPD. It never hurts to ask.
Favorite quote: “When you ask for money, you get advice. When you ask for advice, you get money.”

Burd: Earth Aid is an online tool that provides incentives and rewards for each family to make their home more energy efficient. Biggest hurdle-getting the message out. You need to get the media’s attention (and not in a Paris Hilton sort of way). Use the partnerships that you build along the way and be sure to cater to people’s self-interest. If you can find a way to meet the desires of people, whether it’s those who want to be involved in making the world a better place or those wanting to make a buck, know how you can cater to those interests. The best part about being a young person running a young organization is that you are more open to new ideas. Older orgs tend to stop doing that-the power of inertia is a strong force and a lot of orgs get stuck in the rut. Be open to new ideas and yet be careful that you stay close to your vision. People will invest in you more than your idea-so be articulate and know your business model.

Garlick: Sometimes starting something just takes doing it. At some point, I just said, F*** it. I’m doing this! There is room out there for new ideas. A lot of young people in America do not have a cause, but we know that we cannot ignore the rest of the world. When I was in South Africa, I realized schools were needed. I raised $10,000 for a new school; then, I went back a few years later and discovered it was in disrepair. I realized I couldn’t just build a school and figure I had helped the world; I got more involved. I lived in the rural villages in South Africa and I started seeing that in a village of 3,000 with a 30% HIV/AIDS rate, there were funerals every week. I saw teachers neglecting the schools that were built and instead of teaching, they were sitting outside drinking tea all day. I saw women marginalized and knew that when that happened, her family was going to suffer because we all know that women give back to their families more than men.

Garlick began taking college students to South Africa to live in these villages, then create a solid plan for development, and then assists them with implementation.

So: have a vision and refer to it every day. It may be grand, but don’t forget the really small things that could make a big difference. Be Fearless-you will screw up. You will fail, sometimes every day for a while. Be Determined.
Ignorance hindered me. Listen to people around you. If you aren’t listening, you may do more harm than good.
For those just starting out: Raise money first. Before you create a website. Go in with nothing but your ideas and strategies-you don’t need a fancy powerpoint. Spend a year raising money, it will save you seven. When you are struggling with raising $2,000 a month to cover expenses, and suddenly that number jumps to $20,000 a month, you have to be ready for that.

For more on each organization:

http://www.foreignpolicydigest.org/

http://www.thinkimpact.org/

http://www.earthaid.net

http://www.ypfp.org/

The Project on Middle East Democracy presented a panel discussion on September 13, 2010 entitled: Is Turkey Becoming Less Democratic?

The panelists:
Gönül Tol: Executive Director, Center for Turkish Studies, Middle East Institute
Daniel Brumberg: Director, Muslim World Initiative, U.S. Institute of Peace and associate professor at Georgetown University
W. Robert Pearson: former U.S. Ambassador to Turkey; President, International Research and Exchanges Board

Tol: Essentially stated that to question whether Turkey is becoming less democratic was to take the “simplistic” view of the situation. She urged the audience to consider how far Turkey has come and how much the dynamics have changed; for example, in the 1990s, Turkey’s foreign policy was inextricably tied to its security concerns: the two threats it had at the time were the Kurds and Iran and Syria’s nuclear weapons programs. Therefore, Turkey formed an alliance with Israel to balance out the region’s dynamics. These dynamics have since changed and Turkey no longer sees Iran or Syria as a major threat, although it is still grappling with the Kurdish issue. Thus, Tol, stated, that “Israel has lost its importance to Turkey and Turkey can afford to lose Israel now.” Its foreign policy is no longer security oriented, but focused on trade and economics. In fact, Iran and Syria are becoming important trading partners with Turkey, especially Iran. (Turkey reportedly gets 30% of its oil from Iran.) She pointed out that approximately 61% of the population who voted in yesterday’s referendum which extended the government’s powers over the judiciary, voted in support of the referendum. She stated that “what Turkey needs right now is an impartial judiciary (which has not been the case), not necessarily an independent judiciary.” (These two would seem to go hand-in-hand; how can a judiciary be impartial if it is not independent, i.e., not at the whims of any branch of government or other influence?) And the fact that there has been no outcry of fraudulent voting, would make one think that democracy is alive and well in Turkey.

However, Tol concluded, that Turkey still has a ways to go when it comes to respecting minority rights and that while Prime Minister Erdoğan has harshly criticized Israel for human rights violations, he has said nothing about human rights violations in Sudan or Iran. She stated that he will be held accountable next year in the elections for his failings. Finally, Turkey in general “shares most of the West’s goals for the region, including preventing nuclear weapons races, finding peace between Israel and Palestine, and eliminating Al-Qaeda.”

Brumberg then took the floor and focused primarily on the three models of governments in the Middle East: 1. Total-autocracy, as seen in Tunisia and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, which means there is one party and none other. 2. Liberalized Autocracies: the majority of the region’s states fall under this category, elections tend to include all groups, but the same ruling party tends to remain in power 3.Liberalized Democracy: one side is always engineering elections, usually with the support of the military and possibly the judiciary (I found these categorizations rather confusing and not really central to the discussion.)

Brumberg’s main question was whether these amendments would truly prove to be beneficial to society or simply give the central government more power. He pointed out that Erdoğan has been accused of harassing and even closing large independent media outlets. Thus, despite the fact that a majority voted for the referendum, will that majority also undermine the rights of minorities?

Pearson: Every inch the diplomat, he brought some resounding wisdom and humor to the situation. He first congratulated Turkey’s national basketball team on their win yesterday, which he says, takes precedence over any referendum in Turkey, at least for the day. Then he stated, “Let’s be careful when we try to call ourselves experts on Turkey-this is not true unless you are Turkish-but let’s discuss it as Americans.” He compared American observations of what has been happening in Turkey to the “seminal shift in American politics” that occurred under Andrew Jackson and stated that he had no doubt “the Turks will solve their problems.” He felt a good way to view Turkey was through the words of a young Turkish woman he met who told him she was “Turkish by birth, Asian by culture, European by education.”
Interestingly, Pearson also stated that there is a “deep anti-Americanism in Turkey, as well as anti-Semitism” that concerns him. I found this a little startling, as I spent a week traveling around Turkey alone (just a week, I know) this summer and not once did I see, hear, or read anything that appeared even remotely anti-American (although I do not read or speak Turkish, so perhaps I lived in ignorant bliss that entire week). Of course, I would take the Ambassador’s word for it over my own experiences, seeing as he lived there for quite some time. I just do not believe that it is blatant ant-Americanism. His example of anti-Americanism was that the Turks cheered for Iran rather than the U.S. in the world basketball game between the two…he finished that anecdote by stating “It’s ok to be democratic and hate the U.S., but it is a certain amount of hypocrisy.”
Finally, he stated that it would be good for an opposition party to stay involved in Turkish politics. If human rights are heading south and the government is going to begin reducing citizen’s rights, then the opposition group that fails to block it will take the blame. (Anyone want to sign up?)

The overall consensus: nothing in the referendum election process or its substance was un-democratic. Just keep an eye on those Turks.

Organization of America States: Policy Roundtable on the Millennium Development Goals for the Region

by Debie Waggoner September 8, 2010

(The MDGs are listed at the end of this summary.)

Moderators: Jose Miguel Insulza: OAS Secretary General and Irene Klinger, OAS Director of the Dept. of International Affairs

Presenters: (Primary) Alicia Bárcena, Executive Secretary of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Assisted by Heraldo Muňoz of the UN Development Programme and Dr. Juan Manuel Sotelo of Partnerships of the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO).

Additional remarks by Arturo Valenzuela, Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs.

SUMMARY of Presentation:

First of all, the presentation of the progress that LAC and the Caribbean have made on the MDGs was brief considering the amount of information that was gathered and analyzed. There is an inch-thick report that goes into much greater detail. Be aware that this information was collected from over 18 different agencies. The overall feeling from the presenters is that LAC has made solid progress, with the caveat, of course, that the data which was gathered is primarily from the years 2000-2008 (what the OAS refers to as the “Bonanza Period” due to the 4-5% growth experienced in much of the LAC), so it may not reflect any of the effects of the global financial crisis. This is important to note, since a lot may have changed in the past two years depending on how badly a particular country’s economy tanked. Not to be negative, but keep all of these statistics in mind when we hear stories from those who are currently living in LAC and have a very different reality from two years ago. That said, here is the run-down of what the OAS felt was important in this report.

Poverty Reduction: considered the most important overarching goal to combat the 8 MDGs.
The MDG goal is a 50% reduction in poverty by 2015. In the period referred to above, LAC saw an 11% decrease in poverty due to growth, employment, and the shift in demographics (i.e. people are having fewer children). Jamaica was credited with the greatest decrease in poverty and the Caribbean was, overall, doing better than the rest of LAC. Brazil, Chile and Peru have already reached their poverty reduction goals.

The Gini Index (which measures economic inequality-the lower the number, the more economic equality exists, for more info: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2172.html) showed that economic equality increased in Brazil, Chile, Bolivia, and Argentina.

Hunger: Malnutrition and Chronic Malnutrition
Progress has been made in battling malnutrition; however, the market forces have not helped due to the financial crisis. There is a surplus of food in LAC, but the prices are often too high for families to buy quality, nutritional foods.


Education: the OAS proposes a 5 year, $59 million plan to get LAC countries up to speed in the education sector. Whether or not this will happen, is a big question. Records for primary schools are good, but the quality of the education is concerning. According to Ms. Bárcena, many students in secondary education drop out and the number one reason is that they are bored. They think they are smarter than the teachers and can learn more from the internet than from their educators. She did not address what types of qualifications teachers are expected to have (do they need a college degree in most of the LAC?) or what is being suggested as a solution.

Gender Equality: The massive amounts of unemployed youth are a major concern in the OAS. Young women have a 52% unemployment rate in LAC. Many youths are not working and not studying (called ninis-doing nothing). Overall youth unemployment is 20-30% in some countries and many have no social protections (unemployment benefits, healthcare, food-stamps, etc.)
Ms. Bárcena mentioned 3 pillars to achieve autonomy for women: 1. Education (women are making great strides towards improving their education in some of the LAC) 2. Salary Equality-most women make 20% less than men doing the same job. 3. Reproductive/Physical Autonomy: there is a need to improve information on birth control, maternal health, combating adolescent pregnancies, and freeing women from the cultural image that women should stay at home and raise babies rather than seeking means to support themselves financially.

Child Mortality: not specifically addressed, but infant mortality was mentioned. LAC has seen a 52 percent drop in infant mortality. The goal is a 2/3 drop, so they are well on their way to achieving this one.

Maternal Health-addressed with Gender Equality

HIV/AIDS: OAS only noted that there had been “many improvements” in this area, particularly in the availability of anti-retroviral drugs and education on protected sex.

Environmental Sustainability: OAS did not seem to have any solid data on this and admitted that data had been hard to collect. However, they did come up with a few stats such as the fact that in 2000, LAC was responsible for more than 80,000 tons of ozone-harming pollution per annum and by 2008 that had been reduced to 7,000 tons. Deforestation is, not surprisingly, a major concern since LAC is being deforested at twice the rate of any other region of the world. Drinking water and sanitation have vastly improved in most of the LAC, with the significant exception of the rural areas which remain very badly off. Also of major concern is that 110 million people live in slums or shanty-towns; this is 36% of the LAC population. No headway has been made in reducing the number of people living in slums-which is interesting considering the high priority placed on poverty reduction.

Global Partnership for Development:
Obviously, many LAC have benefited from foreign aid; but the greatest source of development has been the $138 Billion in FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) and the $60 billion that floods into the region from remittances. Many LAC have been designated “Middle Income” countries and are no longer receiving as much foreign aid and no longer receive special status as trading partners. The report states that for now, trade is not enough; the FDI does the most to help economic growth. Interestingly, the report mentions that Bolivia has the greatest amount of reserves in the region-which really surprised me.

Conclusion: Looking better, but a lot more needs to be done.
Two things were heavily emphasized at the conclusion of the presentation, and throughout it as well.
Inequality-this word was mentioned numerous times and seems to be the obsession of the OAS. There are very high concentrations of wealth that the OAS would like to see more evenly distributed. No one went into details about how they envisioned greater equality, other than the second heavily emphasized point:
Institutionalizing public policies-the vague answer to reducing inequality was for LAC governments to create infrastructure that included institutions responsible for maintaining sound and consistent public polices, rather than leaving this to governments that change every few years. Increased transparency is a must and the OAS believes people across the region are demanding it. The political will has to be mustered to make these improvements, but of course, in reality, that means fighting corruption and raising taxes.


Final Note: Haiti was not included in this report-it is in extreme debt, is recovering from a horrible disaster, and is not expected to meet any of the MDGs.



What are the Millennium Development Goals?
*From http://www.undp.org/mdg/basics.shtml

The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) are the most broadly supported, comprehensive and specific development goals the world has ever agreed upon. These eight time-bound goals provide concrete, numerical benchmarks for tackling extreme poverty in its many dimensions. They include goals and targets on income poverty, hunger, maternal and child mortality, disease, inadequate shelter, gender inequality, environmental degradation and the Global Partnership for Development.
Adopted by world leaders in the year 2000 and set to be achieved by 2015, the MDGs are both global and local, tailored by each country to suit specific development needs. They provide a framework for the entire international community to work together towards a common end ?making sure that human development reaches everyone, everywhere. If these goals are achieved, world poverty will be cut by half, tens of millions of lives will be saved, and billions more people will have the opportunity to benefit from the global economy. The eight MDGs break down into 21 quantifiable targets that are measured by 60 indicators.
· Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
· Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education
· Goal 3: Promote gender equality and empower women
· Goal 4: Reduce child mortality
· Goal 5: Improve maternal health
· Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases
· Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability
· Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development

Two Middle East Scholars Discuss: Iran After the Sanctions: What Next?

The first speaker, Mr. Michael Singh discussed the argument that Regional players in the Middle East/Persian Gulf are going to be key in working with Iran due to the mistrust Iran has with the West. He quickly followed that statement noting his personal skepticism that Iran’s neighbors will probably be just as lacking in influence as the West because it appears that Iran’s attention is on the West and has little regard for its neighbors.
Two basic statements that Singh laid out that the international community agrees on: Iran is undoubtedly seeking nuclear weapons; and a nuclear armed Iran is a threat to the region and to the world. Both of these statements have been made by the past few U.S. Presidents as well as countless policy experts. The U.S in cooperation with other nations has been using the characteristic carrot-and-stick approach. The carrot, to Singh, is the U.S. stating that Iran would benefit from greater regional cooperation if it gave up its aggressive behavior and nuclear weapon-seeking. The stick is just the opposite: continued lack of cooperation in the region and continual isolation from the world. Sanctions are clearly part of the stick.
Singh went on to state that Iran and other countries in the region are well aware of their own best interests and while the U.S. and others in the West have expressed that it would be in Iran and the region’s best interests if Iran ceased working to obtain nuclear weapons, Iran has just the opposite feeling. With U.S. troops already stationed strategically close to its borders in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan and a consistent American policy that military action remains on the table, combined with the major upheaval last year after the fraudulent Iranian election, the Iranian regime is utterly apprehensive and sees the nuclear weapon as, really, their only security answer to perceived U.S./Western threats. Thus, nuclear weapons fit the Iranian regime’s security fears. Singh mentioned that Iran wants to join the nuclear club and its leaders have already publicly referred to Iran as a nuclear state and that it’s counting on the international community forgiving or adapting to Iran having nuclear weapons without much fuss; case in point, Pakistan.
The last thing this regime wants to do is sit down at the table-it rebuffed Obama’s (albeit brief) attempt at diplomacy last year. And, it has consistently preached against the West for decades. So, Singh proposed that the West start focusing on using time against the Iranian regime—since it is loath to use military might, although he acknowledged that it must be kept on the table. The past 7 years have been an example of impeding and delaying Iran’s nuclear program and the current administration is stepping up that tactic. The latest sanctions are meant to keep Iran on its back foot and give the U.S. a chance to cripple Iran’s economy while building regional cohesion. One of Iran’s biggest economic outputs-oil-is quickly depleting and the regime’s “gross economic mismanagement” has only caused further economic distress.
Finally, Singh stated that the U.S. should continue to support human rights and democracy within Iran in order to remain connected to the cause of many of the Iranian people.
Mr. Trita Parsi then took the floor and began with addressing the question: What went wrong in Iran last year? Just after Obama extended diplomatic gestures and a few letters were exchanged, fraudulent elections occurred and Iran was thrown into internal chaos for several months. Although many in the West admired the protestors marching for democracy and freedom, this chaotic time, said Parsi, was actually the worst thing that could have happened for U.S.-Iran policy. The regime felt threatened not only from without, but also from within and took drastic, murderous action to ensure its own longevity. Iran shrank from engaging with the West and the distrust of the West only increased. He stated that “in the absence of trust and confidence, no matter what the mutual benefits may be for two countries to get along, it is incredibly difficult to get them to sit down together and agree on anything.” He stated that the imminent sanctions have only increased Iran’s talk about taking military action. The international community has expressed exhaustion with the Iranian regime and thus, political will has faltered. Parsi argued for convincing Iran rather than coercing Iran; yet, he acknowledged that it is impossible to convince anyone if there is no trust. Thus, he urged that diplomacy continue in the form of promoting human rights in Iran. Rather than focusing on the nuclear issue, the West should turn to human rights issues, a topic much more important to and welcomed by the Iranian people and who have shown they are ready for regime change. Finally, he noted that because of massive distrust on both sides, both sides are left to guess what the final intentions and end goals are: Iran and the U.S./West have never stated what specifically they want in an agreement.

Foreign Policy Event Links

I hope to add more links in the future, but this is a good start:

-American University, School of International Service: http://www.american.edu/sis/calendar/?h=89
-Brookings: http://www.brookings.edu/events.aspx

-Carnegie Endowment for International Peace-by invitation only
-Cato Institute: http://www.cato.org/events/calendar.html
-Conflict Solutions International: http://www.csiorg.org
-Council on Foreign Relations-doesn't do events, but great resource
-Georgetown University, Institute for the Study of International Migration: http://events.georgetown.edu/events/index.cfm?Action=List&CalendarID=133
-Georgetown University, Public Policy Institute: http://events.georgetown.edu/events/index.cfm?Action=List&CalendarID=12
-George Washington University, Elliott School of International Affairs: http://www.elliottschool.org/events/calendar.cfm
-Humpty Dumpty Institute: by invitation only http://www.thehdi.org/special-programs/index.shtml
-International Republican Institute:http://www.iri.org/news-events-press-center
-Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies: http://apps.sais-jhu.edu/insider/this_week_calendar.php?monthsahead=0
-Meridian International: http://www.meridian.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6&Itemid=8
-Middle East Institute: http://www.mei.edu/Events.aspx
-National Democratic Institute: http://www.ndi.org/events
-U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations: http://foreign.senate.gov/hearings/
-United States Institute of Peace: http://www.usip.org/events
-World Learning: http://www.worldlearning.org/14.htm

United States Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice

“What Goes On in Other Countries Affects Americans” ~ UN Ambassador Susan Rice

Conference Call with United States Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice on July 28, 2010.

Thanks to Young Professionals in Foreign Policy (www.ypfp.org), I was able to be a part of this conference call in which Ambassador Rice discussed the importance of public service and the qualities she looks for when hiring a team member before taking a few questions from YPFP members.

Rice began by stating that she recognized the enormous challenge presented by public service, but also the “amazing privilege” that such service presents. For all of us young and enthusiastic foreign policy geeks, she said this new generation will be focused on economics and a web of security issues unknown to her and her predecessors.

One comment that I greatly appreciated was Rice’s statement that “what goes on in other countries affects Americans”. I wish each of us really understood this. I also would like to point out, for those billions of non-Americans in the world-what goes on in some of the most remote places on earth trickles back and affects you and I in ways we often never realize. This is part of the reason why I started this blog-no country is isolated-globalization has removed that possibility.

I hope to delve further into this in later posts…

Now for the meat and potatoes of the call:

If you are considering a position with the U.N., Rice is looking for these qualities, in addition to relevant skills and expertise:

· People who have spent “quality time overseas, either lived or served” outside of the U.S.

· Fluency in Languages-yes, plural-although fluency in one language outside of English is great, those who can speak 2 or more other than English will get her staff’s attention.

If the Europeans can master 5 languages in a lifetime, why can’t we?

· Flexibility-adapt and adjust to whatever is thrown at you

· Be a good writer! She heavily emphasized that she will not waste time trying to train an otherwise great candidate how to write well and be creative.

· A Selfless Teamplayer-if you don’t get this figured out, you will have a hard time being successful anywhere

When asked if there was one topic she recommended young people be conversant in, her answer was:

“The language of Money and Budgets. You need to be able to understand how budgets work and be able to marshal resources. You’d be surprised how rare that knowledge is in government.”

And finally, her thoughts on family and still being dedicated to a high profile position:

“If you want to start a family, don’t wait until you think it’s the perfect time-that perfect time may never come. There’s always something professional you want to get done, but you will find the rewards outweigh the stresses. Having a partner ready and willing to share and trade-off with you is very important. And, being there for your family and loved ones should always top the priority list: you will only regret not being there. There is always someone who can back-stop you at work temporarily, but no one else can be that sister/brother/daughter/son.

One Last Note, since the Office of Presidential Personnel also joined the call.

If you are interested in joining the Obama Administration, be sure to submit your resume to the link on www.whitehouse.gov. This is not for jobs inside the White House, but for political appointments. You do not have to have campaign experience, (although that helps), but be sure to be specific when listing your qualifications. The top five areas of expertise that the OPP is looking for

1. Economics

2. Energy & Environment

3. Domestic Issues

4. National Security Council

5. Boards and Commissions

Kosovo

Update from Kosovo: July 27, 2010

A recent brownbag lunch with an American colleague who works in a field office in Kosovo enlightened our little group with his experiences living and working in and around Pristina for the past 1 ½ years.
I took notes and wanted to share them and my insights.

For those who are not familiar with Kosovo: Roughly 2 million people live in this land-locked region that has been at the center of international attention off and on since the former Yugoslavia broke apart in the early 1990s. Kosovo is home to ethnic Albanians who are predominantly Muslim. Also living in this area are ethnic Serbs who are predominantly Orthodox. Serbia administered control over Kosovo when Yugoslavia broke apart; then in 2009, the ethnic Albanian majority in Kosovo declared independence from Serbia. Serbia, Russia and nearly half of the rest of the nations of the world have yet to recognize Kosovo as a legitimate nation-state which adds to the complexity of its government situation and its lack of economic activity.

With that, here is a brief update on what you need to know about Kosovo:
Recognition or No Recognition-What’s the Big Deal?
Despite last week’s ruling by the International Court of Justice which decided that Kosovo’s Declaration of Independence was legal, Kosovo is still not recognized by almost half of the world’s nations. It is terribly inconvenient and economically backwards not to be universally recognized as an independent and sovereign state by some of the major world powers. For example, Kosovo is unable to obtain a postal code-which means many countries in the world refuse to send mail or packages anywhere with a “Kosovo” address. If you try to purchase a book on Amazon, there is no drop-down for “Kosovo.” Kosovo passports are not recognized by nearly half of the world’s countries. Kosovo has no designated country-code for international phone calls; currently, it is renting Monaco’s country code. For the majority of people living in the least developed countries, these basic essentials are available-but not to those living in Kosovo.

Separation is Leading to a Serious Lack of Communication-Serbian enclaves in Kosovo have removed themselves almost entirely from the society of ethnic Albanians (called Kosovars) with separate schools that teach only Serbian and possibly English. The Kosovars have in turn begun growing up learning only Albanian and possibly English; however, very few Albanians or Serbs learn English or any other “neutral” language. These days, most people under the age of 30 speak only their ethnic language. Most Albanians over age 30 can speak Serbian, but are not often with Serbs since their communities have become so divided. This is potentially very dangerous since the two ethnicities are becoming mature adults who have no idea how to communicate with a large portion of their fellow “citizens.”

Economic Outlook: Look Out!
Bleak. That is the simplest way to put it. Kosovo’s population (no census has been taken in years, so numbers are hard to come by) is estimated at 60% youth (under the age of 32) and unemployment is estimated at 50% on a good day. Although the international community has turned its focus from security and ensuring the safety of both ethnic groups to the economy and education, the big question now is whether the tipping point will be reached before these foreign aid projects can be fully implemented. Hundreds of thousands of angry youths with nothing to do and less than bright future prospects equates to the perfect recipe for violence, drug and human trafficking, high suicide rates, and eventually a failed state before it was even given a chance to be a state. Kosovo needs a solid governing body-something the EU has tried to take on-and an education system that gives youths the opportunities to advance from poverty and chaos to a stable life.

For further reading on the International Court of Justice’s ruling on the Legality of Kosovo’s Declaration of Independence, check out this link: http://www.usip.org/resources/the-icj-and-kosovo-independence

Comments welcome!