USIP: MORE THAN ‘SHIITES’ AND ‘SUNNIS’:POST-SECARIAN STRATEGY IN IRAQ
On March 3, 2009, USIP hosted Jan Egeland, Director of the, NUPI and Reidar Visser, Research Fellow at NUPI, to present the findings of his report, “More than ‘Shiites’ and ‘Sunnis’: How a Post-Sectarian Strategy Can Change the Logic and Facilitate Sustainable Political Reform in Iraq.” Sam Parker, Iraq Program Officer at USIP, offered a response on the paper.
Iraqi society has a rich history of coexistence between Sunnis and Shi’a.US policy in post-2003 Iraq created, or otherwise deepened, division among Iraq’s various communities — first by invading Iraq with a misguided vision of Iraqi society, framing the evolving conflict through an ethno-sectarian paradigm, and finally pursuing a reconciliation strategy based on the fulfillment of communitarian quotas. This process yielded political gains to opportunistic leaderships by bolstering the appeal of communitarian interests and polarizing an otherwise coexistent population. The Iranian government, whose interest lies in preventing a nonsectarian Iraq, has ultimately benefited from American missteps. The US government and international community must now work to reverse this trend, in order to facilitate a timely and unproblematic withdrawal of US forces.
Foremost among the paper’s eighteen recommendations is that the US government should publicly acknowledge the negative consequences of its policies to date and clarify its future aims in Iraq. Other specific recommendations include: tying further international development assistance and withdrawal of US troops to the completion of a revised or new constitution; offering campaign assistance to political parties running on non-sectarian platforms; opening bilateral US-Iran negotiations with intentional disregard to Iran’s role in Iraq, so as to downplay this issue; guaranteeing the KRG internationally recognized autonomy; and discouraging foreign investment in the oil sector in Kurdistan until its status is agreed upon.
Click here for audio from the event and the full executive summary
Question to the Blogosphere: Now that the United States is scaling back its involvement in Iraq, do you think that a unified Iraqi identity can emerge again? Is the U.S. solely do blame for the fracturing of Iraqi society, or was Saddam’s Ba’athist party also responsible? What do you think the role of Iran should be in Iraq? Should the United States be involved in Iraqi politics?
BBC NEWS: TERMS SET FOR COLOMBIA FARC TALKS
Colombia’s President Alvaro Uribe has said he is ready to hold peace talks with Colombia’s Farc rebels, but that strict conditions would have to be met. Farc dropped its demand for a demilitarised area to be set up as a precondition for talks on a swap of rebel hostages for prisoners.
Farc has launched a new offensive, including a campaign of bomb attacks in cities, since suffering a series of defeats in 2008 – though it has recently suggested it may be willing to pursue “political alternatives”. The government, meanwhile, has been pursuing a strategy of pressuring individual rebel units into abandoning the 45-year civil conflict rather than engaging in high-level talks with the leadership.
Question to the Blogosphere: Do you think this round of talks will be more successful than previous attempts to release hostages? Is there a trade off between the protection of human rights and dealing effectively with extremists? How has Farc changed over time and do we have to wait until the conflict is ripe for negotiations, when the groups are ready to negotiate, to start building common ground?
‘THE TRAVELLER WITHIN’ BLOG: CELEBRATING 30 YEARS OF ‘PEACE’: ON EGYPT’S NATIONAL SCHIZOPHRENIA TOWARDS ISRAEL
In his latest blog post, Mo-ha-med reflects on the thirtieth anniversary of the Egypt-Israel peace agreement, summarizing current attitudes in Egypt as economic and political accords, smiling handshakes on the one hand, with constant expressions of dislike, defiance and distrust on the other. While Israelis may drive freely into the Sinai and can easily obtain a visa to the rest of the country, Egyptians visiting Israel are heavily discouraged by their own authorities, and scorned at upon their return.
In terms of interests, two main reasons compel Egypt to maintain friendly relations with Israel. The first is that Egypt simply cannot afford to have a troubled north-eastern border – more so than it currently is. Nor can it afford to engage in diplomatic hostilities, let along military skirmishes with Israel: they’d be in Cairo by tea-time.
The second is the very consequential financial incentive – bribe, really – that Egypt receives from the Americans to maintain its peace treaty, making it the second largest recipient of Washington’s largesse after Israel.
Question to the Blogosphere: What do you think Egypt’s relationship with Israel should look like? Can the economic interdependence of these two countries lead to more social peace in the future? What do you think will happen to Israeli-Egyptian relations after Mubarak leaves power? What should the role of the U.S. be in facilitating relations between Israel and Egypt? Are the connections between the two countries made weak because of prejudices and mistrust on both sides?
MERCOPRESS: ARAB LEAGUE, SOUTH AMERICAN SUMMIT LOOKS FOR POLITICAL COMMON GROUND
Arab League and South American countries opened Tuesday their second summit with the purpose of boosting trade and cooperation. The idea of regular meetings between the 22 members of the Arab League and 12 South American countries was born in Brasilia in 2005, sponsored by Brazilian president Lula da Silva.
The purpose of the regular summits which includes government officials and business representatives is not only closer trade links, possibly some form of association, but also political, with strong cooperation in the international arena, according to Brazilian sources. Precisely in the four years since its launching Brazil has seen trade with Arab countries zoom from 8 billion US dollars in 2004 to 20.2 billion in 2008. The summit takes place a day after the Arab League’s meeting to address the recent conflict of Gaza, which has divided opinions.
The two regions are looking also to expand ties at the people level. The Arab League estimates that between 10 and 15% of the population of South America is of Arab origin, seven million in Brazil alone.
Question to the Blogosphere: The summit between the Arab League and the South American states has increased trade between the two regions, but has it hurt South America’s ability to trade with the United States, one of their main trade partners? Reaching common ground appears to have many financial advantages, but could increased interactions between the two different regions increase tensions between their differing cultures? What is the status of the Arab minorities in South America? Do you think the fact that this meeting took place around the same time as the inter-Arab meetings in Doha made it have less of an impact? What are the areas of common ground between Latin America and the Middle East?
THE BOSTON GLOBE: SEARCH FOR COMMON GROUND AT THE G20 SUMMIT
On the even of the G-20 economic summit in London, Obama is meeting one-on-one with allies and potential enemies alike, including Russian President Dmitri A. Medvedev, whom he will meet again in Moscow to reach agreement on cutting nuclear weapons stockpiles before an existing treaty expires at the end of the year. He also met with Chinese President Hu Jintao to seek more cooperation on security and the economy, including a new dialogue.
“I came here to put forward our ideas, but I also came here to listen, and not to lecture,” Obama said in a joint press conference with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. “Having said that, we must not miss an opportunity to lead. To confront a crisis that knows no borders, we have a responsibility to coordinate our actions and to focus on common ground, not on our occasional differences. If we do, I believe we can make enormous progress.”
Question to the Blogosphere: Do you think the G20 should meet more than it currently does per year? What common ground can be established between different economies on what is the best course of action is to overcome the global financial crisis? For example, do some countries have an interest in the failure of others–arethere advantages to this for some countries competing for power? Could the new relationships forged between disparate countries be used to resolve other issues between countries?
AL JAZEERA: ARAB LEADERS SEEK COMMON GROUND
Arab leaders have begun talks in Doha, the Qatari capital, in a bid to find a common approach towards key issues confronting the Middle East, including a common approach towards Israel’s new government, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the global financial crisis and the issuing of an international arrest warrant for Omar al-Bashir, the Sudanese president.
Addressing the opening session, Ban Ki-Moon, the UN secretary-general, urged Israel to freeze its building of settlements in the occupied West Bank. Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, who attended the conference despite the warrant for his arrest on charges of war crimes by the ICC, defended himself in his speech and also urged support for the Palestinians. While seventeen heads of state are attending the two-day gathering, more than initially expected, there were been some notable abstentions, including Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak.
Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, also used the opportunity to hit out at Israel, saying “there is no peace partner for Arabs in Israel”.
Question to the Blogosphere: Do you think that these series of meeting among Arab leaders will lead to useful policies for the many serious issues in the Middle East, or will the absence of important leaders like Mubarak doom the meetings to failure? Do you think that these meetings will help bring peace to the Middle East, or solidify the parties’ oppositions to one another? That is, will the meeting increase animosity between the Arabs and their Israeli neighbors? Does have al-Bashir at the conference delegitimize these efforts in the eyes of the international community?
