Diplomacy & Crisis News

The United Nations Security Council today called on all of Guinea-Bissau’s political leadership to resume dialogue in order to work together in the governance of the country as it emerges from previous periods of instability.

(Own report) - Germany is significantly responsible for helping create the conditions causing tens of thousands to flee from Kosovo. This has been confirmed by an analysis of the development that seceded territory has taken since NATO's 1999 aggression, in which Germany had played a leading role. Prominent German politicians have also played leading roles in establishing Kosovo's subsequent occupation, helping to put the commanders and combatants of the mafia-type Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) militia into power in Priština. They created social conditions that have drawn sharp internationally criticism. In 2012, the European Court of Auditors (ECA) reported that organized crime continues at "high levels" in Kosovo. The Council of Europe even discerns some of the highest-ranking politicians, including a long-standing prime minister, as being members of the Mafia. Poverty is rampant. After 16 years of NATO and EU occupation, around one-sixth of the children suffer from stunted growth due to malnutrition. Germany has played an important role in organizing the occupation. If it were not for cash transfers refugees send home, many Kosovo families would not be able to survive. In the first semester of 2015 alone, more than 28,600 found themselves forced to apply for refugee status in Germany - with little chance of success. Berlin is now seeking more rapid ways for their deportation.

The military tide has turned against Huthi fighters in Yemen. Emboldened by recent gains, the Saudi-led coalition has started to push into the centre of the country from Aden, the southern port city taken in mid-July, and may even attempt to capture the capital, Sanaa, further north. To avoid a new and potentially more deadly phase of conflict, the Huthis should honour the concessions they made through UN mediation efforts in Muscat on 8-9 August, including among others a militia withdrawal from cities in accordance with Security Council Resolution 2216 (14 April). In turn, their opponents should accept a compromise that produces an immediate ceasefire, negotiations over the details of an orderly withdrawal of militias from cities and a return to a Yemeni political process to settle outstanding questions.

Disintegrating states and societies, decades of misrule, deepening sectarian polarization, dissolving borders, proliferating non-state actors, expanding civil wars, and a set of near-catastrophic humanitarian crises: The dynamics tearing up the Middle East and North Africa are terrifying enough.

Photo Credit: U.S. Army Africa

Skepticism over vaccines isn’t just an American problem anymore.

As Africa celebrates one year of being polio free, renewed controversy over the polio vaccination efforts in Kenya may threaten to push back that milestone.

Last week, the Kenyan Conference of Catholic Bishops announced its intention to boycott the World Health Organization’s (WHO) polio vaccination campaign until authorities verify the vaccine will have no sterilization effects. Those skeptical of the vaccine’s effect on fertility claim it may be laced with sterilizing elements — namely beta human chorionic gonadotropin (beta-hCG), a chemical produced during pregnancy that is claimed to be used to sterilize women — and demanded the drug be tested independently.

The Catholic Church in Kenya’s skepticism of vaccines is nothing new. In 1995, the WHO proposed a similar campaign to vaccinate against tetanus. Kenya’s Catholic bishops protested, citing concerns over the presence of beta-hCG, and the WHO gave up on the campaign.

Nearly two decades later, the debate over the WHO and UNICEF’s joint vaccine program came to the fore yet again. The program sought to inoculate newborns against a severe form of tetanus by targeting women of reproductive age (15–49). In a statement released in November 2014, the Catholic Health Commission of Kenya and the Kenya Conference of Catholic bishops asserted they now have proof these vaccinations contained beta-hCG.

Public health officials have responded to these accusations by raising two points. Even if beta-hCG is there in trace amounts — which it shouldn’t be — the bishop’s own report has found it’s not at levels high enough to cause permanent damage a woman’s reproductive health. As James Elder, a spokesman for UNICEF, told the Washington Post in November 2014, its presence would be a result of “extremely rare contamination,” not some secret depopulation program.

Alternatively, these tests could have come up with a false positive. In a 1995 article detailing the tetanus vaccine controversy, the authors noted that the testing mechanisms being used by hospital laboratories were insufficient. Many used pregnancy tests, which do test for hCG in women but are inappropriate for testing a vaccine. The combination of certain chemicals in the tetanus vaccine make it highly likely these results were simply false positives.

The recent controversy over the polio vaccine, then, is just an extension of a much longer debate between large multi-national organizations and national authorities. The Kenyan bishops’ skepticism, at its core, isn’t an issue with Catholic writ large.

Today, what debate there is in the church at the institutional level is over whether it is or is not moral to vaccinate one’s self or one’s family with vaccines consisting of stem cells. Even here, church officials note, “the burden of this important battle cannot and must not fall on innocent children and on the health situation of the population — especially with regard to pregnant women.” In the case of Kenya, the burden the bishops are asking their parishioners to take falls squarely on that demographic.

Indeed, the Kenyan church’s position points more to concerns over the activities of these large, seemingly opaque multinational institutions, such as the WHO and UNICEF. The church’s boycott may be misguided and misinformed, but their actions seem to be rooted in a desire for more transparency and better protection of the country’s citizens. Given the country’s recent struggles with corruption and security, it’s easy to see where those broader concerns may be coming from. Still, whatever the deeper reasons for their objections, keeping a new generation of Kenyans polio-free is definitely in the church’s best interests.

Canada made an agreement recently to adopt the radar technology behind the Iron Dome anti-aircraft missile system. In an agreement between ELTA Systems, Rheinmetall and the Canadian Government, a version of the radar behind the Iron Dome will be produced in Canada in cooperation with companies from Israel and Germany. Delivery of the Iron Dome to Canadian forces is set to begin in 2017.

With Russia’s increased investment in defense in its Arctic region, Canada hopes to use their new Iron Dome-inspired system to manage any possible threats in the north. Despite minimal threats to Canada coming from aircraft and ballistic missiles, the Canadian defense system will replace an almost non-existent air defense capability that had eroded after the removal of Canada’s ADATS system a few years ago.

The logic behind Canada’s need for an Iron Dome-like system sheds light on what NATO anticipates will be international security concerns abroad in the near future. The system may serve as a starting point for a low-cost NATO-wide system that could deter Russian aircraft and missile systems in Eastern European countries concerned with rebel movements near Russia’s border. The Iron Dome also allows for an easing of tensions and reduction of causalities in many cases, so it’s as much of a political tool as it is a technological instrument. The system also allows for the targeting of other missiles and mortars, possibly giving it the ability to knock down missiles like those from the

There is a slight possibility that an Iron Dome-type system will find its way to countries in the Middle East that are at odds with Iran but would not purchase defense technology from Israel directly. Balancing the Russia’s S-300 in Iran with a system like the Iron Dome may contribute to reducing the use of ballistic missile technology from both sides, keeping the conflict limited to alternative military systems. Besides the S-300, the Iron Dome is likely one of the best systems for targeting medium-range threats.

Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff talks with Vice President Michel Temer during the launch ceremony of Brazil’s 2015/2016 agriculture program in June.  REUTERS/Bruno Domingos

A poll on Thursday revealed new lows for embattled Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, with her approval rating hitting eight percent – the lowest of any Brazilian president in the last three decades. Datafolha, the polling institute, found that 71 percent of respondents described her administration as “bad” or “terrible,” up from 65 percent in a June poll. Only eight percent percent described it as “great” or “good,” compared to 10 percent in June. More importantly, Brazilians are fed up – two out of three said they would support her impeachment.

Support for Rousseff’s impeachment has grown in the last several months and has been largely fueled by growing unrest triggered by the country’s worst economic downturn in 25 years. Inflation hit a multiyear high of 9.25 percent in mid-July, and the long-running political kickback scandal at state-run oil company Petroleo Brasileiro (“Petrobras”) has captured headlines.

Although Brazil has a formal mechanism for impeachment and has impeached leaders in the past (former President Fernando Collor de Mello was impeached in September 1992), calls for Rousseff’s impeachment by legislators have so far been muted. Former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso and other senior leaders of the opposition Brazilian Social Democracy Party (PSDB) have so far not publicly backed impeachment. Even one of Rousseff’s main opponents, Eduardo Cunha (speaker of the lower house of Congress) wrote an opinion piece last Friday arguing an impeachment is too risky for Brazil’s fragile democracy.

But legislators’ patience is wearing thin. Last Wednesday, the governing coalition in Congress failed to pass a lower chamber bill intended to raise salaries for police officers, prosecutors and government attorneys. This latest failure comes just six months Dilma’s second term, and it reveals the waning confidence of her allies and a possible turn toward her opponents. Her main ally, the Brazilian Democratic Movement Party (PMDB), reportedly sat down for dinner with senators of the opposition PSDB last week and discussed a potential pact to govern moving forward.

Eurasia Group, a New York-based political risk consulting firm, believes the call for impeachment could be realized if Rousseff’s approval rating continues to drop. Three other conditions must be met: 1.) a direct link between Rousseff and the corruption; 2.) former President Luis Inacio Lula da Silva failing to support the current administration; and 3.) the opposition gathering behind the call for impeachment.

The PSDB is hoping to establish a direct link between Rousseff and bribe money used to fund her re-election campaign. Yet they may not need it – Dilma is now being accused of manipulating government accounts. Should that link be established by a federal audit court ruling in late August, impeachment proceedings by Cunha could be initiated in the lower chamber.

And former president Lula’s support for Rousseff may falter, after news last Monday of another arrest tied to the Petrobras kickbacks – that of Jose Dirceu, the ex-president’s former chief of staff. Lula is also being investigated for helping influence the award of contracts to Odebrecht, a Brazilian construction company, for contracts in Panama and Venezuela. Many of the allegations date back to Lula’s administration and may weaken his standing and ability to protect Rousseff.

The final condition, that of the opposition gathering behind impeachment, could gather steam should Rousseff’s popularity continue to fall and ability to govern become more impaired. Opposition leaders are increasingly facing pressure from protestors, many of whom gathered last Thursday night in major cities to bang pots and honk horns during the television broadcast of a political commercial featuring Rousseff, Lula and other Workers’ Party officials. The next test could come on August 16, when crowds are expected for a nationwide protest against Rousseff – the first protest the PSDB will openly support.

Photo Credit: Kremlin Press and Information Office

Kyrgyzstan has canceled a two decades-old agreement governing U.S. economic aid in response to the State Department’s decision to recognize a jailed human rights campaigner with a prestigious commendation. The dispute concerns Azimjon Askarov, who was arrested in 2010 for “inciting ethnic hatred.” Askarov, a member of Kyrgyzstan’s Uzbek minority, filmed rioting by Uzbeks and Kyrgyz in June 2010 that claimed that lives of 400 people. The Kyrgyz-led government in Bishkek accused Askarov of encouraging the violence and handed him a life sentence. Since then, international NGOs and human rights groups have called for Askarov’s release, alleging he is the victim of political and ethnic persecution.

The State Department’s recent decision to bestow the Human Rights Defender Award on Askarov follows years of work to obtain his exoneration. In response to the award, Kyrghyz President Almazbek Atambayev accused the U.S. of “trying to stir up ethnic hatred,” and canceled the 1993 Bilateral Agreement governing American aid to the former Soviet republic. Atambayev suggested that Washington is deliberately destabilizing the country, darkly referencing unspecified “attempts to sow division [and] chaos.”

The move is part of a general trend in Central Asia that has seen U.S. influence decline and official commitment to human rights weaken, with Russia eagerly stepping into the vacuum.

Since 1993, Kyrgyzstan has received $2 billion in aid from the United States, mainly through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Under the terms of the 1993 Bilateral Agreement, USAID and other U.S. aid organizations are exempt from taxation and auditing requirements and their personnel are granted the same immunity from prosecution as diplomats.

Atambayev’s dark hints that the U.S. is trying to “sow division” may sound paranoid, but one needs only look to recent events in Ukraine to see their underlying logic. USAID provided unaccountable millions in funding to various organizations and news outlets opposed to former President Viktor Yanukovych prior to his overthrow in February 2014. There’s no doubt that the work these organizations played some role in the Euromaidan protests that ousted Yanukovych last year. Atambayev has taken the lesson to heart: seemingly innocuous aid organizations can act as catalysts for unwanted political change.

But Ukraine is just the tip of the iceberg. Russia and the United States are involved in a Cold War-esque struggle for influence across Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Kyrgyzstan is a political football that has been tossed between the two superpowers for more than a decade.

Kyrgyzstan is one of the most politically volatile states in the world today. The so-called Tulip Revolution in 2005 overthrew the country’s pro-Russian president, Askar Akayev, with support from the United States. Five years later, Russia allegedly supported yet another revolution to overthrow Akayev’s successor, Kurmanbek Bakiyev. After two revolutions in the last decade, Atambayev is seeking security by decisively entering the Russian camp.

For more than a decade, the country was the only in the world to host both a US air base and a Russian one.  The Manas Transit Center proved instrumental in supporting the troops fighting in Afghanistan – hundreds of thousands of passengers passed through Kyrgyzstan on their way to the frontlines. However, the base was closed in June 2014, coinciding with a $2 billion Russian loan for Kyrgyzstan.

Then, on Aug. 6, Kyrgyzstan officially joined the Eurasian Economic Union, becoming the fifth member of Russia’s response to the European Union. The EAEU now includes Russia and three other former Soviet republics: Armenia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Kyrgyzstan’s entry into the EAEU marks a further step into Russia’s economic and political domain, away from the U.S. and the West.

In the realm of domestic policy, as well, Kyrgyzstan is increasingly modeling itself after Russia. On June 4, Kyrgyzstan’s parliament passed a “foreign agents” law modeled after Russia’s through the first stage of the legislative process. If successful, the law would require all NGOs that receive funding from foreign donors to register as “foreign agents” and submit to intrusive auditing by the state.

Russia’s own “foreign agents” law — passed in 2012 — has targeted NGOs and human rights groups including the GOLOS Association (Russia’s only independent election monitoring organizations), the Levada Center (the country’s only independent polling agency), and the Committee Against Torture, an investigative body that researches allegations of torture by Russian police and military forces. Since 2012, many Russian NGOs have been forced to close their doors or curtail important work to avoid scrutiny, fines and imprisonment by the state.

Kyrgyzstan looks to be following in Russia’s footsteps: the repeal of the 1993 Bilateral Agreement, the passage of its own “foreign agents” law, and its entry into the Eurasian Economic Union point to a decisive shift towards Russia and a further attenuation of U.S. influence in the former Soviet periphery. NGOs, aid workers and human rights groups will be the first to feel the wrath of Krygyzstan’s eastward slide.

President Barack Obama has shown a recent willingness to engage forcefully on tough issues in a manner some found lacking earlier in his presidency. With re-election behind him, he discovered the value of the bully pulpit. His recent discussion of prison reform may be the initial steps of the long walk other social issues — like marriage equality — had to take before they were addressed fully. Presidents cannot resolve issues like these alone — no president can move gun control through an obstructive Congress, for example — but they can set down markers for action on an issue so that successors can approach it with the ball moved a little further down the field. In short, while it’s not an endgame, the bully pulpit adds value.

Since Obama uses the bully pulpit domestically, can he take it abroad? In a sense, he has. His trip to Africa last month aimed to clarify U.S. policy towards the continent’s major nations. His openness toward Cuba showed a willingness to take action to “unfreeze” American policy toward the country that was mired in Cold War thinking. Even in the waning months of his presidency, there is still more that he could accomplish abroad. In the remaining months before the 2016 presidential campaign kicks into high gear and soaks up all available media, here are three areas where Obama’s “foreign policy bully pulpit” could be useful.

NATO. Obama’s administration coined the term “leading from behind” in reference to U.S. participation in the ouster of Moammar Gadhafi from power in Libya, and the amount of responsibility it could shoulder for the results. “Leading from behind” positioned U.S. forces as facilitators of collective actions, but not as the spearhead they were for the Iraq War.

Such actions not only honor alliances they diffuse burdens to a U.S. military that is still looked to first as the global policeman. NATO now encompasses Central and Eastern Europe; its members are best positioned to counter Russian influence in the region. NATO’s rounds of enlargement and efforts to partner with Russia have not matched the level of strategic reassessment NATO undertook with the 1967 Harmel Report. That document outlined the alliance’s guiding principles during the Cold War. Some analysts have called for a repeat of the Harmel process to clarify NATO’s post-Cold War principles and mission. Obama’s motive to share alliance responsibilities more equally with European powers still applies.

Moreover, well into their second decade of NATO membership, rising Central European economies like Poland have increasing resources and strategic need for a revitalized alliance. Obama could call for a second Harmel process, led in part by NATO’s most recent Central and Eastern European members, to determine how the alliance will continue to ensure European security. A a second Harmel process could clarify circumstances under which NATO would take out-of-area action, such as the criteria for an equivalent of the Libya intervention.

Japan. Central to Obama’s foreign policy has been a “pivot” toward Asia. China commands a separate level of attention from U.S. policymakers; but the most important U.S. ally in Asia is Japan. It is the world’s largest economy behind the U.S. and China. Its financial contribution to the United Nations (close to $294 million in 2015) are second only to the U.S. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s new security legislation passed Japan’s lower house last month and is headed to its upper chamber.

The new security measures have been controversial in Japan and the U.S. for proposing to alter Article 9 of Japan’s post-World War II constitution to allow Japan to project military force. But they offer Obama an opportunity to move U.S.-Japan relations forward from its World War II-era posture in the way he pushed the U.S.-Cuba relations out of their Cold War stasis. Japan’s economic might, like Germany’s was long seen as a potential security threat; it is time that its economic power carry with it responsibilities to global security.

A reformed Article 9 could open options for Japanese contribution to security actions without encouraging unilateral action by Japan. Abe’s domestic critics pose the greater challenge, but Obama can make further steps towards getting Japan to shoulder more of Asia’s security burdens while incorporating Japan into global security leadership more directly (by endorsing its addition as a UN Security Council Permanent Member, for example.) A full course correction in policy will not be accomplished in the next year, but Obama can move it forward while he has time.

Germany. To paraphrase Henry Kissinger’s famous comment, when Obama has to “call Europe,” he has to call Germany. Chancellor Angela Merkel has directed Europe’s response to the Greek crisis, cementing Germany’s position as the guiding voice of the euro.

Germany, like Japan, has been run deliberately as a militarily rudderless economic engine. Any path to a common EU security policy, however, will go through Germany. Likewise, the EU’s response to Russian aggression has centered on Germany’s energy and economic relations with that country.

In short, if President Obama wants to be on good terms with Europe, he needs to leave office on good terms with Germany. The Obama administration has made efforts to clean up the mess of the NSA’s alleged tapping of Merkel’s cell phone, but it still stands that the U.S.’ standing in Germany has been dinged during Obama’s tenure. An effort on his part to cement good relations with Berlin would pay dividends for his successor and America’s ongoing ties with the EU.

It is hard to underestimate the power of the media in today’s politics. Obama is a master communicator, and his rhetorical gifts have played a key role in moving America forward on some key domestic issues. As he aims to cement his legacy, why not take his talents abroad?

On Friday, May 15, the Project on International Order and Strategy hosted a discussion about the current state of geopolitics and international peacekeeping. The conversation, a part of the Foreign Policy program’s Order from Chaos project, featured Jean-Marie Guéhenno, former United Nations’ undersecretary-general for peacekeeping operations. Guéhenno discussed his new memoir "The Fog of Peace: How International Engagement Can Stop the Conflicts of the 21st Century" (Brookings Institution Press, 2015). In his role as the U.N.’s lead peacekeeper, Guéhenno oversaw the largest expansion of peacekeeping missions in U.N. history. His insights into peacekeeping, international diplomacy, and great-power relations illuminated some of the challenges we face today, including the crisis in Syria, Russian aggression in Ukraine, and the accommodation of rising powers in a new world order.

Alors qu’une tentative de coup d’Etat contre Pierre Nkurunziza, émanant de l’ex-chef d’état-major, Godefroid Niyombaré, est en cours au Burundi, Thierry Vircoulon chercheur à l'International Crisis Group, explique qui est le général putschiste et analyse, plus généralement, l'appareil sécuritaire du Burundi.

September 11, 2001, started in New York as a particularly beautiful September day: there was not a single cloud, the air was transparent, and the light was crisp. I was less than three weeks away from the first anniversary of my joining the United Nations and had no sense of the momentous global changes that would be set in motion by the tragic events of the day. In his acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo three months later, Kofi Annan would say of September 11, with some flourish: “We have entered the third millennium through a gate of fire.” The historic importance of events is not always immediately perceived, but September 11 was almost immediately understood as the beginning of a new era.

When the Cold War ended in 1991, there was hope the U.N. Security Council would be able to take decisive action to create a more peaceful world. Early blue helmet successes in Cambodia, Namibia, Mozambique, and El Salvador seemed to vindicate that assessment. This optimism was tripped up by the tragedies that followed in the former Yugoslavia, Somalia, and Rwanda. U.N. peacekeepers were bystanders to horrible atrocities. Peacekeeping shrank rapidly.

The nuclear agreement reached in Vienna on 14 July 2015 between Iran and the P5+1/E3+3 (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany) is a significant diplomatic achievement and a testament to the possibilities that principled and patient diplomacy hold for resolving even the most intractable international conundrums. Negotiated outcomes by nature are imperfect. But both sides have protected their core interests and rightfully can claim victory – a precondition for any sustainable solution.

Some may say John Lennon was a dreamer. But he wasn't the only one. Such was the sentiment of Lennon's 1971 hit song, "Imagine", which dreams of a world without hunger and wars. Although the song resonated with millions of people, I doubt there were many people, including myself, that believed such a dream was even remotely possible. Unfortunately, our world is made up of too many people with varying histories and agendas. I think most will agree, that Peace on earth and good will to man, just ain't gonna happen. At least not in absolute terms.

There is a notion cultivated by opponents of the Iran nuclear agreement, attractive to members of Congress under intense pressure to vote no, that congressional rejection of the agreement will enable U.S. negotiators to reach a better deal. The expectation is, that with a further turn of the screws, we can pressure the Iranians to give more and/or we give less. But it can’t happen.

(Own report) - The German establishment is sending mixed signals in reaction to the announcement of an unofficial plebiscite on Catalonia's secession from Spain. Catalan Prime Minister Artur Mas has declared the September 27 regional elections a de facto plebiscite on the region's secession. Should his alliance secure the absolute majority, he will proclaim independence from Spain within 8 months. In the past, Germany had repeatedly supported Catalan secession. Influential German think tanks are demanding that secession not be obstructed. However, there is opposition rising from within business circles. Catalonia is a central site for German companies in Spain. Engaged in trade throughout Spain, they do not want to see their business possibilities limited to one region and Barcelona's secession from Madrid could possibly prove an obstacle. According to German government advisors, on the other hand, these problems could be solved. Some economists contend that the EU's currency, the Euro, can, in the long run, only be maintained within a uniform economic area. This would exclude Spain, but include a seceded Catalonia, the strongest economic zone on the Iberian Peninsular.

The Point of No Return: Climate Change Nightmares Are Already Here
By Eric Holthaus
Rolling Stone

From acidification and warming waters to the disappearance of entire species, climate change has already begun to take its toll on the earth. Some of these changes may be irreversible, and what’s particularly frightening is a lot of them are coming sooner than expected.

Hiroshima
By John Hersey
The New Yorker

Pulled from the archives in remembrance of the 70th anniversary of Hiroshima, this extraordinary article provides an in-depth look into the lives lost and those who somehow managed to survive.

The harrowing story of the Nagasaki bombing mission
By Ellen Bradbury and Sandra Blakeslee
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Although the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were touted as clear and decisive victories by U.S. leadership, the Nagasaki mission in particularly was riddled with screw-ups and errors that could have plunged the plane into the Pacific Ocean. This comprehensive account of the bombing on August 9, 1945, looks at what went wrong and how it changed the course of history.

The Bureaucrats Who Singled Out Hiroshima for Destruction
By Paul Ham
The Atlantic

At first glance, Hiroshima may have seemed like an odd target for the 1945 bombing. It wasn’t Japan’s biggest city, nor was it as obvious of a military target as, say, Kokura. In this excerpt from Hiroshima Nagasaki: The Real Story of the Atomic Bombings and Their Aftermath, Paul Ham tells the story of the reasons military strategists chose their targets and the process that led to dropping the two atomic bombs a few months later.

When Canada Learned It Had Spies
By Graham Templeton
Vice

Canada’s intelligence gathering efforts remained largely a secret until 1972, when a senior analyst at the U.S. National Security Agency divulged the name of its intelligence branch in an interview with the leftist magazine Ramparts. Dubbed the Communications Branch of the National Research Council, or CBNRC, the 1970s marked the death of anonymity for Canada’s SIGINT program. Templeton explores how this information came to light.

Blogs:

Rebuilding Afghanistan: The Way Forward by Elly Rostoum
Russia and the World are not on Good Terms by Hannah Gais
Netanyahu’s Problematic Remarks on the Iran Deal by Josh Klemons
GailForce: Aspen Security Forum Part II – Terrorism by Gail Harris
Beijing Attempts to Stifle South China Sea Discussion at ASEAN by Gary Sands

The turbulent modern history of Afghanistan provides a sketch of a nation either battling or recovering from a series of wars, political unrest and corruption scandals — the confluence of which has left the country facing poverty and an uncertain future.

Afghanistan’s economy is largely reliant on an international community that provides billions of dollars a year to prevent the country from falling into complete chaos. Despite these efforts, international influx of money in Afghanistan has done little to build a sustainable economy that could eventually stand independent of international support.

The perennial challenge for international reconstruction efforts lies with the lack of fiscal and economic sustainability, and in the absence of proper political governance at the governmental level.

Earlier this month, the Center for Rebuilding Sustainable Communities After Disasters (CRSCAD) at the University of Massachusetts Boston, hosted an international conference on “Rebuilding Sustainable Communities in Afghanistan: The Way Forward.” I had a chance to catch up with the center’s founding director and a professor of Urban Planning and Community Studies, Dr. Adenrele Awotona, who explained,

In March 1948, just after the end of World War II, the United States Congress passed the Economic Cooperation Act and approved funding of over $12 billion for the rebuilding of war-ravaged Western Europe. That comprehensive European Recovery Program was nicknamed the “Marshall Plan.” In 2014, after over a decade of war in Afghanistan, records show that more United States and NATO money had been invested in the “reconstruction” of that country than was spent on the Marshall Plan.

For once, money doesn’t seem to be the problem. Corruption and the lack of regulatory, fiscal and constitutional structures have lead to an uneven distribution of wealth in the country — mostly concentrated with the top 15 to 20 percent of the population. The economic disparity is a bit of deja vu, and had previously been an contributing factor the original Communist takeover in the 1978. Today, competing political ideologies remain a problem. They are mostly sectarian and Islamic in flavor and continue to divide the country, eliminating any semblance of good governance.

The challenge for Afghan reconstruction is ensuring sustainability. The international community’s reconstruction strategy in Afghanistan has not stressed the need for sustainability. The majority of the hundreds of billions already poured into reconstruction has gone to building roads, dams, hospitals and schools – but the Afghans are not able to sustain much of that infrastructure without the continued financial support. In other words, when the money stops flowing, the structures won’t last long.

Perhaps a better strategy to rebuilding Afghanistan lies in focusing efforts on 1.) formulating a strong constitution that is embedded and reflective of the country’s history, culture, faith and one that is deeply committed to a modern understanding of human and civic rights; 2) strengthening law enforcement — not through militarization, but in the ability to enforce laws, keep the peace, and prosecute those who break the law — this point is particularly important in helping curb corruption — which remains rampant given the inability to prosecute those who break the laws; 3) providing  a strong regulatory and fiscal framework to facilitate and protect investment. A viable solution for Afghanistan’s economic woes and development lies with the private sector. Private international investment can help develop profitable business enterprises that can spur and generate greater economic development in the country, and produce needed revenues for the government to aid in rebuilding Afghanistan.

The caveat lies with the substantial above-ground security risks of doing business in Afghanistan. Providing the conditions for private sector growth requires proper political governance at both the national and local levels. It also requires that the international community focus its efforts on paving the way and providing the right conditions for private sector growth both in terms of infrastructure, but perhaps most importantly in building a robust, enforceable regulatory structure to secure and protect investments.

You can follow Elly on Twitter @EllyRostoum

While the increasing militarization of the South China Sea strains Asia-Pacific’s stability and security for the long term, the region’s humble fishing fleets pose more immediate, frequent, and less managed risks. If properly organized, however, those same fleets could offer one way to develop a culture of compromise and cooperation.