In light of recent events, Park Jae Kyu, former ROK Minister of Unification, offered a unique perspective and various explanations for the change in relations between North and South Korea. In major diplomatic arenas, such as the Olympics, the world has witnessed their outward behavior change from arriving together at the 2004 Olympics, to arriving separately at this years Beijing Olympics. Even more recently, the world received news of a Northern Korean officer who killed a South Korean tourist. While these are all outward facts, Park Jae Kyu provided a more insightful analysis of the ever changing relationship between the two countries.
According to Park, previous presidents Kim Dae Jung and Roh Moo Hyun, both engaged in inter-Korean relations with Northern Korea through initiatives such as the “Engagement (Sunshine)” and “Peace and Prosperity” policies (respectively). This cooperation fostered stronger relationships, tourism and trade growth, as well as the first and second inter-Korean summits (on June 15, 2000 and October 4th 2007, respectively). These summits marked an outward acknowledgment of the two countries mutual cooperation, and a landmark in North and South Korean history.
Unfortunately, this cooperation reached a road block in early 2008, when Lee Myung Bak was elected as President of the Republic of Korea. He is the first conservative president to lead the country in over ten years, and his policy reform reflected this standpoint. According to Park, Lee attempted to maintain similar policies as Kim and Rho, however Lee also wanted to build upon them and update many aspects he deemed faulty. One of his changes included a closer relationship with US policy, and thus the adaptation to denuclearize North Korea. Lee also released a joint statement with President Bush denouncing North Korea’s human rights violations. Lee attempted to soften his statements, claiming that inter-cooperation would promptly re-emerge with the denuclearization of the North. Lee titled his new policy towards the north as “Mutual Benefit and Common Prosperity’. Throughout all of the new commotion, North Korea still expected the ROK government to carry out policies based on the June 15, 2000 North-South joint declaration. However, when the Lee administration failed to do so, and seemingly ignored both the 2000 and 2007 joint-declarations, Pyongyang and his administration vehemently denounced Lee’s policies, reducing his presidency to a mere “messenger boy for American’s nuclear war (Park, 9.8.08).” This marked the absolute collapse of cooperation.
Shortly following the collapse, On March 27th Pyongyang’s administration expelled high level South Korean officials. Park notes that due to this collapse, the economic headway achieved through the joint-policies are at risk. The food shortage is at full swing in the North, and projects to repair the Kaesong-Shinuiju and Kaesong-Pyongyang expressways and railroads are at a stand still.
Recently there has been limited progress as the Six-Party talks were resumed shortly before the Beijing Olympics. However, North Korea has ceased any denuclearization efforts, and thus the current situation is at a stand still, much like before the Olympics. Yet Park remains optimistic, believing a solution to the current stall will be found as both economies somewhat depend upon each other.
Sponsor: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Date: September 8, 2008
Time: 10:00am
Representative: Daria Willis
Showing posts with label Asia Pacific. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Asia Pacific. Show all posts
Monday, September 15, 2008
Monday, June 30, 2008
Resettled Refugees Remember Those Left Behind
June 20, 2008 marked the eight annual World Refugee Day, a bittersweet day of remembrance for the over 11 million refugees and 26 million internally displaced people. It is unfortunate, recalled numerous presenters, that this day must be celebrated, but it is fortunate to hear the hopeful and inspiring stories of refugees who have ameliorated their lives and to hear of the countless volunteers who dedicate their efforts to assisting them. Protection for refugees and for those who serve them was the theme of this year’s event led by UNHCR's Deputy High Commissioner L. Craig Johnstone. He stressed the need to respect the human rights of refugees and volunteers.
A diverse myriad of speakers paid homage to the plights of refugees from four countries: Iraq, Sudan, Afghanistan and Burma. NPR correspondent Deborah Amos anecdotally recalled her meetings with Iraq refugees and the challenged which affront them living in urban refugee settlements throughout Syria and Afghanistan. Sad stories of Sudanese refugees were recounted by Daoud Hari, whose memoirs are vividly depicted in his book The Translator. After losing much of her family in Afghanistan, The Other Side of the Sky author Farah Ahmedithanked the UNHCR for resettling her and her mother in the US. Joining her was Thimothy Ju, a young refugee from Myanmar whose recent journey from camps in Thailand to a home in Texas was documented in the MTV show True Life: I’m Coming to America. Although they all endured different experiences, they were united in their gratitude from the good works of the UN and their remembrance of those left behind. Poignantly stoic and blindly hopeful, their stories captivated the thousands in the crowds and depicted the triumph of the human spirit amidst unbelievable adversity.
This sad yet triumphant celebration concluded with the presentation of the Humanitarian of the Year Award, awarded to Chicago Bulls forward Luol Deng. Born in Sudan, he relocated to Egypt and later to Great Britain, where he developed his skill and passion for basketball. He is an instrumental partner in the UNHCR’s Ninemillion Campaign that aims to bring education and sport programs to the world’s nine million child refuges by 2010. Deng donates $50 to Ninemillion for every basket he scores and encourages people around the world to follow his example. Deng delivered a heart-warming speech that placed his basketball career second to his job as a humanitarian and volunteer. The joy and exhilaration from giving a helping hand far succeeds the thrills of any championship ring.
Sponsors: The National Geographic Society and the UNHCR
Date: June 20, 2008
Time: 12-1 p.m.
Representative: Elizabeth Caniano
A diverse myriad of speakers paid homage to the plights of refugees from four countries: Iraq, Sudan, Afghanistan and Burma. NPR correspondent Deborah Amos anecdotally recalled her meetings with Iraq refugees and the challenged which affront them living in urban refugee settlements throughout Syria and Afghanistan. Sad stories of Sudanese refugees were recounted by Daoud Hari, whose memoirs are vividly depicted in his book The Translator. After losing much of her family in Afghanistan, The Other Side of the Sky author Farah Ahmedithanked the UNHCR for resettling her and her mother in the US. Joining her was Thimothy Ju, a young refugee from Myanmar whose recent journey from camps in Thailand to a home in Texas was documented in the MTV show True Life: I’m Coming to America. Although they all endured different experiences, they were united in their gratitude from the good works of the UN and their remembrance of those left behind. Poignantly stoic and blindly hopeful, their stories captivated the thousands in the crowds and depicted the triumph of the human spirit amidst unbelievable adversity.
This sad yet triumphant celebration concluded with the presentation of the Humanitarian of the Year Award, awarded to Chicago Bulls forward Luol Deng. Born in Sudan, he relocated to Egypt and later to Great Britain, where he developed his skill and passion for basketball. He is an instrumental partner in the UNHCR’s Ninemillion Campaign that aims to bring education and sport programs to the world’s nine million child refuges by 2010. Deng donates $50 to Ninemillion for every basket he scores and encourages people around the world to follow his example. Deng delivered a heart-warming speech that placed his basketball career second to his job as a humanitarian and volunteer. The joy and exhilaration from giving a helping hand far succeeds the thrills of any championship ring.
Sponsors: The National Geographic Society and the UNHCR
Date: June 20, 2008
Time: 12-1 p.m.
Representative: Elizabeth Caniano
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
Girls Count
Girls Count: A Global Investment and Action Agenda
Featured Speakers: Kathy Calvin, Margaret Greene, Caren Grown, Laura Laski, Ruth Levine, Joan Libby-Hawk, Cynthia Lloyd, Caroline Ryan
The importance of investing time, energy, and funding into the world’s young female population is clear and undisputed. Young females across the globe are undoubtedly crucial to developmental progress and to the success of the Millennium Development Goals. Despite the noticeably important role of this specific group, support systems that aim to promote good health, the ability to advance, safety, and favorable living conditions for young women are unreliable. Girls are not protected even though they should be. Their vulnerability is exacerbated by the lack of consistent support. So they have only reaped the benefits of lip service, not reliable support over time.
In recognition of this unfortunate reality, the Center for Global Development, the International Center for Research on Women and the Population Council have reported on issues concerning this underserved segment of humanity with hopes to bring awareness to the fore and action to the ground.
The speakers first addressed why girls matter and why investing in their well-being is an economically sound decision. They mentioned that in this era of common interconnectedness of nations, young women comprise the workforce base that light textiles and other global industries requiring cheap labor rely on. As a result of their utility, young women are often subject to unfair work conditions and the unfortunate cyclic factors that accompany such exploitation.
One factor that accompanies exploitative practices is the absence of a formal mechanism that recognizes the existence of young females. As a result, young women lack citizenship and access to the rights that rely on formal documentation and identity records. Thus, many girls are restricted physically by their inability to travel legally. They are also they are limited financially as official ownership of land titles, assets, and homes requires documentation, as well as the approval and/or sponsorship of a male, usually a husband or father.
With hopes to help combat the gender inequalities recognized world-wide, the speakers gave a series of recommendations and encouraged attendees to realize how girls effect development. They framed part of this discussion around the Millennium Development Goals and by focusing on what individuals, non-governmental organizations/private actors, and governments can do to mitigate the problems related to gender equality and insufficient support for young females.
Some of the proactive steps you can take include encouraging males to respect and care for women of all ages. Parents can (re)introduce psychological commitment to ensure feminist ideals are respected and viewed with legitimacy. Also, you can support specific programs that directly support democratic governance and improve the conditions of civil society such as the Somali Women’s Scholarship Fund supported by UNDP-USA.
If you would like more information concerning issues of development related to women around the globe or would like to know how you can take a role in improving gender inequality, contact the U.S. Committee for UNDP.
Sponsor: Center for Global Development, International Center for Research on Women, Population Council
Location: Hilton Washington Embassy Row
Date: January 30, 2008
Time: 10:00 am-12:00pm
Approximate Number of Attendees: 300
Representative Attending: Saphonia Foster
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Indonesia Today and its US Relations
Featured Speakers: Former President Bacharuddin Jusuf Habibie
On January 29, the US-Indonesia Society hosted many distinguished members of the international community for a breakfast with former President B.J Habibie of Indonesia. President Habibie is the President credited with bringing democracy to the country by opening the media, increasing human liberties, and introducing the largest decentralization initiative in history. Indonesia is now the third largest democracy in the world and the largest Muslim country.
Habibie’s speech emphasized the need for a stronger relationship between Indonesia and the United States. He began by citing the commonalities between the preambles to both constitutions. Using the preambles as a template he discussed how the common values that the countries possess (including pluralism, democracy and maintaining peace throughout the world) provide capital for future cooperation between the two countries.
Later in his speech, he discussed why Indonesia is important to US interest. He referred to Indonesia as “a cornerstone of regional security” and an economic role model for other developing nations. He also pointed out his country’s strategic importance on the Malacca Strait, which is the main shipping channel between the Indian and the Pacific Ocean.
Because Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world, Habibie explained how it proves that democracy is compatible with Islam, contrary to some political theory, and how it serves as a good partner in the US’s war on terror. He said that Indonesia’s success as a modern, prosperous and democratic nation will benefit the image of Islam and in pursuit of democracy worldwide.
Location: Cosmos Club
Date: January 29, 2008
Time: 8:30 am-10:00
Approximate Number of Attendees: 50
Intern Attending: Micaela Klein
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
A FAREWELL TO ALMS
Featured Speaker: George Clark
In a provocative lecture George Clark, professor at the
The lecture was held at the University of California Washington Center and drew a broad audience including researchers, economists, graduate students, former diplomats, ambassadors, and various representatives from think tanks and developmental organizations.
In his talk,
The crowd was stimulated by
Date: Thursday January 10, 2008
Time: 10:00 am - 11:30 am
Location:
UNDP-USA Representative: Saphonia Foster
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Midpoint to 2015: Inclusive Globalization and the Millennium Development Goals
Featured Speakers: Hafiz Pasha, UN Assistant Secretary-General and the Regional Bureau for Asia and the Pacific, UNDP; Johannes Linn, Brookings Institution; Getta Rao Gupta,
Moderator: David Yang, UNDP
Keynote Speaker, Hafiz Pasha, focused his panel presentation on “Inclusive Growth and the MDGs: The Asian Experience” in order to bring attention to Asia’s Lowest Developed Countries (LDCs) who have been largely forgotten in the euphoria of China’s and India’s success. There are 14 LDCs in the Asia-Pacific region which include some 258 million people. Pasha pointed out that this number represents 40 per cent of all the people in LDCs and that these countries have made the least progress toward reaching the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). As a region, there has been an increase in inequality both among Asian countries and within these countries. Pasha closed his presentation stating, “The Asian story is positive—a success story—but I have a feeling we can do much more.” His statement served as a reminder to listeners that while there has been growth in the region and progress toward reaching the MDGs, growth without inclusion of the poorest and marginalized groups will ultimately hurt Asian growth overall.
Commentators Johannes Linn and Geeta Rao Gupta both agreed with Pasha’s presentation by highlighting specific points. Gupta spoke to the importance of including women in development and cited the failure to meet the 2005 MDG for gender parity in primary and secondary education. Gupta called this failure unforgivable and called for an increase in resources, political leadership and technical expertise directed towards the right places. Linn mentioned several potential concerns, including the risk of people losing momentum in achieving the MDGs once the dates have come and gone, and the need for a more coordinated UN effort which further adopts the “One UN” imitative and Paris Declaration. All speakers agreed that to be successful in achieving the MDGs we must work for an increase in the inclusion of women, youth, unskilled laborers, migrant households, minorities, the landless, and the aged and disabled.
Sponsor:
Location:
Date: July 11, 2007
Time: 12:00-2:00 pm
Approximate Number of Attendees: 200
Intern Attending: Meredith Blair
Monday, July 02, 2007
Beyond Disasters: Creating Opportunities for Peace
Featured Speakers: Zoë Chafe, Worldwatch Institute; Michael Renner, Worldwatch Institute; Anita Sharma, ENOUGH
With natural disasters having doubled in the last two decades, it is more important than ever for policymakers to address disaster relief as comprehensively as possible. Using three case studies, the Aceh province of Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and Kashmir, Chafe and Renner explored the potential to use disaster relief as an opportunity for conflict resolution.
Natural disasters can provide key opportunities for conflict-riddled areas. According to Michael Renner, post-disaster goodwill often exists on all sides, but it is always short-lived and rarely manifests itself politically. In Aceh, the world’s attention after the 2004 tsunami created the political space both sides needed to resolve the separatist conflict. Speaking from personal experience, Anita Sharma described how equitable aid addressed the basic needs of housing and economic stability—and was backed by publicly transparent donor organizations—allowed the disaster and conflict relief efforts to succeed in Aceh. Conversely, in Sri Lanka and Kashmir, natural disasters were not enough to bring enemy groups together; donor groups in Sri Lanka were left helpless as control of funds already donated became a bitter political issue, and both Indian and Pakistani armies acted like occupiers, not relief forces, in Kashmir. Renner stressed the importance of using indigenous solutions that address core issues surrounding a conflict. Renner promoted the neutralization of anti-peace forces and democratic institution-building, to allow countries to create peaceful environments in which they are able to rebuild.
Sponsor: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Location: Wilson Center, 5th Floor Conference Room
Date: June 28, 2007
Time: 12 noon – 2 pm
Approximate Number of Attendees: 40
Intern Attending: Mike Heslin
With natural disasters having doubled in the last two decades, it is more important than ever for policymakers to address disaster relief as comprehensively as possible. Using three case studies, the Aceh province of Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and Kashmir, Chafe and Renner explored the potential to use disaster relief as an opportunity for conflict resolution.
Natural disasters can provide key opportunities for conflict-riddled areas. According to Michael Renner, post-disaster goodwill often exists on all sides, but it is always short-lived and rarely manifests itself politically. In Aceh, the world’s attention after the 2004 tsunami created the political space both sides needed to resolve the separatist conflict. Speaking from personal experience, Anita Sharma described how equitable aid addressed the basic needs of housing and economic stability—and was backed by publicly transparent donor organizations—allowed the disaster and conflict relief efforts to succeed in Aceh. Conversely, in Sri Lanka and Kashmir, natural disasters were not enough to bring enemy groups together; donor groups in Sri Lanka were left helpless as control of funds already donated became a bitter political issue, and both Indian and Pakistani armies acted like occupiers, not relief forces, in Kashmir. Renner stressed the importance of using indigenous solutions that address core issues surrounding a conflict. Renner promoted the neutralization of anti-peace forces and democratic institution-building, to allow countries to create peaceful environments in which they are able to rebuild.
Sponsor: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Location: Wilson Center, 5th Floor Conference Room
Date: June 28, 2007
Time: 12 noon – 2 pm
Approximate Number of Attendees: 40
Intern Attending: Mike Heslin
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Rethinking the Diaspora: New Capital Flows
Featured Speakers: Shahid Javed Burki, Former VP World Bank, Former Finance Minister of
What role do Diaspora communities play in development today? In this informative panel discussion, attendees heard the benefits that Diaspora communities have to both their host and home countries, and the impact their contributions can make to third world development when utilized properly. With
Shahid Javed Burki focused his presentation on the Pakistani Diaspora community, which is concentrated largely in the
Finally, Dr. Brinkerhoff asserted the underlying importance of Diaspora communities by stating their role as actors – and legitimate actors – in development. The potential that Diaspora communities have in the realm of development should be harnessed by the development community as a whole. In order to engage Diaspora communities and channel their energy for development, the international development community must, as Brinkerhoff said, “Target the already mobilized” and not “Mobilize the targeted.”
Sponsor: International Resources Group
Location:
Date:
Time:
Approximate Number of Attendees: 40
Intern Attending: Megan Niedermeyer
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
The Other Side of the Indian Growth Story: Agriculture and Rural Development
Featured Speakers: Arvind Panagariya,
In recent years, much has been made of
One likely long-term solution, the panelists agreed, is for many of the people currently working in agriculture to switch to consumer goods sectors in a trend mirroring
The panelist’s identified five areas that show potential for improvement. These areas include: building infrastructure in rural areas, such as roads and electricity; smart investment in agriculture, moving away from subsidies that raise food prices by up to 20%; streamlining the agriculture sector through measures such as food distribution downsizing, marketing privatization, and commercial farming; branching out into related sectors like the nearly nonexistent food processing industry; and streamlining local governance. The government was widely cited as a source of mismanagement on fronts ranging from road construction to social development and agriculture intervention.
There are many challenges to overcome, but also great potential for
Sponsor:
Location:
Date: June 26, 2007
Time: 3:30-5pm
Approximate Number of Attendees: 45
Intern Attending: Mike Heslin
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Peacebuilding in Iraq and Afghanistan: Building Security from the Ground Up
Featured Speakers: Samuel Rizk, Forum for Development; Hero Anwar, REACH; Jana El Horr, American Islamic Congress; Hamid Arsalan, Eastern Mennonite University.
The objective of this panel was to hear from four individuals working on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, because of the amount of “policy buzz” around the Hill and lack of general public visibility of the situation.
Samuel Rizk from the Forum for Development started the panel by speaking about his experiences in Middle East communities. He explained that he has been working with media communication to encourage peace in Iraq. To encourage accurate media communication he has worked to relay regional experience to national and grassroots organizations, created 3-year contracts with organizations to work on conflict resolution and coordinated a network to build sustainable partnerships. The goal of these efforts has been to reintegrate people into the society that was demolished by the terrorist overhaul and dictatorial government. Some of Rizk’s efforts have included: establishment of the Dalia Center and the Youth Art Exchange program. The Dalia Center is a small project with the ultimate goal of encouraging cross-boundary (ethnic, religious and social) cooperation. The Youth Exchange program promotes peace from the group up by engaging Iraqi children in theater, art and music exchanges with Lebanese youth. Rizk concluded his presentation by suggesting foreign troops be withdrawn from Iraq because there is truly no room for political development when foreign troops are present.
Hero Anwar followed Rizk with a presentation on her organization, REACH, and its role in grassroots peacebuilding. Anwar explained that REACH programs target marginalized, poor and vulnerable groups to help them find ways to constructively discuss their needs that lead to collaboration instead of conflict. REACH also works to improve household economies for independent economic productivity and to assist in the development of civil society. Currently, Anwar has projects working with water and sanitation, microcredit, sustainable agriculture practices, development of Community-Based Organizations (CBOs) and building civil society institutions. One example is REACH’s CBO Network, which was created to encourage different religions to gather around common needs. This network is especially important because REACH is not associated with a political party and thus is able to maintain a neutral standing.
Jana El Horr of the American Islamic Congress followed Anwar with suggestions about how US organizations can help. El Horr explained that the US approach to development and aid is often from a “top-down” mentality, whereas bottom-up approaches are too frequently forgotten. Working from the bottom up, we can empower Muslims to speak out against human rights violations and cultivate a sense of basic human rights in their communities. Currently, with the disconnect between NGOs and civil society, there is no collaborative approach to encourage this type of thinking. El Horr hopes that by uniting benevolent forces, we can expedite the peace process.
Hamid Arsalan emphasized several of the same ideas regarding the importance of peacebuilding from the ground up. The process needs to be initiated and carried out by the people of Afghanistan to ensure sustainable rebuilding efforts and restoration. Arsalan mentioned that UN involvement may be the only way to peace. Specialized agencies such as the United Nations High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR) are familiar with doing this type of work and are designed to allocate their budget to promote peace-building in conflict zones which consistently displacing more and more individuals. This is especially important because the international community as a whole has had trouble trying to intervene and help with peace-building because of the serious security threats in the most highly affected zones.
Arsalan made six distinct policy recommendations:
1) Implementation of community development projects
2) Build human dignity through self-reliance, a key to overcoming other issues
3) Prepare communities for women’s education through UNICEF
4) Create education projects that are tied into economic development
5) Develop strong collaboration with a USAID presence
6) Actively involve civil society leaders
He hopes that through these specific changes to current policy in Afghanistan, we can involve the Afghan people in developing their own peace and security policies.
Location & Sponsor: Friends Committee on National Legislation
Date: June 7, 2007
Time: 12:00-1:30pm
Approximate Number of Attendees: 30
Intern Attending: Elysa Severinghaus
The objective of this panel was to hear from four individuals working on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, because of the amount of “policy buzz” around the Hill and lack of general public visibility of the situation.
Samuel Rizk from the Forum for Development started the panel by speaking about his experiences in Middle East communities. He explained that he has been working with media communication to encourage peace in Iraq. To encourage accurate media communication he has worked to relay regional experience to national and grassroots organizations, created 3-year contracts with organizations to work on conflict resolution and coordinated a network to build sustainable partnerships. The goal of these efforts has been to reintegrate people into the society that was demolished by the terrorist overhaul and dictatorial government. Some of Rizk’s efforts have included: establishment of the Dalia Center and the Youth Art Exchange program. The Dalia Center is a small project with the ultimate goal of encouraging cross-boundary (ethnic, religious and social) cooperation. The Youth Exchange program promotes peace from the group up by engaging Iraqi children in theater, art and music exchanges with Lebanese youth. Rizk concluded his presentation by suggesting foreign troops be withdrawn from Iraq because there is truly no room for political development when foreign troops are present.
Hero Anwar followed Rizk with a presentation on her organization, REACH, and its role in grassroots peacebuilding. Anwar explained that REACH programs target marginalized, poor and vulnerable groups to help them find ways to constructively discuss their needs that lead to collaboration instead of conflict. REACH also works to improve household economies for independent economic productivity and to assist in the development of civil society. Currently, Anwar has projects working with water and sanitation, microcredit, sustainable agriculture practices, development of Community-Based Organizations (CBOs) and building civil society institutions. One example is REACH’s CBO Network, which was created to encourage different religions to gather around common needs. This network is especially important because REACH is not associated with a political party and thus is able to maintain a neutral standing.
Jana El Horr of the American Islamic Congress followed Anwar with suggestions about how US organizations can help. El Horr explained that the US approach to development and aid is often from a “top-down” mentality, whereas bottom-up approaches are too frequently forgotten. Working from the bottom up, we can empower Muslims to speak out against human rights violations and cultivate a sense of basic human rights in their communities. Currently, with the disconnect between NGOs and civil society, there is no collaborative approach to encourage this type of thinking. El Horr hopes that by uniting benevolent forces, we can expedite the peace process.
Hamid Arsalan emphasized several of the same ideas regarding the importance of peacebuilding from the ground up. The process needs to be initiated and carried out by the people of Afghanistan to ensure sustainable rebuilding efforts and restoration. Arsalan mentioned that UN involvement may be the only way to peace. Specialized agencies such as the United Nations High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR) are familiar with doing this type of work and are designed to allocate their budget to promote peace-building in conflict zones which consistently displacing more and more individuals. This is especially important because the international community as a whole has had trouble trying to intervene and help with peace-building because of the serious security threats in the most highly affected zones.
Arsalan made six distinct policy recommendations:
1) Implementation of community development projects
2) Build human dignity through self-reliance, a key to overcoming other issues
3) Prepare communities for women’s education through UNICEF
4) Create education projects that are tied into economic development
5) Develop strong collaboration with a USAID presence
6) Actively involve civil society leaders
He hopes that through these specific changes to current policy in Afghanistan, we can involve the Afghan people in developing their own peace and security policies.
Location & Sponsor: Friends Committee on National Legislation
Date: June 7, 2007
Time: 12:00-1:30pm
Approximate Number of Attendees: 30
Intern Attending: Elysa Severinghaus
Monday, April 23, 2007
Afghanistan: A Balanced Approach
Event Title: Afghanistan: A Balanced Approach
Sponsor and Location: CSIS
Date: April 16, 2007
Time: 3:00-4:15pm
Approximate Number of Attendees: 40
Intern Attending: Elysa Severinghaus
Featured Speakers: Bert Koenders, Minister for Development Cooperation
Over the years, the Netherlands has developed a consistent presence in Afghanistan and as their Minister of Development, Bert Koenders, puts it, they have come up with a ‘balanced approach’ to occupying particularly difficult parts of the country. They have integrated diplomatic and development efforts so that one is not lagging behind the other as they attempt to help Afghanistan recover from years under the Taliban.
With the support of the Afghan government, the Afghan people and the international community, citizens are gaining foothold again in the south but despite tremendous progress, security is still very fragile. One of the current risks is interaction with the international drug trade. Statistics show that 90% of drugs in Europe are imported from Afghanistan, making them a ‘poisonous lifeblood’ of the economy. Because of relevant security issues, the forces from the Netherlands has been unable to involve groups outside the Northern Alliance in efforts against the Taliban.
Since the U.S. withdrew its focus from Afghanistan and moved toward Iraq, there has been a distinct power vaccuum, sucking away resources toward rebuilding a nation destroyed by its rebel groups. “What they need,” Koenders said, “is a flexible stabilization force for new visible administration and development.”
Koenders expressed two major concerns with regard to progress in the region. The first was that most of the missions are taken on by ASEF (The Asia-Europe Foundation), which simply does not have the capacity that could be available through the entirety of the U.N. The second major concern is the quantity, quality and visiblity of progress to the Afghan people. While it may be clear to those providing aid that the country is making progress, in order for it to work and gain societal support, evidence of progress must be visible and transparent. To eradicate both these concerns, they must restore public confidence and put Afghan soldiers at the professional level so that citizens can identify with those who are fighting off the ominous ‘bad guy’.
Probably the most crucial point regarding foreign aid is running on an Afghan clock. The Dutch have worked to relate to realities on the ground and not run at an imposed pace. They must continue develop an effective level of commitment, methods of timing and exit strategy because, at least, their development efforts are there for the long haul. In these efforts, the Dutch approach emphasizes the process of reconstruction as a mutually beneficial collaboration between local and international groups. It cannot simply be an imposed international project; they must invest in creating an adequately decentralized government through dialogue and civil assessment. Koenders remarked that the mission would be “As civilian as possible, as military as necessary” and that they would continue to strive to “make the Taliban irrelevant”.
Sponsor and Location: CSIS
Date: April 16, 2007
Time: 3:00-4:15pm
Approximate Number of Attendees: 40
Intern Attending: Elysa Severinghaus
Featured Speakers: Bert Koenders, Minister for Development Cooperation
Over the years, the Netherlands has developed a consistent presence in Afghanistan and as their Minister of Development, Bert Koenders, puts it, they have come up with a ‘balanced approach’ to occupying particularly difficult parts of the country. They have integrated diplomatic and development efforts so that one is not lagging behind the other as they attempt to help Afghanistan recover from years under the Taliban.
With the support of the Afghan government, the Afghan people and the international community, citizens are gaining foothold again in the south but despite tremendous progress, security is still very fragile. One of the current risks is interaction with the international drug trade. Statistics show that 90% of drugs in Europe are imported from Afghanistan, making them a ‘poisonous lifeblood’ of the economy. Because of relevant security issues, the forces from the Netherlands has been unable to involve groups outside the Northern Alliance in efforts against the Taliban.
Since the U.S. withdrew its focus from Afghanistan and moved toward Iraq, there has been a distinct power vaccuum, sucking away resources toward rebuilding a nation destroyed by its rebel groups. “What they need,” Koenders said, “is a flexible stabilization force for new visible administration and development.”
Koenders expressed two major concerns with regard to progress in the region. The first was that most of the missions are taken on by ASEF (The Asia-Europe Foundation), which simply does not have the capacity that could be available through the entirety of the U.N. The second major concern is the quantity, quality and visiblity of progress to the Afghan people. While it may be clear to those providing aid that the country is making progress, in order for it to work and gain societal support, evidence of progress must be visible and transparent. To eradicate both these concerns, they must restore public confidence and put Afghan soldiers at the professional level so that citizens can identify with those who are fighting off the ominous ‘bad guy’.
Probably the most crucial point regarding foreign aid is running on an Afghan clock. The Dutch have worked to relate to realities on the ground and not run at an imposed pace. They must continue develop an effective level of commitment, methods of timing and exit strategy because, at least, their development efforts are there for the long haul. In these efforts, the Dutch approach emphasizes the process of reconstruction as a mutually beneficial collaboration between local and international groups. It cannot simply be an imposed international project; they must invest in creating an adequately decentralized government through dialogue and civil assessment. Koenders remarked that the mission would be “As civilian as possible, as military as necessary” and that they would continue to strive to “make the Taliban irrelevant”.
Thursday, December 14, 2006
Inside the Flames: Covering the World’s Hottest Spots
Event Title: Inside the Flames: Covering the World’s Hottest Spots
Sponsors: Women in International Security
Location: Georgetown University, Meranda Room, 3600 N St., NW
Date: October 27, 2006
Time: 11:00 AM – 3:30 PM
Approximate number of Attendees: 250
Intern Attending: Ashley Smith
Featured Speaker: Joyce M. Davis, Associate Director of Broadcasting, Radio Free Europe
Joyce Davis’ work focuses primarily on Islamic movements and the Middle East. She is currently working with Radio Farda, the Persian radio broadcast of Radio Free Europe based in Prague. Although funded by the U.S. government, many Persians now view Radio Farda as their national radio station. While Radio Farda does rely in part on Iranian news sources, they work predominantly with U.S. reporters and speak from a U.S. perspective. The traditional role of radio has been to retain impartiality in all coverage of events. Radio Farda tries to balance this traditional role while also following a congressional mandate that dictates its actions to a certain extent. Because of this, Radio Farda has been using their broadcasts to actively promote democratic governance and tolerance.
However, when espousing beliefs contrary to those of local governments or authorities, reporting can sometimes become dangerous. Allegations of corruption in reporting can be particularly risky. In Turkmenistan, some media workers have begun reporting anonymously for this reason. At the same time, other journalists feel empowered by democratic promotion and the belief that the United States government will intervene should they become incarcerated as a result of their reporting. Unfortunately, this is not the case and the U.S. does not intercede on foreign reporters’ behalves. In order to ensure the safety of its own reporters, Radio Farda works to forge close relationships with the embassies. On one occasion this proved useful, and a group of reporters about to be apprehended were secreted out to safety. Davis pointed out that there is sometimes a difficult moral compromise that must be reached by reporters. Sometimes it is necessary to maintain good relations with countries whose policies you may not be in favor of in order to remain in the country to cover events.
Davis believes that in Iran, U.S. diplomacy has a large effect on relations between the two countries. Because many moderates in Iran are being radicalized, the media’s position in this country is of particular importance. There are many illiterate Persians that live in remote areas of Iran and may rely entirely on the local mullah for the bulk of their information. However, most of these followers also have access to radio. Therefore, Davis stresses the need to achieve better cultural sensitivity through radio broadcast by promoting the role of Islam as well as the role of democracy. The radio is an important vehicle for the dissemination of ideas and by offering differing perspectives, we can better hope to cultivate tolerance.
Sponsors: Women in International Security
Location: Georgetown University, Meranda Room, 3600 N St., NW
Date: October 27, 2006
Time: 11:00 AM – 3:30 PM
Approximate number of Attendees: 250
Intern Attending: Ashley Smith
Featured Speaker: Joyce M. Davis, Associate Director of Broadcasting, Radio Free Europe
Joyce Davis’ work focuses primarily on Islamic movements and the Middle East. She is currently working with Radio Farda, the Persian radio broadcast of Radio Free Europe based in Prague. Although funded by the U.S. government, many Persians now view Radio Farda as their national radio station. While Radio Farda does rely in part on Iranian news sources, they work predominantly with U.S. reporters and speak from a U.S. perspective. The traditional role of radio has been to retain impartiality in all coverage of events. Radio Farda tries to balance this traditional role while also following a congressional mandate that dictates its actions to a certain extent. Because of this, Radio Farda has been using their broadcasts to actively promote democratic governance and tolerance.
However, when espousing beliefs contrary to those of local governments or authorities, reporting can sometimes become dangerous. Allegations of corruption in reporting can be particularly risky. In Turkmenistan, some media workers have begun reporting anonymously for this reason. At the same time, other journalists feel empowered by democratic promotion and the belief that the United States government will intervene should they become incarcerated as a result of their reporting. Unfortunately, this is not the case and the U.S. does not intercede on foreign reporters’ behalves. In order to ensure the safety of its own reporters, Radio Farda works to forge close relationships with the embassies. On one occasion this proved useful, and a group of reporters about to be apprehended were secreted out to safety. Davis pointed out that there is sometimes a difficult moral compromise that must be reached by reporters. Sometimes it is necessary to maintain good relations with countries whose policies you may not be in favor of in order to remain in the country to cover events.
Davis believes that in Iran, U.S. diplomacy has a large effect on relations between the two countries. Because many moderates in Iran are being radicalized, the media’s position in this country is of particular importance. There are many illiterate Persians that live in remote areas of Iran and may rely entirely on the local mullah for the bulk of their information. However, most of these followers also have access to radio. Therefore, Davis stresses the need to achieve better cultural sensitivity through radio broadcast by promoting the role of Islam as well as the role of democracy. The radio is an important vehicle for the dissemination of ideas and by offering differing perspectives, we can better hope to cultivate tolerance.
Beyond Politics: Prospects and Problems with International Peacekeeping
Event Title: Beyond Politics: Prospects and Problems with International Peacekeeping
Sponsors: The Atlantic Council of the United States and UNA-NCA
Location: The Atlantic Council
Date: October 26, 2006
Time: 3:00 PM – 4:30 PM
Approximate number of Attendees: 25
Intern Attending: Ashley Smith
Featured Speakers: Lieutenant Colonel Chuck Wilson, Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College; Peter Gantz, Refugees International
The speakers began by giving an overview of NATO’s current deployments. Currently, NATO has 44,000 troops deployed worldwide. Two regions where there is a particularly strong NATO presence are the Balkans and Afghanistan. NATO has been working in the Balkans since 1995 and 13,000 NATO troops are stationed there today. In Afghanistan, NATO has been working in and around Kabul. Here they have set up Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) which have been working to bring together national and international communities in hopes of creating a sustainable peace. NATO is also currently in Iraq, where it focuses exclusively on peace building. Its role there is to train forces, including the Iraqi Defense Academy forces and the Iraqi government forces. NATO has also been doing work in Pakistan to aid in earthquake relief.
A positive aspect of NATOs efforts is that they seek to work with multiple regional partners, rather than relying solely on the support of large entities, such as the European Union. They refer to this multilateralism as pushing for “the big P’s”, Partners for Peace. NATO sees this as a way to incorporate capabilities that it does not have itself, including working with global security exporters. One challenge NATO faces is the “institutional rice bowl dilemma”. Which countries should receive credit for NATO successes? Participant countries need to realize that this is not relevant. Another issue is the fact that NATO provides purely kinetic solutions to problems through their use of force. Should the military be trained in other areas, like diplomacy? Or should others be given military training? Who would be responsible for that?
This question leads to the additional dilemma of burden-sharing within peacekeeping operations. There is sometimes a reluctance to donate troops or funding, and there tends to be a heavy reliance on European giving. Lack of funding is currently threatening the survival of UNIFIL, the United Nations mission in Lebanon. In any peacekeeping mission, coordination is essential to success, as evidenced by Haiti. In Haiti, three different international donors are working on peacekeeping. The U.S. government-backed mission successfully set up a Haitian police force. However, due to a lack of infrastructure in the Haitian prison and court systems, the overall efficacy was diminished.
Peacekeeping is often a key component in ensuring sustainable peace in conflict-prone areas. While reform may be necessary for both NATO and the UN, these institutions will continue to play essential roles in the global peace process.
Sponsors: The Atlantic Council of the United States and UNA-NCA
Location: The Atlantic Council
Date: October 26, 2006
Time: 3:00 PM – 4:30 PM
Approximate number of Attendees: 25
Intern Attending: Ashley Smith
Featured Speakers: Lieutenant Colonel Chuck Wilson, Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College; Peter Gantz, Refugees International
The speakers began by giving an overview of NATO’s current deployments. Currently, NATO has 44,000 troops deployed worldwide. Two regions where there is a particularly strong NATO presence are the Balkans and Afghanistan. NATO has been working in the Balkans since 1995 and 13,000 NATO troops are stationed there today. In Afghanistan, NATO has been working in and around Kabul. Here they have set up Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) which have been working to bring together national and international communities in hopes of creating a sustainable peace. NATO is also currently in Iraq, where it focuses exclusively on peace building. Its role there is to train forces, including the Iraqi Defense Academy forces and the Iraqi government forces. NATO has also been doing work in Pakistan to aid in earthquake relief.
A positive aspect of NATOs efforts is that they seek to work with multiple regional partners, rather than relying solely on the support of large entities, such as the European Union. They refer to this multilateralism as pushing for “the big P’s”, Partners for Peace. NATO sees this as a way to incorporate capabilities that it does not have itself, including working with global security exporters. One challenge NATO faces is the “institutional rice bowl dilemma”. Which countries should receive credit for NATO successes? Participant countries need to realize that this is not relevant. Another issue is the fact that NATO provides purely kinetic solutions to problems through their use of force. Should the military be trained in other areas, like diplomacy? Or should others be given military training? Who would be responsible for that?
This question leads to the additional dilemma of burden-sharing within peacekeeping operations. There is sometimes a reluctance to donate troops or funding, and there tends to be a heavy reliance on European giving. Lack of funding is currently threatening the survival of UNIFIL, the United Nations mission in Lebanon. In any peacekeeping mission, coordination is essential to success, as evidenced by Haiti. In Haiti, three different international donors are working on peacekeeping. The U.S. government-backed mission successfully set up a Haitian police force. However, due to a lack of infrastructure in the Haitian prison and court systems, the overall efficacy was diminished.
Peacekeeping is often a key component in ensuring sustainable peace in conflict-prone areas. While reform may be necessary for both NATO and the UN, these institutions will continue to play essential roles in the global peace process.
Trade on Human Terms
Event Title: Trade on Human Terms
Sponsor: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Location: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Date: October 18, 2006
Time: 12pm - 2pm
Approximate Number of Attendees: 100
Intern Attending: Kristin Broyhill
Speakers: Hafiz Pusha, UNDP Asia-Pacific Regional Director; Sandra Polaski, Carnegie Endowment; David Walters, United States Trade Representative.
In July 2006, the United Nations Development Program published the Asia-Pacific Human Development Report: Trade on Human Terms, concentrating on the needs of balanced trade, transitional periods, trade protections and free trade agreements among the developing Asian countries.
Trade liberalization carried promises of increased development leading to poverty reduction. However, the WTO failed to properly manage globalization, which resulted in an unequal balance of trade. This in turn led to unequal development within and among regions. Looking at these results, it can be argued globalization has failed to deliver its promises to the masses.
Beginning in the 1980’s, Asia’s strong holds, China and India, took advantage of trade liberalization and built strong economies via their manufacturing and service industries, respectively. However, with China and India’s regional and global trade domination, the area’s Least Developed Countries (LCDs) were unable to compete in and had little to no access to their regional trading markets; much less the global markets. This trade imbalance left LCDs further behind in development and poverty alleviation. Special treatment of LDCs regarding tariffs and critical economic sector protections is necessary in order to enable LCDs to survive and specialize internally before being exposed to the global market.
Since the 1980’s, export product numbers and revenue throughout Asia-Pacific have soared. What is not reflected in those numbers, however, is the increased unemployment rate, decreased wages and depleting working conditions. These have developed partly in response to a lack of monitoring, and increased implementation of competitive quotas by international companies.
To put uneven growth and the regional trade inequality into perspective, in the 1990’s the manufacturing sector of India grew by 11 percent, while job growth was less than 1 percent. Asia-Pacific’s textile exports added up to 18 billion dollars, but the breakdown consisted of almost 15 billion from China, close to 3 billion from India, and the rest split amongst the fourteen other regional LDCs. LDCs have little or no access to China’s market. In 2005, the fourteen Asia-Pacific LDCs together exported 300 million dollars worth to China, while importing 4 billion from China.
The speakers noted that the rural agricultural economies have been hit the hardest by globalization. Western subsidies and free trade agreements have enabled Western producers to sell their products in developing countries at prices that undercut local producers and their product prices.
Trade is an important part of poverty reduction. However, the WTO and developing countries must look at employment implications sector by sector and plan accordingly in order to absorb and train those recently unemployed. To ensure a balance and smooth transition, protections and gradual sequencing of the steps toward trade liberalization need to be put into place and monitored over a number of years to minimize destabilization, poverty and unemployment.
Most importantly, argued the speakers, rather than a focus on production numbers, trade policy must create a middle class of consumers in order for globalization and trade liberalization to be profitable and sustainable for all.
Sponsor: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Location: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Date: October 18, 2006
Time: 12pm - 2pm
Approximate Number of Attendees: 100
Intern Attending: Kristin Broyhill
Speakers: Hafiz Pusha, UNDP Asia-Pacific Regional Director; Sandra Polaski, Carnegie Endowment; David Walters, United States Trade Representative.
In July 2006, the United Nations Development Program published the Asia-Pacific Human Development Report: Trade on Human Terms, concentrating on the needs of balanced trade, transitional periods, trade protections and free trade agreements among the developing Asian countries.
Trade liberalization carried promises of increased development leading to poverty reduction. However, the WTO failed to properly manage globalization, which resulted in an unequal balance of trade. This in turn led to unequal development within and among regions. Looking at these results, it can be argued globalization has failed to deliver its promises to the masses.
Beginning in the 1980’s, Asia’s strong holds, China and India, took advantage of trade liberalization and built strong economies via their manufacturing and service industries, respectively. However, with China and India’s regional and global trade domination, the area’s Least Developed Countries (LCDs) were unable to compete in and had little to no access to their regional trading markets; much less the global markets. This trade imbalance left LCDs further behind in development and poverty alleviation. Special treatment of LDCs regarding tariffs and critical economic sector protections is necessary in order to enable LCDs to survive and specialize internally before being exposed to the global market.
Since the 1980’s, export product numbers and revenue throughout Asia-Pacific have soared. What is not reflected in those numbers, however, is the increased unemployment rate, decreased wages and depleting working conditions. These have developed partly in response to a lack of monitoring, and increased implementation of competitive quotas by international companies.
To put uneven growth and the regional trade inequality into perspective, in the 1990’s the manufacturing sector of India grew by 11 percent, while job growth was less than 1 percent. Asia-Pacific’s textile exports added up to 18 billion dollars, but the breakdown consisted of almost 15 billion from China, close to 3 billion from India, and the rest split amongst the fourteen other regional LDCs. LDCs have little or no access to China’s market. In 2005, the fourteen Asia-Pacific LDCs together exported 300 million dollars worth to China, while importing 4 billion from China.
The speakers noted that the rural agricultural economies have been hit the hardest by globalization. Western subsidies and free trade agreements have enabled Western producers to sell their products in developing countries at prices that undercut local producers and their product prices.
Trade is an important part of poverty reduction. However, the WTO and developing countries must look at employment implications sector by sector and plan accordingly in order to absorb and train those recently unemployed. To ensure a balance and smooth transition, protections and gradual sequencing of the steps toward trade liberalization need to be put into place and monitored over a number of years to minimize destabilization, poverty and unemployment.
Most importantly, argued the speakers, rather than a focus on production numbers, trade policy must create a middle class of consumers in order for globalization and trade liberalization to be profitable and sustainable for all.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Post-Conflict Policing and Stabilization Operations: Challenges in the Asia Pacific Region and the Role of the Australian Federal Police
Event Title: Post Conflict Policing and Stabilization Operations: Challenges in the Asia Pacific Region and the Role of the Australian Federal Police
Sponsors: Transnational Threats Project (TNT) and the Australian Federal Police
Location: CSIS
Date: September 15, 2006
Time: 12:30 PM - 2:00 PM
Approximate number of Attendees: 45
Intern Attending: Ashley Smith
Featured Speaker: AFP Police Commissioner, Michael Joseph Keelty, APM
The AFP serves as both Australia’s national and international law enforcer. Therefore, Keelty undertakes many missions both domestically and abroad. He is working with an Australian outfit, the International Deployment Group, which is working in the Solomon Islands, East Timor, Papua New Guinea and the Middle East. The UN will also be reentering East Timor.
When considering international peace and security, there is a large question as to when it is appropriate to begin policing verses defending. Here, oftentimes different opinions lend different answers. Sometimes it happens that the AFP is invited to a country by the government, but then they end up at odds with those who invited them to be there in the first place. Australia had been working in Papua New Guinea, but the constitution of that government offered the Australians no immunity, so they were forced to leave.
Keelty pointed out the difficulty of changing “corruption culture”. One of the problems with relying solely on NGOs for aid of any kind, verses governmental intervention, is that there is no relationship developed between the two countries. Given that peace is created through long-term commitment, these relationships are very important.
In discussing intelligence sharing as it relates to policing, Keelty pointed out that it is not always advantageous to do so. For example, when battling corruption, one would certainly not want to disclose sensitive materials to the government at fault. Additionally, some have accused Interpol of being “equivocal” on the issue of terrorism. At the same time, in countries where the government and constitution are in place, policing may not be necessary.
One important thing to keep in mind when entering another country is that country’s culture. Understanding is very important, particularly when it comes to understanding local laws before attempting an intervention.
Keelty noted that there will be an increase in the number of Australian police forces that participate in international policing efforts, as the AFP’s international role has widely been seen as successful. He pointed out that the public is very much in favor of the Australian police in general and that no actual recruiting is necessary. Their online applications bring an adequate number of new recruits, who come in with more schooling and experience than many other international police agencies – the average age of recruitment being 29.
Sponsors: Transnational Threats Project (TNT) and the Australian Federal Police
Location: CSIS
Date: September 15, 2006
Time: 12:30 PM - 2:00 PM
Approximate number of Attendees: 45
Intern Attending: Ashley Smith
Featured Speaker: AFP Police Commissioner, Michael Joseph Keelty, APM
The AFP serves as both Australia’s national and international law enforcer. Therefore, Keelty undertakes many missions both domestically and abroad. He is working with an Australian outfit, the International Deployment Group, which is working in the Solomon Islands, East Timor, Papua New Guinea and the Middle East. The UN will also be reentering East Timor.
When considering international peace and security, there is a large question as to when it is appropriate to begin policing verses defending. Here, oftentimes different opinions lend different answers. Sometimes it happens that the AFP is invited to a country by the government, but then they end up at odds with those who invited them to be there in the first place. Australia had been working in Papua New Guinea, but the constitution of that government offered the Australians no immunity, so they were forced to leave.
Keelty pointed out the difficulty of changing “corruption culture”. One of the problems with relying solely on NGOs for aid of any kind, verses governmental intervention, is that there is no relationship developed between the two countries. Given that peace is created through long-term commitment, these relationships are very important.
In discussing intelligence sharing as it relates to policing, Keelty pointed out that it is not always advantageous to do so. For example, when battling corruption, one would certainly not want to disclose sensitive materials to the government at fault. Additionally, some have accused Interpol of being “equivocal” on the issue of terrorism. At the same time, in countries where the government and constitution are in place, policing may not be necessary.
One important thing to keep in mind when entering another country is that country’s culture. Understanding is very important, particularly when it comes to understanding local laws before attempting an intervention.
Keelty noted that there will be an increase in the number of Australian police forces that participate in international policing efforts, as the AFP’s international role has widely been seen as successful. He pointed out that the public is very much in favor of the Australian police in general and that no actual recruiting is necessary. Their online applications bring an adequate number of new recruits, who come in with more schooling and experience than many other international police agencies – the average age of recruitment being 29.
Friday, August 04, 2006
Plumbing the Past: The Impact of History on Philippine Institutions and Democracy
July 26, 2006 2:30 – 5:00 PM
Speakers:
Aries A. Arugay, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, University of the Philippines at Dilman
Glenn A. May, Professor and Director of Graduate Studies, Department of History, University of Oregon
Hazel M. McFerson, Associate Professor, Department of Public and International Affairs, George Mason University
Vicente L. Rafael, Professor, Department of History, University of Washington
Joel Rocamora, Executive Director, Institute for Popular Democracy
The Asia Program through the Woodrow Wilson Center is currently examining the political situation of the Philippines and the reasons why its democratic institutions are struggling. They are investigating the possibility that the history of the Philippines is the main cause for their current instability. The event used several stages of Philippine history to explain how each phase has led to the present problem of democratic governance. The panel of presenters was comprised of historians discussing how the US and Spain influenced the democracy of the Philippines and political scientists addressing the current problems as a conclusion of their past.
Vincente A. Rafael focused on the Spanish influence on the Philippines, especially through their rule between 1565 and 1898. Using a nation-state as the primary factor for democratic existence, Rafael asserted that the influence of Spain set the stage for nationalism in the country and a central nation state. Whereas the Philippines were previously independent tribal islands, Spain connected and unified them to function as one. A series of linkages were created through the Philippines; economic linkages fostered their trade, religious ones tied Christianity into the people, vertical linkages created a bureaucracy, and geographic ones tied the Philippines to the outside world. Glenn A. May discussed how the US influence in the Philippines over their democratic structure unintentionally reinforced the undemocratic nature of society as the people were persuaded to accept a ruling mechanism that was not entirely beneficial to their wellbeing. This included voting rights to merely the male elite and a school system that did not compliment their economic realities.
Joel Rocamora attributed the current political problems to a systemic crisis, a fault in the ability of the political system to respond effectively to poverty and violence. The gap between the rich and poor is widespread and increasing, and the state capacity is in serious decline. The Philippines, he believes, are incapable of producing national leadership. There is too much US dependence and influence today. Aries Arugay, however attributed the current problems to the poor dispersal of power in society, the coercion of the government, and the impact of the colonial legacy. Hazel McFerson believed that reforms needed to be made in the agrarian sector and in the elite democracy.
by Rebecca Bonardi
Speakers:
Aries A. Arugay, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, University of the Philippines at Dilman
Glenn A. May, Professor and Director of Graduate Studies, Department of History, University of Oregon
Hazel M. McFerson, Associate Professor, Department of Public and International Affairs, George Mason University
Vicente L. Rafael, Professor, Department of History, University of Washington
Joel Rocamora, Executive Director, Institute for Popular Democracy
The Asia Program through the Woodrow Wilson Center is currently examining the political situation of the Philippines and the reasons why its democratic institutions are struggling. They are investigating the possibility that the history of the Philippines is the main cause for their current instability. The event used several stages of Philippine history to explain how each phase has led to the present problem of democratic governance. The panel of presenters was comprised of historians discussing how the US and Spain influenced the democracy of the Philippines and political scientists addressing the current problems as a conclusion of their past.
Vincente A. Rafael focused on the Spanish influence on the Philippines, especially through their rule between 1565 and 1898. Using a nation-state as the primary factor for democratic existence, Rafael asserted that the influence of Spain set the stage for nationalism in the country and a central nation state. Whereas the Philippines were previously independent tribal islands, Spain connected and unified them to function as one. A series of linkages were created through the Philippines; economic linkages fostered their trade, religious ones tied Christianity into the people, vertical linkages created a bureaucracy, and geographic ones tied the Philippines to the outside world. Glenn A. May discussed how the US influence in the Philippines over their democratic structure unintentionally reinforced the undemocratic nature of society as the people were persuaded to accept a ruling mechanism that was not entirely beneficial to their wellbeing. This included voting rights to merely the male elite and a school system that did not compliment their economic realities.
Joel Rocamora attributed the current political problems to a systemic crisis, a fault in the ability of the political system to respond effectively to poverty and violence. The gap between the rich and poor is widespread and increasing, and the state capacity is in serious decline. The Philippines, he believes, are incapable of producing national leadership. There is too much US dependence and influence today. Aries Arugay, however attributed the current problems to the poor dispersal of power in society, the coercion of the government, and the impact of the colonial legacy. Hazel McFerson believed that reforms needed to be made in the agrarian sector and in the elite democracy.
by Rebecca Bonardi
Thursday, July 20, 2006
Combating Avian Influenza and HIV/AIDS: Vietnam’s National Policy
July 19, 2006 4:30 PM-6:00 PM
Speakers:
Dr. Trinh Quan Huan, Vice Minister of Health, Vietnam
Dr. Nguyen Huy Nga, Director General, Vietnam Administration of HIV/AIDS Control
Dr. Nguyen Tran Hein, Director, National Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology
In January 2006, CSIS traveled to Vietnam for an HIV/AIDS Task Force Mission. There have been 108,789 HIV cases nationwide, and by 2010 a predicted 311500 cases of HIV will have been contracted. In 1990 the first case of HIV was reported and in the last five years there has been a rapid explosion of its prevalence. The HIV distribution is gender skewed; 85% of the cases are contracted by males. Of all cases, 70-80% occurs as a result of injection drug use (IDU). Youths are the largest population hit; it is estimated that 50% of HIV infected people are between the ages of 20-29.
The government has adopted a new progressive law that prohibits discrimination and stigmatization of the virus, and includes harm reduction, therapy, care, and support into the treatment plan. Under the wing of PEPFAR, the Vietnam HIV/AIDS program has a strong national strategy that contains an M&E unit, support at every level of society, and a control center. There are programs for women sex workers, for children living with AIDS, and therapy programs for the many injection drug users. The programs are encouraged by the religious centers; Vietnamese monks in particular are especially supportive of the policies and have encouraged their communities to seek treatment and information for prevention.
Vietnam’s main achievements are its political commitment to addressing the HIV/AIDS issue and implementing a strong program. They have scaled up HIV/AIDS treatment and care; as of now 5000 people have access to treatment and by the end of the year, 7000 will. Funding is still the main challenge of the country, right now only 30% of needed funds are available.
The avian influenza is also a major health risk for the country of Vietnam. The epidemic has come in three waves and all provinces of the country have had outbreaks. There have been 92 human cases overall and 42 deaths. There haven’t been any outbreaks in 2006. In wave one, 44 million poultry died. The epidemic started in the northern region of the country, and then jumped to the southern part of the country, skipping the whole middle section. Each wave followed this pattern and the third wave finally migrated to the middle. Wave three was most deadly, and lasted from December 2004 to November 2005.
There were a few major findings reported, the most important being a strong correlation between the river networks and HPAI (human poultry avian influenza) outbreaks. Secondly, the outbreaks occur in the cold wet season (winter/spring). There is no gender discrepancy but the flu seeks more damage among the under 40 crowd. The flu also works in family clusters, meaning that the virus generally would affect more than one family member in a particular region. There is no evidence of human to human transmission of the virus. Direct contact with the ill/dead poultry seven days prior was the main cause of the disease.
Four main ‘lessons learned’ were reported: First, a high level of political commitment is needed, with strong government leadership present. Second, the establishment of multi-sectoral steering committees is needed, and is central to the communal level. Third, good collaboration is needed between the ministries, the government, and the regional and local governments. Organizations and mass media are crucial as well. The implementation by these groups led to surveillance/early warning systems, virus eradication programs, disposal of contaminated birds, a ban of duck hatching, and poultry vaccinations. Finally, the fourth lesson learned was the benefit of a strong health care system that included surveillance, care and treatment across the country. The recommendations for the future include strengthening surveillance, vaccinating poultry, using tamiflu, accelerating human vaccinations, and enhancing regional and global communication.
by Rebecca Bonardi
Speakers:
Dr. Trinh Quan Huan, Vice Minister of Health, Vietnam
Dr. Nguyen Huy Nga, Director General, Vietnam Administration of HIV/AIDS Control
Dr. Nguyen Tran Hein, Director, National Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology
In January 2006, CSIS traveled to Vietnam for an HIV/AIDS Task Force Mission. There have been 108,789 HIV cases nationwide, and by 2010 a predicted 311500 cases of HIV will have been contracted. In 1990 the first case of HIV was reported and in the last five years there has been a rapid explosion of its prevalence. The HIV distribution is gender skewed; 85% of the cases are contracted by males. Of all cases, 70-80% occurs as a result of injection drug use (IDU). Youths are the largest population hit; it is estimated that 50% of HIV infected people are between the ages of 20-29.
The government has adopted a new progressive law that prohibits discrimination and stigmatization of the virus, and includes harm reduction, therapy, care, and support into the treatment plan. Under the wing of PEPFAR, the Vietnam HIV/AIDS program has a strong national strategy that contains an M&E unit, support at every level of society, and a control center. There are programs for women sex workers, for children living with AIDS, and therapy programs for the many injection drug users. The programs are encouraged by the religious centers; Vietnamese monks in particular are especially supportive of the policies and have encouraged their communities to seek treatment and information for prevention.
Vietnam’s main achievements are its political commitment to addressing the HIV/AIDS issue and implementing a strong program. They have scaled up HIV/AIDS treatment and care; as of now 5000 people have access to treatment and by the end of the year, 7000 will. Funding is still the main challenge of the country, right now only 30% of needed funds are available.
The avian influenza is also a major health risk for the country of Vietnam. The epidemic has come in three waves and all provinces of the country have had outbreaks. There have been 92 human cases overall and 42 deaths. There haven’t been any outbreaks in 2006. In wave one, 44 million poultry died. The epidemic started in the northern region of the country, and then jumped to the southern part of the country, skipping the whole middle section. Each wave followed this pattern and the third wave finally migrated to the middle. Wave three was most deadly, and lasted from December 2004 to November 2005.
There were a few major findings reported, the most important being a strong correlation between the river networks and HPAI (human poultry avian influenza) outbreaks. Secondly, the outbreaks occur in the cold wet season (winter/spring). There is no gender discrepancy but the flu seeks more damage among the under 40 crowd. The flu also works in family clusters, meaning that the virus generally would affect more than one family member in a particular region. There is no evidence of human to human transmission of the virus. Direct contact with the ill/dead poultry seven days prior was the main cause of the disease.
Four main ‘lessons learned’ were reported: First, a high level of political commitment is needed, with strong government leadership present. Second, the establishment of multi-sectoral steering committees is needed, and is central to the communal level. Third, good collaboration is needed between the ministries, the government, and the regional and local governments. Organizations and mass media are crucial as well. The implementation by these groups led to surveillance/early warning systems, virus eradication programs, disposal of contaminated birds, a ban of duck hatching, and poultry vaccinations. Finally, the fourth lesson learned was the benefit of a strong health care system that included surveillance, care and treatment across the country. The recommendations for the future include strengthening surveillance, vaccinating poultry, using tamiflu, accelerating human vaccinations, and enhancing regional and global communication.
by Rebecca Bonardi
Monday, July 10, 2006
Africa Democratic Prospects
Tuesday, June 27, 2006 3:30-5:30
Speakers:
Moderators: US Reps. Ed Royce and Donald Payne. Invited Participants: Dany Komla Aydia, Joel Barkan, Ted Dagne, Christopher Fomunyoh, Jendayi Frazer, Princeton N. Lyman, Miria Matembe, J. Stephen Morrison, Dave Peterson, Howard Wolpe.
The event was in the form of a round table discussion explaining the AU countries in the progress towards democracy. The African challenges to bring about democracy are narrowed down into: Government and institutions corruption, demilitarizing government institutions and Civil wars. The needs are: justice, prevalent rule of law, economic growth, strengthening weak democracy to avoid falling back in the loop of authoritarianism and dictatorship. Almost 18 African countries have become democratic. Free media has played a big role in the progression of democracy especially through community radios. MCC has greatly supported African countries wanting democratic governance and civil society.
On of the main points of discussion was China's economic interest in African countries and the threat it poses to the democratic progress. China can play a model for authoritarians that economic development can be achieved without democracy and human rights. While some speakers agreed that China might pose a threat, some argued that there are also other countries that play the same role.
Governments in Africa have developed in different trends: Ambiguous democracies, Virtual democracies, electoral dictatorship, aspiring democracies. Due to years of wars and misplacement and were deprived form education that plays important role in democratic voting.
by Youmna Diri
Speakers:
Moderators: US Reps. Ed Royce and Donald Payne. Invited Participants: Dany Komla Aydia, Joel Barkan, Ted Dagne, Christopher Fomunyoh, Jendayi Frazer, Princeton N. Lyman, Miria Matembe, J. Stephen Morrison, Dave Peterson, Howard Wolpe.
The event was in the form of a round table discussion explaining the AU countries in the progress towards democracy. The African challenges to bring about democracy are narrowed down into: Government and institutions corruption, demilitarizing government institutions and Civil wars. The needs are: justice, prevalent rule of law, economic growth, strengthening weak democracy to avoid falling back in the loop of authoritarianism and dictatorship. Almost 18 African countries have become democratic. Free media has played a big role in the progression of democracy especially through community radios. MCC has greatly supported African countries wanting democratic governance and civil society.
On of the main points of discussion was China's economic interest in African countries and the threat it poses to the democratic progress. China can play a model for authoritarians that economic development can be achieved without democracy and human rights. While some speakers agreed that China might pose a threat, some argued that there are also other countries that play the same role.
Governments in Africa have developed in different trends: Ambiguous democracies, Virtual democracies, electoral dictatorship, aspiring democracies. Due to years of wars and misplacement and were deprived form education that plays important role in democratic voting.
by Youmna Diri
Democracy and human Rights in Asia
Thursday, June 8, 2006 10:30am to 12:30pm
Speakers: Paul Scott (ARDA)
Richard Deck (ARDA)
Cynthia Bunton (International Republican Institute)
T Kumar (Amnesty International)
Blair King (National Democratic Institute)
CHRC staff
Mr. Richard Deck of the ARDA began the panel discussion with a brief history of the Alliance for Reform and Democracy or ARDA. The concept for the creation of such an organization came about in Cambodia in August 2005. ARDA, however, was finally created in Thailand in October. ARDA’s mission according to Mr. Deck is to offer Asian countries with a network to exchange information, gather support during times of crisis, etc. ARDA was created to serve as an ally of Asian democrats, monitor political developments, promote democracy and freedom throughout Asia.
Mr. Deck concluded his speech by talking briefly about some of ARDA’s interventions in Malaysia and Hong Kong.
Mr. Paul Scott, the project director of the Asia Democracy Index spoke next. The Asia Democracy Index (ADI) report measure and evaluates democracy, good governance and status of human rights in Asian countries. The special feature about this report is that Asians themselves ranked their governments. Mr. Scott then proceeded to talk briefly about the situation in all the 16 countries that participated in the ADI report. He also said that certain Asian countries like India and China could not be surveyed due to budgetary reasons. The survey which relied completely on local NGO’s included questions on civil rights, elections, governance and corruption and the role of the media. Japan ranked highest in the ADI. Mr. Scott also pointed out interesting facts that came to light because of this survey. For instance, in Pakistan, even though the government is corrupt and inefficient there is civil and political space for criticism. The media is extremely active and vigilant. He went on to talk about other countries like Myanmar, Indonesia.
Cynthia Bunton of the International Republican Institute stressed on her organizations support to the ARDA. She also said that her organization agreed with ARDA’s agenda to bring democracy to certain countries in Asia. She also dismissed the ‘empty rhetoric’ of ‘Asian values’ which according to her was simply an excuse for corrupt governments to exploit their citizens by not bringing in democracy.
Mr. T Kumar from Amnesty international spoke of the link between democracy and human rights. Human rights, according to him, sets the right atmosphere for democracy to function. He also said that Asia was a large and complex region especially with regard to democracy. Even in countries which are democratic there are problems. India, for instance. Mr. Kumar also blamed certain western governments for harming the spread of democracy in this region because of their vested interests.
Mr. Blair King concluded the panel discussion by focusing on US foreign policy in the region. He said that the diverse nature of the region makes it hard for the US to develop a coherent foreign policy. He also said that regional organizations like ASEAN, etc should play a larger role in bringing democracy to the region. US should support these organizations in order for them to achieve their goals.
by Tahseen Alam
Speakers: Paul Scott (ARDA)
Richard Deck (ARDA)
Cynthia Bunton (International Republican Institute)
T Kumar (Amnesty International)
Blair King (National Democratic Institute)
CHRC staff
Mr. Richard Deck of the ARDA began the panel discussion with a brief history of the Alliance for Reform and Democracy or ARDA. The concept for the creation of such an organization came about in Cambodia in August 2005. ARDA, however, was finally created in Thailand in October. ARDA’s mission according to Mr. Deck is to offer Asian countries with a network to exchange information, gather support during times of crisis, etc. ARDA was created to serve as an ally of Asian democrats, monitor political developments, promote democracy and freedom throughout Asia.
Mr. Deck concluded his speech by talking briefly about some of ARDA’s interventions in Malaysia and Hong Kong.
Mr. Paul Scott, the project director of the Asia Democracy Index spoke next. The Asia Democracy Index (ADI) report measure and evaluates democracy, good governance and status of human rights in Asian countries. The special feature about this report is that Asians themselves ranked their governments. Mr. Scott then proceeded to talk briefly about the situation in all the 16 countries that participated in the ADI report. He also said that certain Asian countries like India and China could not be surveyed due to budgetary reasons. The survey which relied completely on local NGO’s included questions on civil rights, elections, governance and corruption and the role of the media. Japan ranked highest in the ADI. Mr. Scott also pointed out interesting facts that came to light because of this survey. For instance, in Pakistan, even though the government is corrupt and inefficient there is civil and political space for criticism. The media is extremely active and vigilant. He went on to talk about other countries like Myanmar, Indonesia.
Cynthia Bunton of the International Republican Institute stressed on her organizations support to the ARDA. She also said that her organization agreed with ARDA’s agenda to bring democracy to certain countries in Asia. She also dismissed the ‘empty rhetoric’ of ‘Asian values’ which according to her was simply an excuse for corrupt governments to exploit their citizens by not bringing in democracy.
Mr. T Kumar from Amnesty international spoke of the link between democracy and human rights. Human rights, according to him, sets the right atmosphere for democracy to function. He also said that Asia was a large and complex region especially with regard to democracy. Even in countries which are democratic there are problems. India, for instance. Mr. Kumar also blamed certain western governments for harming the spread of democracy in this region because of their vested interests.
Mr. Blair King concluded the panel discussion by focusing on US foreign policy in the region. He said that the diverse nature of the region makes it hard for the US to develop a coherent foreign policy. He also said that regional organizations like ASEAN, etc should play a larger role in bringing democracy to the region. US should support these organizations in order for them to achieve their goals.
by Tahseen Alam
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
