World Politics Review

Turkey's EU Bid Requires Patience

Kate Schuler — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 08:16:00 -0400

The release last week of a European Commission report highly critical of Bulgaria's and Romania's progress in their efforts against corruption serves as a useful reminder that both Brussels and Ankara should exercise patience while negotiating Turkey's European Union bid. The Bulgarian and Romanian cases demonstrate that both Europe and its potential members are best served by an exhaustive, deliberate accession process.

The Powell Doctrine's Enduring Relevance

Cecille Isidro — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 13:07:00 -0400

Once upon a time, there was a grand and influential foreign policy doctrine. It was based on some traditional notions about U.S. statecraft that placed severe constraints on when America went to war. It asserted that when the United States used military force, it must do so in overwhelming fashion and only in the service of vital national interests. For any military action, it counseled the dispassionate weighing of costs and benefits, recommended that policymakers have clear, realistic and achievable political objectives, and called for the

Obama in Egypt: A Vision in Democracy Promotion

Cecille Isidro — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 14:11:00 -0400

President Barack Obama's historic address to the Muslim world in Cairo tomorrow offers a prime opportunity to outline a new U.S. vision for democracy and human rights in the region. To accomplish this goal, Obama must firmly reject the notion that safeguarding America's strategic interests in the Middle East somehow runs counter to the goal of advancing political reform. Instead he must craft a balanced message that recognizes that reform is synonymous with U.S. interests in the region.

Better Aid, Not 'Dead Aid,' for Africa

Cecille Isidro — Wed, 06 May 2009 10:17:00 -0400

Dambisa Moyo's new book, "Dead Aid ," is a prime example of an old idea wrapped up in new packaging. As a Harvard-educated child of Africa (Zambia), with stints at Goldman Sachs and the World Bank, Moyo makes for an appealing messenger. However, the idea on which her book is based -- that foreign assistance for Africa hasn't worked -- is hardly an original one to most aid practitioners.

Under the Influence: A Yardstick of American Power | World Politics Review

Cecille Isidro — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 09:10:00 -0500

Parag Khanna argues that in many places, "America is no longer viewed as a provider of security but rather of insecurity," which allows China and Europe to ...

U.S. Arms Sales | World Politics Review

Communications — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 14:07:00 -0500

... Yemen and Colombia -- that routinely violate human rights, the nonpartisan think-tank, New America Foundation, said in a report released last week. ...

Arms and Security Initiative Program in World Politics Review | 'Corridors of Power'

Communications — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 13:06:00 -0400

...The Bush administration's military buildup, the largest since World War II, "may be starting to wind down despite the ongoing costs of Iraq and Afghanistan," according to a current report by the New America Foundation's Arms and Security Initiative...LINK

Stop Looking for 'Moderate' Shiites and Address Interests

Ron Tang — Fri, 30 May 2008 08:55:00 -0400

Even those in America who call for a more humble American foreign policy and recognize the need to listen to foreign populations and global public opinion persist in deploying at every possible moment the most patronizing of monikers in describing their preferred allies: "moderate."

Over the past eight years, the condescending label of moderate has been applied to a variety of potential interlocutors in regional conflicts -- with never a positive result. Negotiations with so-called "moderate Taliban" proved a failure; Taliban interests and unity certainly outweighed any incentives the U.S.-backed Karzai regime could muster. The much lauded effort in Iraq's Anbar province to work with "moderate Sunni" may also backfire: Al-Qaida in Iraq has been weakened, but there has been no political progress on the national level and, thanks to U.S. weapons, the Anbar Sunnis are now armed to the teeth. Then there was the arming of the "moderate Palestinians" of Fatah over the "militants" of Hamas, which made the latter even more merciless in its takeover of Gaza, splintering the Palestinian state both geographically and politically.

In each case, the label is little more than a kiss of death, showing the weakness of those leaders who accept it and become puppets of the Bush administration, such as Jordan's King Abdullah.

Now the U.S., through public diplomacy and other means, is sponsoring efforts to seek out "moderate Shiites" in the crescent of Shiite-majority Arab countries stretching from Lebanon through Bahrain to Iraq. Major American think tanks host conferences to identify and distinguish moderate Shiites and use them as a bridgehead to dampen Iranian-sponsored unrest among oppressed Shiites in these either monarchic or chaotic nations. As with all other examples of attempting to co-opt so-called moderates, these efforts should be seen for what they are: window-dressing for an attempt to isolate opponents such as Iran rather than genuine efforts to recognize the geography, history, demographics and national interests of people in the region and push for pragmatic solutions based on these factors.

The search for "moderate Shiites" presents an exceptional and ironic problem: There is no such thing. It is not that one cannot find secular, democratic Shiites as one can with Sunnis. Indeed, perhaps all Shiites are so except for Iran's ruling clerics. But most of them also are uninvolved in politics, leaving the reality that we must reach out to Shiite groups that are rooted in local and national political movements. Strictly speaking, if the Bush administration wants to negotiate with moderate Shiites, it should speak directly with Lebanese Hezbollah, an organization that has abandoned the idea of an Islamic republic and, with the most recent peace conference in Qatar, accepted a greater official political role in Lebanon's multi-confessional parliamentary system.

Given the recent history of failed imaginary segregation of foreign societies, a more serious plan has never been more necessary. Addressing Iran's concerns of being surrounded by American troops and nuclear powers won't come through a limp attempt at Shiite rollback, nor through a simple bilateral dialogue with the United States. The respect and recognition Iran seeks can only be achieved through a regional security conference long proposed and never implemented. Numerous recent surveys make clear that the majority of Iranians favor greater foreign investment and diplomatic and social exchanges with the West -- a "grand bargain" that could do far more to change the Tehran regime's behavior than isolated support for a few "moderate Shiites."

Israeli opposition to convening the key regional players -- Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, and smaller Gulf statelets -- together with the major outside players -- the EU, U.S., Russia and China -- has been a needless drag on advancing a dialogue that should have begun years ago. Israel's inhibitions have created a chicken-and-egg problem: It won't negotiate until its existence is recognized, but such recognition will only come with credibility earned through negotiation.

The United States has long ceased to be considered an honest broker in the region, and Tony Blair was nothing if not an ironic choice to be the Quartet's special representative for regional conflicts, given Britain's legacy in the region and his closeness to the Bush administration. The EU, which has security interests in the region given the terrorist threats it faces, economic interests given its energy relationships with Iran and now even Iraq, and even a military peacekeeping presence in Lebanon already, is perhaps the only trusted outside power which could convene such a regional process to deescalate Mideast tensions. Whoever brings together the hostile actors, who are permanently locked in one complex constellation, the effort should be based on assessing declared interests, not on parochial American diktats to allow only "moderates" a seat at the table.