*This article was first published by Freedom House on July 18, 2011.
*This Commentary first appeared on neimanwatchdog.org on July 8, 2011
While political debate still roils over the legality of the American role in Libya, other questions have grown more pressing. Those questions include whether the European side of the NATO operation can be sustained and whether the Libyan opposition truly has the ability to achieve their goal of taking down the regime of Muammar Qaddhafi & Co.
These issues are critical for those favoring US participation in NATO operations as well as those opposed.
The Middle East Institute and the UNDP are proud to host a discussion with UNDP Administrator Helen Clark, Under Secretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs Robert D. Hormats, and Middle East Institute Scholar Amb. Edward Walker about how best to address political, economic and human development needs in the Arab world today.
*This article originally appeared in Newsweek Pakistan in their June 10, 2011 edition
This article originally appeared in Newsweek Pakistan in their June 10, 2011 edition
Originally posted May 2011
American policy toward conflict in Libya is bearing disappointing fruit. The conflict there seems to be settling in to a stalemate with the likely prospect of becoming an extended civil war. In the face of this prospect, John McCain and other Senators are calling for greater US involvement. That goes against the grain of American public opinion. It raises in sharp relief the question: Will our current limited engagement policy work? And if so, when?
This article originally appeared in the National Interest online under the title "Collapse Imminent in Afghanistan" on April 21, 2011
It was absolutely predictable that Republicans would attack President Obama whatever he did in Libya, though Newt Gingrich, in his overeagerness, overreached by criticizing him for too explicitly opposite reasons. It was also likely that the anti-interventionist left, which sees (almost?) any use of American military power as imperialistic and unwarranted would likewise be opposed.
Rahm Emanuel famously quipped that a crisis should never go to waste. In his absence, the Administration seems determined not to take sufficient advantage of the ongoing and huge crisis in the Arab world. Its hesitant, uncertain, and (to date) completely ineffectual response to events in Libya sadly make this all too clear.
It now appears that the US finally has gotten serious about doing something meaningful to assist opposition forces in Libya. Exaggerated fears and an insufficient grasp of the adverse consequences of not taking such action previously paralyzed US (and most European) policymakers with respect to even an eastern no-fly zone, let alone more robust measures. Meanwhile, what is left of the organized Libyan opposition is increasingly hard-pressed.
The Middle East Institute is proud to host Joshua Landis and Andrew Tabler for a discussion about the current state of US-Syrian relations and the impact the changing regional dynamic will have on the relationship's priorities. How might the revolutionary wave crossing the Middle East effect Washington's discussions with Damascus? Should there be a greater emphasis on reform? Where does the Syrian-Israeli peace track stand and is it more urgent than ever?
Speakers: Joshua Landis, Andrew Tabler
The greatest threat to U.S. national security is Congress’s abdication of its constitutional responsibilities. Nothing could make this point more clear than the current discussion of whether Washington should bear the lion’s share of the costs and risks of a no-fly zone over Libya.
*This Policy Insight first appeared as a feature article in the Majalla on February 9, 2011.
Half a century after independence and two decades since the liberation from Iraqi occupation, Kuwait’s bitter experience with pan-Arabism and ongoing regional power plays have affected its growth. However, since the downfall of Saddam Hussein in 2003, and thanks to robust oil revenues, Kuwait has witnessed an unprecedented boom, albeit amidst raging internal disputes over the need for reform and the future direction of the country.
Betrayal
The shock waves of Hosni Mubarak’s resignation have just started to roll across the Middle East, but in Egypt the upheaval has barely begun. The country now embarks on what the protesters in Tahrir square hope will be a transition to a true, civilian-led democracy. In the meantime, Egypt is headed for a period of military rule in some form, with the ultimate intentions of the armed forces leadership still in doubt. Will the military act to effect the “genuine transition” now demanded by the Obama Administration and the protesters themselves?