Showing posts from category foreign policy.
-
Historic Floods Plague Pakistan
›August 19, 2010 // By Shawna Cuan
“Staggered by the scale of destruction from this summer’s catastrophic floods, Pakistani officials have begun to acknowledge that the country’s security could be gravely affected,” reports the Washington Post. The Pakistani government – already cash-strapped between fighting “the war on terror” and trying to prevent an economic collapse – now faces recovering from the worst flooding in over 80 years.
-
Interview With Wilson Center’s Maria Ivanova: Engaging Civil Society in Global Environmental Governance
›August 13, 2010 // By Russell SticklorFrom left to right, the five consecutive Executive Directors of the United Nations Environment Programme: Achim Steiner, Klaus Toepfer, Elizabeth Dowdeswell, Mostafa Tolba, and Maurice Strong, at the 2009 Global Environmental Governance Forum in Glion, Switzerland.
In the eyes of much of the world, global environmental governance remains a somewhat abstract concept, lacking a strong international institutional framework to push it forward. Slowly but surely, however, momentum has started to build behind the idea in recent years. One of the main reasons has been the growing involvement of civil society groups, which have demanded a more substantial role in the design and execution of environmental policy—and there are signs that environmental leaders at the international level are listening.
On the heels of the UN Environment Programme’s Governing Council meeting earlier this year in Bali, a call was put out to strengthen the involvement of civil society organizations in the current environmental governance reform process. To that end, UNEP is creating a Civil Society Advisory Group on International Environmental Governance, which will act as an information-sharing intermediary between civil society groups and regional and global environmental policymaking bodies over the next few years. (The application deadline has been extended; applicants interested in joining the Advisory Group should submit their materials via e-mail by Sunday, August 15, 2010—full instructions are listed at the end of this post.)
Maria Ivanova, a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson Center and director of the Global Environmental Governance Project, played a key role in ensuring civil society engagement in the contemporary political process on international environmental governance reform. Ivanova recently sat down with the New Security Beat to talk about the future prospects for global environmental governance, the Rio+20 Earth Summit in Brazil in 2012, and how to foster a more open and sustained dialogue between the worlds of environmental policymaking and academia.
New Security Beat: What are the pitfalls of a regional approach to addressing climate change and other environmental issues, as opposed to an international approach?
Maria Ivanova: Global environmental problems cannot be solved by one country or one region alone, and require a collective global response. But they can also not be addressed solely at the global level because they require action by individuals and organizations in particular geographies. The conundrum with climate change is that the countries and regions most affected are the ones least responsible for causing the problem in the first case. We cannot therefore simply substitute a national or regional response for a global action plan, as more often than not, it would be a case of “victim pays” rather than “polluter pays”—the fundamental principle of environmental policy in the United States and most other countries. Importantly, however, our global environmental institutions do not possess the requisite authority and ability to enforce agreements and sanction non-compliance.
NSB: What are some of the inherent difficulties in getting countries to see eye-to-eye and collaborate on the development of institutions for global environmental governance?
MI: The most important difficulty is perhaps the lack of trust and a common ethical paradigm accompanied by a pervasive suspicion about countries’ motives. Secondly, there is a perceived dichotomy between environment and development that has lodged in the consciousness of societies around the world. Thirdly, there’s the inability of current institutions to deliver on existing commitments. The resulting blame game feeds suspicions and restarts the whole cycle again.
NSB: Do you see the 21st century’s various environmental challenges as being a driver of international conflict or cooperation?
MI: After the fall of the Berlin Wall, it was expected that global environmental (and other) issues would be a driver for cooperation. A green dividend was expected, and the 1992 Rio Earth Summit fostered much hope. But quite the opposite happened. Global environmental challenges such as climate change, for example, have caused more conflict than cooperation. Other concerns, such as whaling and biodiversity loss, have also triggered conflicts as governments have become fiercely protective of their national sovereignty. On the other hand, civil society groups and even individuals around the world have come together in new coalitions and formed new alliances. So while at a governmental level we observe increased tension, at a civil society level, we witness unprecedented mobilization and collaboration, especially through social media. Obviously, we live in a new world.
NSB: There has been a lot of talk about bridging the gap between the academic and policy worlds—two communities that do not typically have much interaction, but likely have a lot to learn from one another. What steps do you think can be taken regarding environmental governance that might facilitate a sustained dialogue and interaction between the two sides?
MI: Many academics have thought, debated, and written about global environmental governance. Fewer have presented their analysis to policymakers and politicians. At the Global Environmental Governance (GEG) Project that I direct, we seek to bridge that gap and provide a clearinghouse of information, serving as a “brutal analyst,” and acting as an honest broker among various groups working in this field. Moreover, we are in the process of launching a collaborative initiative among the Global Environmental Governance Project, the Center for Law and Global Affairs at Arizona State University, and the Academic Council on the UN System to collect, compile, and communicate academic thinking on options for reform to the ongoing political process on international environmental governance. We are creating a Linked-In group where we hope to engage in discussions with colleagues from universities around the world with the purpose of generating ideas, developing options, and testing them with policymakers. Moreover, we are engaging with civil society beyond academia. The GEG Project is sponsoring five regional events on governance in Argentina, China, Ethiopia, Nepal, and Uganda that are taking place in August and September. Led by young environmental leaders in those countries who attended the 2009 Global Environmental Governance Forum in Glion, Switzerland, these consultations are generating genuine engagement in thought and action on governance. So, new initiatives are certainly emerging and the results could be visible by the Rio+20 conference in May 2012.
NSB: What are your expectations for Rio+20?
MI: Given that governance is a major issue on the agenda for Rio+20, my hope is that the conference will bring about a new model for global governance, which reframes the environment-development dichotomy, cultivates shared values, and fosters leadership. Indeed, I am convinced that leadership is the most important necessary condition for change. We need to encourage more bold, visionary, entrepreneurial behavior rather than conformity.
My hidden hope for Rio+20 is that it will dramatically shift the narrative and move us from sustainable development to sustainability. Sustainability builds on sustainable development but goes further than that. As a concept it allows for new thinking, new actors, and new politics. It avoids the North-South polarization of sustainable development, which is so often equated with development and is therefore understood as what the North has already attained and what the South is aspiring to. By contrast, no one society has reached sustainability, and learning by all is necessary. Moreover, much of the innovative thinking about sustainability is happening in developing countries, which are trying to improve quality of life without jeopardizing the carrying capacity of the environment. Progressive thinking is also taking place on campuses in industrialized countries, which are creating a new sense of community and collaboration. Indeed, young people around the world are engaging in finding new ways of living within the planetary limits in a responsible and fulfilling manner.
Maria Ivanova is director of the Global Environmental Governance Project, a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and an assistant professor of global governance at the McCormack Graduate School of Policy and Global Studies, University of Massachusetts Boston.
If you wish to nominate yourself or someone else as a candidate for the Civil Society Advisory Group on IEG, you need to submit materials to civil.society@unep.org by Sunday, August 15, 2010 (please copy info@environmentalgovernance.org). You can find the nomination form and the Terms of Reference for the group at the Global Environmental Governance Project’s website.
Photo Credit: “UNEP Leadership,” courtesy of the Global Environmental Governance Project. -
Reform Aid to Pakistan’s Health Sector, Says Former Wilson Center Scholar
›August 5, 2010 // By Wilson Center StaffExcerpt from op-ed by Samia Altaf and Anjum Altaf in Dawn:
WE must state at the outset that we have been wary of, if not actually opposed to, the prospect of further economic assistance to Pakistan because of the callous misuse and abuse of aid that has marked the past across all elected and non-elected regimes.
We are convinced that such aid, driven by political imperatives and deliberately blind to the well-recognised holes in the system, has been a disservice to the Pakistani people by destroying all incentives for self-reliance, good governance and accountability to either the ultimate donors or recipients.
Even without the holes in the system the kind of aid flows being proposed are likely to prove problematic. Over half a century ago, Jane Jacobs, in a brilliant chapter (Gradual and Cataclysmic Money) in a brilliant book (The Death and Life of Great American Cities), showed convincingly how ‘cataclysmic’ money (money that arrives in huge amounts in short periods of time) is a surefire way of destroying all possibilities of improvement. What is needed, she argued, is ‘gradual’ money in the control of the residents themselves. While Jacobs was writing in the context of aid to impoverished communities within the US, she concluded with a remarkably prescient concern: “I hope we disburse foreign aid abroad more intelligently than we disburse it at home.”
Continue reading on Dawn.
For more on U.S. aid to Pakistan, see New Security Beat‘s coverage of the recent U.S.-Pakistani Strategic Dialogue.
Photo Credit: A U.S. Army Soldier with 32nd Infantry Regiment, 10th Mountain Division, hands out medical supplies to Pakistani refugees outside an International Committee of the Red Crescent aid station in Afghanistan’s Kunar province, October 23, 2009. Courtesy of flickr user isafmedia. -
The Conflict Potential of Climate Adaptation and Mitigation
›August 4, 2010 // By Schuyler Null“Climate change and our energy future are issues that are really front and center in our policy debates and public debates,” said ECSP Director Geoff Dabelko in this collection of interviews from New Security Beat’s Backdraft series. “One specific set of questions within this larger debate is about how climate change connects to a broader security set of questions. In that context we have a lot of questions and a lot of concerns – [and] potentially some opportunities.”
-
Boosting the U.S. Role in the Global Health Arena
›A new video from the Commission on Smart Global Health Policy, which was established by the Center for Strategic & International Studies, reviews the commission’s progress towards its goal of encouraging the U.S. government to embrace global health as a pillar of U.S. foreign policy.
The video reviews the recommendations from the commission’s March 2010 report, A Healthier, Safer and More Prosperous World: 1) Maintain robust U.S. support for the fight against HIV/AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis; 2) Prioritize maternal and child health, especially in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia; 3) Help other nations improve their capacity to prevent and respond to outbreaks of contagious disease; 4) Expand U.S. capacity to fund future global health initiatives by securing long-term investments for such efforts; and 5) Step up U.S. funding for multilaterals engaged in the global health field, including the World Health Organization, Global Fund, UNICEF, the World Bank, and the GAVI Alliance.
In the months ahead, commission members will be participating in public forums throughout the United States to discuss and promote the recommendations included in the report, before gathering in January to review the Obama administration’s progress on global health as the administration begins its third year. To date, the centerpiece of the administration’s health outreach efforts has been the six-year, $63 billion Global Health Initiative, designed to promote an enhanced U.S. role in addressing public health issues overseas.
The CSIS Global Health Policy Center will also be launching a year-long debate series called “Fault Lines in Global Health,” focusing on controversial topics in the global health field. The series’ kick-off event will center on U.S. AIDS funding, and is scheduled for Friday, August 6, 2010, from 9:30-11:00 a.m. -
‘Restrepo’: Inside Afghanistan’s Korengal Valley
›August 2, 2010 // By Marie HokensonRestrepo, the riveting new documentary film from Tim Hetherington and Sebastian Junger, follows a platoon of U.S. soldiers deployed in the dangerous Korengal Valley of Afghanistan. As a cadet at West Point majoring in human geography, I was fascinated to watch the ways the soldiers confronted and adapted to the challenges posed by the local culture of the remote Afghan community surrounding their outpost.
West Point’s human geography program delves into the relationships between facets of society and geography that may also have potentially significant security implications. In the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. troops fight insurgents in difficult environments – from heavily urbanized cities to extremely remote valleys – while interacting with civilian populations with radically different languages and cultures.
Restrepo: Culture in Action and Under Fire
At the remote outpost Restrepo, named in memory of a medic killed in action, the platoon receives daily fire from insurgents as they seek to improve security enough to allow the construction of a road through the valley.
At a weekly shura, the company commander explains the benefits of the road to the village elders, yet they are either unconvinced or uninterested. This frustrating meeting reveals a cultural disconnect: the Americans see the road as the way to win Afghan “hearts and minds” by facilitating progress and bringing more revenue to the community, but the Afghans are suspicious of the Americans’ motives and promises, and not convinced of the benefits.
Another culture clash arises when a cow is caught in the outpost’s concertina wire. The soldiers kill the seriously injured cow, but this proves to be a continual source of tension in negotiations between the soldiers and the locals. Killing the cow was illegal, say the Afghan elders, who seek financial compensation that the Army is not willing to provide. Perhaps better understanding of regional culture could have prevented this relatively minor incident from souring relations.
On the other hand, by attending the traditional shura gatherings with village elders, the U.S. soldiers are showing their respect for Afghan culture while facilitating negotiations and, potentially, the sharing of useful intelligence.
Although not shown in the film, the U.S. military also demonstrates its understanding of Afghan culture through the growing use of female soldiers to reach out to Afghan women. As many women in Afghanistan are not allowed to be seen by unrelated men, female soldiers are tasked with searching houses and Afghan women, as well as assessing their need for aid and gathering intelligence from them.
West Point: Culture in Theory and Practice
Dealing with the problems faced by today’s soldiers, like those in Restrepo, requires understanding the current conflict landscape and its security implications. Understanding the influence of religion, language, development, and people on the world’s geography is vital to mapping the combat terrain.
Human geography instruction at West Point provides cadets with more perceptive views of other countries and the complex problems they face. Military geography analyzes urban and natural environments, as well as related interactions, such as the impact of population dynamics and nature resources on military operations. Land-use planning and management addresses conflicts over land use and environmental strategies. Other opportunities, such as study-abroad programs and interactions with foreign cadets, increase our exposure to other cultures and geographies.
Through my study of human geography, I have gained a much greater understanding of the people and countries where I travel and work today – and where I will go in the future as a commissioned officer in the U.S. Army.
Marie Hokenson is a cadet at the United States Military Academy at West Point and an intern with the Woodrow Wilson Center’s Environmental Change and Security Program.
Photo Credit: “Mutual support,” courtesy of flickr user The U.S. Army. -
Cleo Paskal: India Is Key to Climate Geopolitics
›July 27, 2010 // By Wilson Center Staff“Copenhagen was many things to many people,” said Chatham House’s Cleo Paskal, in a video interview with the Wilson Center’s Environmental Change and Security Program, but “what was very clear was that India, specifically, was playing quite a strong, clear role in deciding how alignments would be working.” We spoke to Paskal following her presentation at a recent Wilson Center event.
-
Landmark Law Takes Aim at the “Resource Curse”
›July 22, 2010 // By Schuyler NullBy signing the financial overhaul package on Wednesday, President Obama also enacted the first major U.S. government attempt to require transparency in the international oil, gas, and mineral trade, aimed at reducing the risk of “resource curse” scenarios that have plagued countries like Nigeria and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
The amendment, sponsored by Senators Bill Cardin and Richard Lugar, requires extractive companies registered with the SEC to publicly disclose their tax and revenue payments to foreign governments. The amendment singles out the DRC for additional scrutiny: companies trading in tin, coltan, wolframite, and gold – minerals found commonly in eastern Congo – will need to report whether they are sourcing from the DRC or its neighbors and disclose what steps they have taken to ensure that their supplies are conflict-free.
The international community will be eagerly watching the results of this effort. Can a U.S. law on conflict minerals reduce violence in the DRC’s complex civil war? I recently argued that while the legislation is a great initial effort, it will have little immediate impact on the violence and suffering in the country. In a recent interview with New Security Beat, EITI expert Jill Shankleman called the Cardin-Lugar bill “an important step” but pointed out that it only covers companies who are listed with the SEC and does not reduce the need for countries to enter into EITI.
Will this new law help Afghanistan – with its allegedly vast stores of valuable minerals – avoid the fate of the DRC? While some fear that corruption and lack of transparency may lead to conflict around the new Chinese contract to operate Afghanistan’s Aynak copper field, a recent U.S. Army War College paper argues that contrary to prevailing opinion, the Chinese approach to large-scale extractive investments could complement Western-led military stabilization efforts.
Photo Credit: “Wolframite” from the DRC, courtesy of flickr user Julien Harneis.
