|
- Statment on Obama's Address to the Nation
on Afghanistan, Center for American Progress
- Statement on Obama's Upcoming Decision on
Afghanistan, Center for American Progress
- Concerns About the Civilian Strategy in
Afghanistan, Caroline Wadhams
- Obama Failed to Outline the Way Forward
in Pakistan, Brian Katulis
- A Surge of a Different Sort for
Afghanistan, Brian Katulis
- Europe Watches as America Shoulders a
Heavier Burden, Brian Katulis
- Lingering Questions for the President,
Caroline Wadhams
- The Fruits of Engagement, Nina Hachigian
- Progress Requires Patience, Compromise,
and Courageous Leadership, George Mitchell
- Building Blocks of Palestinian Statehood:
An Ambitious But Deliverable Agenda, Tony Blair
- The U.S.-India Strategic Partnership is
Vital, Colin Cookman and Brian Katulis
- The U.S. Needs Turkey for its Middle East
Agenda, Brian Katulis
- Clean Energy for the Wild Blue Yonder,
Alexandra Kougentakis, Tom Kenworthy, and Daniel Weiss
- Announcement of U.S.-China Cooperation
Create a Path to Copenhagen Success, Julian Wong and Andrew Light
- Iran's Crisis of Resistance, Matthew Duss
- What to Do About Sudan Now, John
Prendergast
- How to Make Afghanistan a 'Just War',
Susan Thistlethwaite and Brian Katulis
- The Taliban's Lure in Afghanistan,
Caroline Wadhams
- Time Frame Necessary to Counter Insurgent
Propaganda, Caroline Wadhams
- Administration Seeking More Time in
Afghanistan, Brian Katulis
|
|
|
"Statement on President Obama's
Address to the Nation on Afghanistan," Center for American Progress,
December 2, 2009
Now that the president has outlined his case moving forward,
congressional leaders and policymakers must continue to press the
administration and the government agencies responsible for carrying out
this task to provide additional details of how they intend to
operationalize this strategy. As we argued in a previous statement,
before Congress approves additional funding it should require the Obama
administration to outline a clear set of objectives with accompanying
metrics and an implementation strategy
Click here to
read the full statement.
"Statement on Obama's Upcoming
Decision on Afghanistan," Center for American Progress,
November 25, 2009
The international community has a stake in fostering stability in
Afghanistan and South Asia, and the United States is playing an
important leadership role in addressing the security threats. The
region is host to two nuclear powers and several terrorist networks
with a global reach, and addressing these threats to global stability
is vital. U.S. objectives should be to ensure that Afghanistan does not
again become a launching pad for international terrorism and to prevent
a power vacuum in Afghanistan that would further destabilize Pakistan
and the region. We believe that any strategy moving forward requires
these five critical elements: the establishment of a flexible timetable
for the withdrawal of U.S. troops, the maintenance of the international
nature of the mission, pressure on Pakistan to confront extremists
within its borders, a focus on reform and good governance efforts in
Afghanistan, and a clear plan to pay for the mission.
Click here to
read the full statement.
Caroline Wadhams,
"Concerns About the Civilian Strategy in Afghanistan," Foreign Policy, December 2, 2009
There
was
no mention of justice despite the fact that one of the central ways
that the
Taliban insurgents have increased their support in Afghan communities
is
through providing justice (with mobile courts, mediation efforts). Yes,
agriculture needs to be a focus (as Obama mentioned), but the United
States
should be prioritizing one of Afghans' top grievances: a lack of
justice.
Click here to
read the full article.
Brian Katulis, "Obama
Failed to Outline the Way Forward on Pakistan," Foreign Policy, December 2, 2009
President Obama reiterated many of the main points about why
Pakistan is important to Afghanistan and the broader region, and then
slipped
into vague generalities about what the U.S. is actually doing or trying
to do
with Pakistan -- "a partnership with Pakistan that is built on mutual
interest,
mutual respect, and mutual trust." He also went on to mention resources
going
to support Pakistan's democracy and development, and he highlighted the
fact
the United States is the largest international supporter for those
Pakistanis
displaced by the fighting. But anyone looking for the "way forward" in
Pakistan -- that
part of the speech was missing in action.
Click here to
read the full article.
Brian Katulis, "A
Surge of a Different Sort for Afghanistan," Sphere, December 1, 2009
The
headlines on President Obama's Afghanistan speech have focused on
the additional U.S. troops he is sending, but there's another component
to the new strategy that is just as vital to achieving some progress
and greater stability in that troubled country: the civilian surge. And
making this surge a success will be no easy task.
Click here to
read the full article.
Brian Katulis, "A
Reaction From Europe," Democracy Arsenal, December 1, 2009
Because
there haven’t been huge costs in terms of lives and money, the
impact is not felt as strongly here in Europe. Don’t get me
wrong -
America’s key allies have troops and diplomats risking their
lives in
Afghanistan. Some European families have paid the ultimate price
in
losing family members to the conflict. But the burden
doesn’t feel as
heavy over here as it does in America, and the debate on Afghanistan,
when it occurs, seems much more distant than it does in the U.S.
Click here to
read the full article.
Caroline Wadhams,
"Lingering Questions for the President," Democracy Arsenal, December 1, 2009
The Administration hit the right tone in
terms of making the case for why the United States should remain
engaged in Afghanistan while acknowledging our own economic crisis and
that “we are passing through a time of great trial.”
His timeline for
transitioning security to Afghans beginning in 2011 was key and matches
with a position a
few of us have taken at the Center for American Progress – that
the war
in Afghanistan can no longer be open-ended and that we need to
establish a timeframe for the withdrawal of U.S. troops. I do, however, have a few questions and
concerns regarding elements of the speech.
Click here to
read the full article.
Nina Hachigian, "The
Fruits of Engagement," Center for American Progress, December 2, 2009
On China in particular, President
Obama’s trip has yielded further
progress since he returned. On Thanksgiving, China—the world's
top emitter of greenhouse gases—pledged to cut
the amount of carbon dioxide emitted for each unit of its gross
domestic product by 40 to 45 percent by 2020, compared with 2005
levels. It is a very big deal that Beijing has moved off its long-held
position of refusing agree to any firm limits on its carbon emissions.
Click here to
read the full article.
George Mitchell,
"Progress Requires Patience, Compromise and Courageous Leadership," Middle East Bulletin interview, December 1, 2009
With regard to next steps, we want to
see the resumption of negotiations on permanent status issues as soon
as possible. We intend for these negotiations to be time limited, at
the end of which all permanent status issues will be resolved …
We have always intended for negotiations to proceed on a variety of
tracks. These will include high-level direct talks to establish a
framework for the negotiations and set a positive atmosphere in which
they can proceed; parallel talks between the U.S. and Israel and the
U.S. and the Palestinians on key issues, such as security; and
lower-level direct talks in which negotiators work through the details
of the issues. In the current environment, we think it makes sense to
explore a re-launch of negotiations through a mix of these tracks.
Click here to
read the full interview.
Tony Blair, "Building
Blocks of Palestinian Statehood: An Ambitious But Deliverable Agenda," Middle East Bulletin interview, November 24, 2009
We have seen significant change in the
last few months, for example, two of the projects I have been working
closely on have been the opening of the Jalameh vehicle crossing which
allows Arab Israelis to bring cars into the West Bank for the first
time since the second intifada and the second is the launch of the
Wataniya mobile phone company, which is the largest foreign direct
investment into the Palestinian economy there has been. There are now
further projects we are working on, such as the Rawabi housing project
outside of Ramallah, which would be the largest single building project
in modern times. Plus, we need to look to make further changes to the
access and movement regime in the West Bank ... Much more needs to be
done for people to believe that they are on an inexorable road to
peace, and a political process is necessary to ensure that the economic
gains are enshrined and continue.
Click here to
read the full interview.
Colin Cookman and Brian Katulis, "The U.S.-India
Strategic Partnership is Vital," Center for American Progress, November
24, 2009
Prime Minister Singh’s
visit comes during a sensitive period for U.S.
diplomacy around the world. The luster is wearing off from the Obama
administration’s initial honeymoon period of foreign policy,
leading to
growing questions about what the Obama administration has tangibly
achieved with its new style of diplomatic outreach. President
Obama’s
trip to Asia last week raised some concerns
in India that the United States was acceding to China’s growing
power
without demonstrating India’s important role, and this state
visit is
aimed at signaling the importance of U.S.-India ties. Gaining
India’s
cooperation on a range of issues will be an important test of the Obama
administration’s ability to achieve results in his foreign policy.
Click here to
read the full article.
Brian Katulis, "The U.S. Needs Turkey for its Middle
East Agenda," Atlantic Community,
November 23, 2009
The
Obama administration has staked out an ambitious policy agenda for
the Middle East and South Asia, with the center of gravity of US
efforts shifting eastward towards the challenges of Pakistan and
Afghanistan as well as Iran. The Obama administration will seek to
remain engaged on the Arab-Israeli conflict and Iraq, but more
resources and diplomatic attention are shifting towards South Asia and
Iran. So far Obama's agenda remains a work in progress and has
exhibited more continuity than change from the Bush administration's
policies. In order to make meaningful progress, the US will require
help from Turkey. Turkey and the US should work to coordinate their
efforts towards common goals on the four main fronts of South Asia,
Iraq, Iran and the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Click here to
read the full article.
Alexandra
Kougentakis, Tom Kenworthy, and Daniel Weiss, "Clean Energy for the
Wild Blue Yonder," Center for American Progress, November 23, 2009
Reliance on foreign energy sources and global warming pose major
threats to the United States’ security. A report by the Center
for
American Progress earlier this year determined that
“America’s
dependence on foreign oil transfers U.S. dollars to a number of
unfriendly regimes, while robbing the United States of the economic
resources it desperately needs for domestic development and American
innovation.” The problem is particularly acute for the Department
of Defense,
which is the world’s largest consumer of energy and whose
military
operations and facilities consume significant amounts of energy.
Click here to
read the full report.
Julian Wong and
Andrew Light, "Announcements of U.S.-China Cooperation Create a Path to
Copenhagen Success," Center for American Progress, November 20, 2009
The United States and China announced on Tuesday a package of
cooperative agreements
on clean energy and climate change that are remarkable in both breadth
and ambition. The cluster of seven initiatives, partnerships, action
plans, and research centers covers a range of low-carbon energy
strategies from electric cars to energy efficiency technologies. These
agreements follow on the heels of last Sunday’s announcement
at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation meeting that the United States
has embraced the Danish proposal for finalizing an interim
international climate agreement in Copenhagen in December. The
U.S.-China summit help further signal a positive shift in expectations
for Copenhagen between the two countries responsible for 40 percent of
the planet’s anthropogenic carbon emissions.
Click here to
read the full article.
Matthew Duss, "Iran's
Crisis of Resistance," The American Prospect, November 20, 2009
The "war on terror" was pretty great for Iran's hardliners. The Bush
administration's 2002 inclusion of Iran in the "Axis of Evil" was a
major blow to Iranian moderates, discrediting their calls for U.S.-Iran
rapprochement and supporting the claims of Iran's hard-liners that
engagement with America was pointless. The invasion of Iraq removed
Iran's greatest enemy, Saddam Hussein, against whom Iran had fought a
staggeringly destructive eight-year war. Iraq's postwar government
included a significant number of Iran's former clients -- including
eventual Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of Iraq -- in top leadership
positions.
Click here to
read the full article.
John Prendergast, "What to Do About Sudan Now," Enough
Project, November 20, 2009
One month after the release of the Obama
administration’s Sudan policy,
the situation has further deteriorated. Violence against civilians
continues unabated in Darfur and in southern Sudan,
and the ruling National Congress Party, or NCP, continues to act in bad
faith and undermine lasting peace in Sudan. In Darfur, relief
organizations clearly do not have access to large areas of Darfur, and
those that do have access to vulnerable populations no longer publicize
their assessments for fear of expulsion. The NCP is blocking the
establishment of conditions for free and fair elections and seeks to
undermine a self-determination referendum scheduled for 2011.
Intercommunal violence in southern Sudan is increasing, with growing
evidence that Khartoum’s divide and destroy policies
are partly to blame.
Click here to
read the full article.
Susan Thistlethwaite and Brian Katulis, "How to Make
the Afghanistan War a 'Just War'," Center for American Progress,
November 19, 2009
Moral
considerations have been largely absent from our country’s
public debate over what to do in Afghanistan. The Obama administration
has been working since Afghanistan’s August elections
to refine its goals, assess the intentions of key countries such as
Pakistan, and gain additional commitments from allies in NATO.
The focus on troop levels and money is important, but the debate has
been insufficient and limited. It is not too late to raise moral
questions regarding the war in Afghanistan. Indeed, these criteria can
help refine the revised strategy for Afghanistan. It was to
America’s
detriment that the previous administration often eschewed established
moral theory or based its policy decisions on a simplistic and
distorted worldview of “good” versus “evil.”
Click here to
read the full article.
Ask the Expert
- Caroline Wadhams says that while few Afghans support the Taliban
insurgency wholeheartedly, "one main cause ... is the corruption that
plagues the Karzai administration... many go to the Taliban
because it's seen as offering more protection and more justice."
Associated Press - Caroline Wadhams notes that a
clearer timeframe for American operations in Afghanistan is necessary
to avoid domestic resentment: "the insurgency has been very, very
skilled at propaganda and I think that they will
inevitably use the announcement of an increase in troop levels to make
the case again and again that we're an occupation, that Karzai is a
puppet... That's why I think it's so important that we continue to talk
about how we're not going to be there forever."
Reuters -
Brian Katulis analyzes the political timeframe constraining the
administration's efforts in Afghanistan: "If you get to a point next
summer where you can show there is a stop to
targeted attacks in key population centers, then this will probably win
them more time ... but if we are looking at the same sort of perception
of a muddle and a
quagmire -- that plus 10 percent unemployment in the United States --
it will be be an awful mid-term election."
|
|
|
|
