|
- Climate Change on the Move, Michael Werz
and Kari Manlove
- Paying for Our Wars, Lawrence Korb
- Attacks Highlight Uneven Progress in
Iraq, Brian Katulis
- Rape and Murder, Funded by Cell Phones,
Sasha Lezhnev and John Prendergast
- Engagement with Iran: An Assessment of
Options, Karim Sadjadpour
- America is Serious About Climate Action,
Andrew Light, Julian Wong, Kari Manlove, and Saya Kitasei
- The U.N. Convention in Copenhagen 101,
Rebecca Lefton, Andrew Light, Kari Manlove, and Daniel Weiss
- China's Shift on Climate Change, Nina
Hachigian
- Making It Work in Afghanistan, Caroline
Wadhams
- Russia's Role in Climate Talks, Samuel
Charap
- Pakistani Anxieties Over Obama Plans,
Brian Katulis
- Lessons from History, Lawrence Korb
|
|
|
Michael Werz and Kari Manlove,
"Climate Change on the Move" Center for American Progress,
December 8, 2009
Fast forward to the year 2050. The world’s population will be up
to 9
billion people according to the United Nations—an increase of
one-third. More than 90 percent of this growth will take place in
developing countries. Estimates also predict that 200 million
people will be newly mobilized as climate migrants by 2050 due to
global warming’s effects. This increased migration will very
likely
affect global security, which makes it imperative for the United States
and other nations to begin formulating responses to climate migration
now.
Click here to
read the full report.
Lawrence Korb,
"Paying for Our Wars," Huffington Post, December 8, 2009
Now that President Obama has decided to
send 30,000 more troops to
Afghanistan the question of how to pay for this increased level of
operations has arisen. In fact the question of how to pay for the wars
in Iraq and Afghanistan should have been raised shortly after the
attacks of 9-11 when the Bush administration decided to overthrow the
regimes in both of those countries.
Click here to
read the full article.
Brian Katulis, "Attacks Highlight Uneven Progress in
Iraq," Center for American Progress, December 8, 2009
Rejectionist elements in Iraq will
probably try to disrupt the uneven
progress in Iraq’s political transition as today’s attacks
show, but
Iraqis have shown an increasing desire and fortitude to move ahead. The
unanswered question is whether they will move ahead in a way that
addresses or exacerbates unresolved tensions over sharing power.
America’s role and leverage will continue to diminish, and Iraq
is
increasingly standing on its own. Time will tell whether the new Iraq
aligns with U.S. interests in the region or not.
Click here to
read the full article.
Sasha Lezhnev and
John Prendergast, "Rape and Murder, Funded by Cell Phones," CNN Opinion, December 8, 2009
Are
the government and company actions taken to date enough to stop
the conflict minerals trade from continuing? The answer is no.
Electronics
companies must invest in a system to certify that the minerals used in
their products are verifiably conflict-free. They must work with their
suppliers to trace the minerals back to their mines of origin and have
independent audits conducted of these supply chains so that we know
with verified proof that none has passed through the hands of armed
groups.
Click here to
read the full article.
Karim Sadjadpour,
"Engagement with Iran: An Assessment of Options," Middle East Bulletin interview, December 8, 2009
I think the door of dialogue and
engagement will remain open, but the Obama administration will be
forced into policies—sanctions and other punitive
measures—they would have liked to avoid. In contrast to the Bush
administration, I think the Europeans, and even the Russians and
Chinese, recognize that since Obama's inauguration last June the United
States has made numerous overtures to Iran, made a good-faith
diplomatic effort to change the tone and context of the U.S.-Iran
relationship, but Tehran was either unable or unwilling to reciprocate.
... For many years now, so many of us have argued that if the U.S. can
engage Iran and reintegrate it in the international community and open
up its economy, this would foment political reform in Tehran. I think
people fail to realize that Khamenei understands that argument very
well, in fact he probably agrees with it, and for precisely that reason
he's resisted confidence building with the U.S.
Click here to
read the full interview.
Andrew Light, Julian Wong, Kari Manlove, and Saya
Kitasei, "America is Serious About Climate Action," Center for American
Progress, December 7, 2009
President Barack Obama and the United
States’ leadership in the
upcoming U.N. climate change conference in Copenhagen will be
instrumental to a successful outcome. The United States is the
world’s
largest historical and per-capita emitter of greenhouse gases. We
cannot hope to meet the goal of limiting increases in global
temperatures to 2 degrees Celsius without U.S. participation in a new
international convention to limit carbon pollution. Getting to that
agreement will require an unprecedented level of international
cooperation. Yet the United States’ notable inaction on climate
change
for eight years under the Bush administration has left a legacy of
mistrust.
Click here to
read the full article.
Rebecca Lefton, Andrew Light, Kari Manlove, and Daniel
Weiss, "The U.N. Convention in Copenhagen 101," Center for American
Progress, December 7, 2009
The ingredients for a successful outcome
at Copenhagen are all there.
We are on track to set the architecture for a legally binding agreement
in 2010 by following a two-step Danish proposal supported by President
Barack Obama and finalizing an interim agreement at the meeting.
Here’s
how actions by the Obama administration and international community
have moved us toward establishing an international agreement to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and why doing so will help every nation.
Click here to
read the full article.
The Diplomat - Nina Hachigian analyzes recent
Chinese decisions to commit to specific limits on carbon emissions: "I
think recognition of its long term interests, plus this intense
international political pressure, has been enough to have China take
this first important step to agreeing to a goal ... you can’t
really have an international deal without that."
Ask the Expert
- Caroline Wadhams discusses next steps for the administration's
implementation of its new strategy for Afghanistan: "many of the
factors that will determine the mission's success are largely outside
U.S. control... if President Karzai continues to empower abusive or
predatory people within his government, if he is unable to clean up the
corruption then it will be very difficult for the international mission
to actually move forward."
Washington Post
- Samuel Charap describes Russia's role in climate talks as "the
elephant in the room that nobody is paying attention to", warning that
"if you want an ambitious agreement, then Russia's potential resistance
can be extremely damaging".
Stars and Stripes
- Brian Katulis says that Pakistani reaction to elements of President
Obama's speech on Afghanistan policy has been cautious; despite efforts
to build greater trust between the two countries, the relationship is
still seen as one where “we send them money and they do what we
tell them”.
USA Today - Lawrence Korb argues that
President Obama's Afghan strategy takes into account historical
lessons: "Setting limited goals, a withdrawal date and getting
international
support ensures that Afghanistan won't be Obama's Vietnam, or a repeat
of Britain and Russia's experiences."
|
|
|
|
