Friday, October 13, 2006

North Korea (10/19)

Next Thursday we will talk about the newest nuclear state.

posted by IIF BlogMeister @ 9:54 AM   0 comments

Somalia (10/12)

Somalia. Still today the name conjures up images of the "Blackhawk Down" incident back in 1993. And although thirteen years have now passed, chaos continues to reign in Somalia. Two northern regions, Somaliland and Puntland, have declared their independence, but though both are relatively stable, neither has been recognized by the international community. The rest of the country has not had a stable government since 1991, and that one was a brutal dictatorship!
And the violence has actually intensified in the past few months! The militias of the Islamic Courts Union (ICU), feared by some to be "the new Taliban," have pushed other militias loyal to various warlords (some claimed to be supported by the CIA) out of Mogadishu, and are expanding the territory under their control. The U.N. recognized government, the Transitional Federal Institutions (TFI), is based in the southern town of Baidoa, and has little power elsewhere. Talks between the ICU and the TFI, aimed at forming a "government of national unity" have broken down, and it appears that the ICU will eventually take over the entire country. Somalia's neighbors, principally Ethiopia, have become involved, as well.
What does the future hold for Somalia? That will be the subject of this Thursday's IIF discussion. One of our regulars, Jacobus Boers, will serve as moderator.
As usual, I am sending along some background information:
The Congressional testimony of Ted Dagne, the Congressional Research Service's Africa expert, gives a good summary of the situation:
Since this is a pdf file, to read it you will need the Adobe Acrobat Reader, which can be downloaded for free; here is the link:
Just click on the arrow beside "Choose A Platform" in step one, select your operating system from the drop-down menu, then click on "Download" in step two.
Here is the executive summary of a report from the International Crisis Group, which contains a link to the full report:
From The Economist, here are a Backgrounder and a few recent articles on Somalia:
Here are a few items on Somalia from the Council on Foreign Relations:
Finally, here are several items on Somalia that were sent to me by Jason DeJoannis:
Come to Villa this Thursday and find out more about this war-torn area of the world that is likely to have increasing importance in the near future.

posted by IIF BlogMeister @ 9:52 AM   0 comments

Thursday, October 05, 2006

When does history begin? (10/5/06)

The topic for this Thursday's IIF discussion will be "When does history begin? or Whose land is it?", and we will be talking about "claims ... about one or another ethnic group having a right to some particular piece of the world." How are we to decide the legitimacy of such claims? What factors should be taken into account? Our discussion will be led by two of our regulars, Joel Kollin and Jason DeJoannis, and as background, I am passing along an article forwarded to me by Joel that was one reason this topic was chosen, and a comment and several articles that were sent to me by Jason. The questions we will be considering seem to arise in the context of so many of the discussions we have about so many different parts of the world. I hope you will join us at Villa this Thursday evening for what should be an interesting discussion.


Charles - I feel that the issue is Whose land is it? (When does history begin?) Here is one article for thinking about the issue:Whose Land Is It?
[And here is another: Whose Land is it anyway? CRH]


The trials and tribulations of Kashmir and Palestine (if I may) began in the same year, 1947, according to the official record. But when did these most intractable of conflicts truly begin, and does it even matter? After all, modern realities are just that; California et al. are unlikely to be returned to Mexico anytime soon (nor the US and Mexico to Native Americans). On the other hand, by looking only at today’s realities and ignoring the past, are we not encouraging opportunism? Which ghosts should be welcomed at the arbitration table?

The tension between “facts on the ground” and the historical litany of injustices is surprisingly universal, appearing in numerous post-World War II situations. For example, the breakaway territories of Taiwan and Northern Cyprus remain in indefinite limbo, with de facto independence but little hope for recognition. Further unresolved cases are on display in Sri Lanka , Indonesia , Tibet , Spain , Kosovo , Bosnia , Japan/China, Kurdistan , Chechnya and elsewhere, while Northern Ireland offers a counterexample of recent vintage.

In the 2005 World Summit, among areas of UN reform discussed was the addition of a new “peacebuilding” agency to supplement the numerous post-conflict peacekeeping operations around the world. Longstanding disputes tend to accumulate complexity and emotion as they cycle through dormant and active periods; entrenched polemics deepen distrust and polarize identity. We will discuss all of this on Thursday as we look for common threads in all-too-common situations.

Kashmir conflict, Wikipedia
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Wikipedia
Northern Cyprus, Wikipedia
The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict in a Nutshell, MidEast Web<
Question of Palestine – History, UN
Kosovo Dominoes: World hotspots in a nutshell, On Line Opinion
Kashmir Flashpoint, BBC

posted by IIF BlogMeister @ 10:48 AM   5 comments

Monday, October 02, 2006

The Sunni/Shiite Divide (8/24/06)

The Shia Revival is the title of a new book by scholar Vali Nasr. It considers the reemergence of sectarian issues throughout the Middle East ranging from Lebanon, the Pesian Gulf states and Iraq all the way through Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan - the so-called Shia crescent.

posted by IIF BlogMeister @ 6:10 PM   1 comments

The Presidential Election in the Democratic Republic of Congo (8/17/06)

With bad news coming in daily from all over the globe - the Middle East, east and south Asia, eastern, western, and southern Africa - it is surprising to find a possible bright spot in, of all places, central Africa! In the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), formerly known as Zaire, it appears that the bloodiest conflict the world has seen since the Second World War, with over four million killed since 1998, has truly come to an end. Much of the fighting ended with the formation of a power-sharing transitional government late in 2003. At the end of last year, a nationwide referendum endorsed a new constitution for the country. And on July 30, voters went to the polls for the first truly free elections since the country gained its independence in 1960, choosing a President and 500 members of the National Assembly. Turnout was over 80%. There was violence, and there were irregularities, but less than expected. Final results will not be known for certain until at least the end of this month, but it appears that the two leading vote getters were the current President, Joseph Kabila, and current Vice-President and former warlord Jean-Pierre Bemba. If a runoff is necessary, and it appears likely that it will be, it will be held in October.
What is likely to happen? What is the significance of these events? That will be the subject of this Thursday's IIF discussion. Jacobus Boers will serve as our moderator.
As usual, I am sending along some background information:
From The Economist, here are a Backgrounder and a series of articles beginning about the time of the end of the conflict in the DRC:
Here are two reports on the elections that aired on The NewsHour on PBS:
Here are two items about the election from The Wall Street Journal:
The Carter Center sent an international delegation to observe the election. Here is their preliminary report:
From the free online encyclopedia Wikipedia, here are a general article on the DRC, and an article on the election:
Here are two items from the Council on Foreign Relations:
And two from the International Crisis Group:
Finally, here are a few news items that have appeared in various newspapers in the couple of weeks since the election:

posted by IIF BlogMeister @ 6:08 PM   1 comments

Sunday, October 01, 2006

The Media and National Security (9/28/06)

The Washington Post publishes a story about secret CIA prisons, based on leaks of classified documents. The CIA employee suspected of leaking the documents is fired and faces possible criminal prosecution. The Post reporter wins a Pulitzer Prize.
After holding the story for a year, The New York Times, relying on leaks of classified information, reveals that the National Security Agency has been carrying out wiretaps, within the U.S., of international phone calls, without court approval. Critics call the program "unconstitutional" and "shocking," but the Administration claims the program was both legal and necessary, that appropriate members of Congress were informed of the program and updated on it periodically, and that its revelation in the press damaged its effectiveness and harmed national security.
The Times and several other papers, relying on leaks, publish a story revealing that the U.S. Treasury Department and other government agencies have been using an internet program that secretly monitors international banking transactions to track funds related to terrorism. Although the program is apparently completely legal, critics decry it as "an abuse of power." Administration officials claim that there have been "a number of very successful counterterrorism investigations that have had successful conclusions where this program was one of the key factors that lead to the successful conclusion of those investigations." The President blasts the media for publishing details of the surveillance program, calling it "a disgraceful move that did great harm" to America.
Press reports about prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib continue in the press for weeks, months, years, complete with lurid photographs, while stories about the brutal murder of a U.S. journalist or a human rights worker are seen no more after only a few days.
A New York Times reporter is imprisoned for months for failure to tell a Grand Jury her source for a story that was never written. Later it is revealed that the Special Prosecutor who subpoenaed her was aware at the time that no crime had been committed. A U.S. Court of Appeals later upholds a subpoena for the telephone records of the same reporter relating to a different story.
A classified National Intelligence Estimate is leaked to The New York Times, which, forty days before an upcoming election, publishes portions of it that cast doubt on Administration claims about the effect of the war in Iraq on the war against terrorism. In response, the President declassifies the entire "key findings" section of the Estimate, angrily claiming that the previously published portion gave a false impression of its conclusions.
The media and national security, that will be the topic of our IIF discussion tonight. The press claims to be acting in the public interest in keeping an eye on government. The government claims to be keeping secrets in the interest of national security. Tonight we will try to sort this all out for ourselves. Ably representing the media will be our guest, Judy Milestone, a retired Senior Vice-President for CNN.

posted by IIF BlogMeister @ 1:55 PM   0 comments