Showing posts tagged as "Conflict prevention"

Showing posts tagged Conflict prevention

22 Aug
"The government, parliamentary opposition, demonstrators and the security apparatus must all respect the constitution and rule of law. Otherwise it would be next to impossible to resolve Pakistan’s security challenges, including militancy and terrorism that have claimed thousands of lives."

—From Crisis Group’s latest Conflict Alert: Protecting Pakistan’s Threatened Democracy

7 May

Ever wonder what it’s like to work for Crisis Group?

In this video, travel with Crisis Group analysts as they investigate conflicts in the field and offer creative solutions.

3 Jan
Next Year’s Wars | Louise Arbour
From Sochi to Sudan, 10 conflicts that will threaten global stability in 2014.
Before we dive into next year’s list of conflicts to watch, some thoughts on the year we are about to conclude are in order. In short, 2013 was not a good year for our collective ability to prevent or end conflict. For sure, there were bright moments. Colombia appears closer than ever to ending a civil war which next year will mark its 60th birthday. Myanmar, too, could bring down the curtain on its decades-long internal ethnic conflicts, though many hurdles remain. The deal struck over Iran’s nuclear program was a welcome fillip for diplomacy, even dynamism. The U.N. Security Council finally broke its deadlock over Syria, at least with regards to the regime’s chemical weapons, and committed to more robust interventions in Eastern Congo and the Central African Republic. Turkey’s talks with the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) continue in fits and starts, but the ceasefire looks reasonably durable. Pakistan enjoyed its first-ever democratic handover of power. 
As important as these achievements are, still more important is to keep them in perspective. Colombia’s peace process remains vulnerable to messy domestic politics in the election year ahead. Myanmar’s positive trajectory could derail if the bigotry unleashed on Muslim communities continues unchecked. Moving towards a final settlement with Iran amidst a sea of red lines and potential spoilers — in Washington, Tehran, and the region — is undoubtedly a more perilous challenge than reaching the interim deal in Geneva, welcome step though it was. And that Turkey and Pakistan, both entries on last year’s “top 10” list, don’t make it onto this year’s list is hardly a clean bill of health, given the spillover of Syria’s conflict into Turkey, and the ongoing dangers of extremism and urban violence in Pakistan.
FULL ARTICLE (Foreign Policy)
Photo: Freedom House/Giovanni Turco/Flickr

Next Year’s Wars | Louise Arbour

From Sochi to Sudan, 10 conflicts that will threaten global stability in 2014.

Before we dive into next year’s list of conflicts to watch, some thoughts on the year we are about to conclude are in order. In short, 2013 was not a good year for our collective ability to prevent or end conflict. For sure, there were bright moments. Colombia appears closer than ever to ending a civil war which next year will mark its 60th birthday. Myanmar, too, could bring down the curtain on its decades-long internal ethnic conflicts, though many hurdles remain. The deal struck over Iran’s nuclear program was a welcome fillip for diplomacy, even dynamism. The U.N. Security Council finally broke its deadlock over Syria, at least with regards to the regime’s chemical weapons, and committed to more robust interventions in Eastern Congo and the Central African Republic. Turkey’s talks with the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) continue in fits and starts, but the ceasefire looks reasonably durable. Pakistan enjoyed its first-ever democratic handover of power. 

As important as these achievements are, still more important is to keep them in perspective. Colombia’s peace process remains vulnerable to messy domestic politics in the election year ahead. Myanmar’s positive trajectory could derail if the bigotry unleashed on Muslim communities continues unchecked. Moving towards a final settlement with Iran amidst a sea of red lines and potential spoilers — in Washington, Tehran, and the region — is undoubtedly a more perilous challenge than reaching the interim deal in Geneva, welcome step though it was. And that Turkey and Pakistan, both entries on last year’s “top 10” list, don’t make it onto this year’s list is hardly a clean bill of health, given the spillover of Syria’s conflict into Turkey, and the ongoing dangers of extremism and urban violence in Pakistan.

FULL ARTICLE (Foreign Policy)

Photo: Freedom House/Giovanni Turco/Flickr

8 Nov
Check out Crisis Group’s Weekly Update, a summary of everything we have published over the past week.

Check out Crisis Group’s Weekly Update, a summary of everything we have published over the past week.

26 Oct

Doctrines Derailed?: Internationalism’s Uncertain Future

Global Briefing 2013 opening speech from the International Crisis Group’s President & CEO Louise Arbour. In her opening remarks, Arbour looks at the pursuit of international criminal justice; the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine; peacekeeping missions; and the international promotion of the Rule of Law. The shortcomings of these existing frameworks for conflict prevention are highlighted as she argues that it is only by acknowledging the inadequacies of our approaches that we have any chance of improving them. We are encouraged to fine-tune the tools of conflict management and use them more wisely to advance peace and security.

25 Oct

Day 2 of the Global Briefing has come to an end. We began with an intense discussion on Syria and wrapped up with parallel sessions on Afghanistan and Pakistan, and Sudan.

24 Oct

We’re just wrapping up day 1 of our Global Briefing event. We’ve had fascinating discussions covering topics such as the EU and conflict prevention to tension in the China seas and stability in the Sahel.

29 May
U.S. denies N. Korea commando operation | The Washington Post
By Chico Harlan
The U.S. military on Tuesday denied a report that it has been sending commandos into North Korea to spy on underground military facilities, a mission that would violate the armistice agreement that ended the Korean War.
A U.S. military statement said that The Diplomat, an Asia-Pacific current affairs journal, had “taken great liberal license” with the comments attributed to a top U.S. general. According to The Diplomat, Brig. Gen. Neil H. Tolley, commander of special operations forUnited States Forces Korea, said at a conference last week that both U.S. and South Korean commandos parachute into the North to conduct reconnaissance on underground tunnels that are hidden from satellites.
“Quotes have been made up and attributed to him,” the U.S. statement said. “No U.S. or [South Korean] forces have parachuted into North Korea.”
But analysts warned that North Korea, despite the U.S. denial, could seize the initial report as evidence of American aggressiveness, a central theme for its propaganda and a key rationale for its military spending and provocations. Last week Pyongyang vowed to bolster its “nuclear deterrence” if the United States continued its hostile policy toward the North.
FULL ARTICLE (The New York Times) 
Photo: Charles McCain/ Flickr

U.S. denies N. Korea commando operation | The Washington Post

By Chico Harlan

The U.S. military on Tuesday denied a report that it has been sending commandos into North Korea to spy on underground military facilities, a mission that would violate the armistice agreement that ended the Korean War.

A U.S. military statement said that The Diplomat, an Asia-Pacific current affairs journal, had “taken great liberal license” with the comments attributed to a top U.S. general. According to The Diplomat, Brig. Gen. Neil H. Tolley, commander of special operations forUnited States Forces Korea, said at a conference last week that both U.S. and South Korean commandos parachute into the North to conduct reconnaissance on underground tunnels that are hidden from satellites.

“Quotes have been made up and attributed to him,” the U.S. statement said. “No U.S. or [South Korean] forces have parachuted into North Korea.”

But analysts warned that North Korea, despite the U.S. denial, could seize the initial report as evidence of American aggressiveness, a central theme for its propaganda and a key rationale for its military spending and provocations. Last week Pyongyang vowed to bolster its “nuclear deterrence” if the United States continued its hostile policy toward the North.

FULL ARTICLE (The New York Times) 

Photo: Charles McCain/ Flickr

Lady Gaga: Indonesian hardliners’ latest victory | Al Arabiya
By AFP
Lady Gaga’s decision to cancel the Indonesian leg of her world tour due to threats by Muslim hardliners highlights how groups pushing a strict view of Islam are growing increasingly powerful, analysts say.Home to the world’s largest Muslim population, officially secular Indonesia is often touted by Western leaders as a beacon of moderate Islam and a model for the Muslim world — as visiting U.S. President Barack Obama did in 2010.But a series of attacks on Christians, Muslim minorities and those deemed “enemies of Islam”, combined with the apparent unwillingness of the government and courts to clamp down has sparked concerns over the rise of the hardliners.
FULL ARTICLE (AFP via Al Arabiya)
Photo: Reuters

Lady Gaga: Indonesian hardliners’ latest victory | Al Arabiya

By AFP

Lady Gaga’s decision to cancel the Indonesian leg of her world tour due to threats by Muslim hardliners highlights how groups pushing a strict view of Islam are growing increasingly powerful, analysts say.

Home to the world’s largest Muslim population, officially secular Indonesia is often touted by Western leaders as a beacon of moderate Islam and a model for the Muslim world — as visiting U.S. President Barack Obama did in 2010.

But a series of attacks on Christians, Muslim minorities and those deemed “enemies of Islam”, combined with the apparent unwillingness of the government and courts to clamp down has sparked concerns over the rise of the hardliners.

FULL ARTICLE (AFP via Al Arabiya)

Photo: Reuters

4 May
Foreign Policy | The Accidental Peacemaker
China did something very unusual in the United Nations this week: It did not abstain from, much less veto, a resolution threatening to impose sanctions unless Sudan stopped killing civilians in South Sudan. China has long treated Sudan as a client state, and it stood by Khartoum during the long years when Western powers tried to stop the atrocities the regime was committing in Darfur. Yet, after a discussion that a Security Council diplomat described as “substantive but not acrimonious,” China voted for Resolution 2046, which demands that both Sudan and South Sudan put an end to cross-border attacks and return to negotiations.
China has not, of course, become a convert to human rights, as the current standoff over activist Chen Guangcheng proves all too vividly. Nor is it having second thoughts about its foundational foreign-policy doctrine of “nonintervention,” which has made China the defender of authoritarian regimes the world over. A recent report on Chinese foreign policy by the British group Saferworld concludes that “At least for now, non-interference, stable regimes and stable relations that are conducive to maintaining China’s global economic engagement, will retain precedence in guiding Beijing’s diplomatic relations with conflict-affected states.”
But something important has happened: Facing a situation in which the principle of nonintervention doesn’t tell it what to do, China has been forced to join the United States and other countries, as well as the African Union, in actively trying to end a brutal conflict. China has supported Sudan over the last decade because Sudan supplied China with oil. Last year, however, when South Sudan became independent, Khartoum lost most of its oil-producing territory. China immediately began courting the new country with visits from senior officials and a blizzard of proposed investment deals. Only last week, while South Sudanese President Salva Kiir was in Beijing, China announced an $8 billion loan to the new country to build major infrastructure projects. But though South Sudan has most of the oil, Sudan has the pipelines and the refining equipment. So China needs both countries — and the rising spiral of violence between them, provoked largely though not wholly by Khartoum, has forced China to get off the sidelines.
FULL ARTICLE (Foreign Policy)

Foreign Policy | The Accidental Peacemaker

China did something very unusual in the United Nations this week: It did not abstain from, much less veto, a resolution threatening to impose sanctions unless Sudan stopped killing civilians in South Sudan. China has long treated Sudan as a client state, and it stood by Khartoum during the long years when Western powers tried to stop the atrocities the regime was committing in Darfur. Yet, after a discussion that a Security Council diplomat described as “substantive but not acrimonious,” China voted for Resolution 2046, which demands that both Sudan and South Sudan put an end to cross-border attacks and return to negotiations.

China has not, of course, become a convert to human rights, as the current standoff over activist Chen Guangcheng proves all too vividly. Nor is it having second thoughts about its foundational foreign-policy doctrine of “nonintervention,” which has made China the defender of authoritarian regimes the world over. A recent report on Chinese foreign policy by the British group Saferworld concludes that “At least for now, non-interference, stable regimes and stable relations that are conducive to maintaining China’s global economic engagement, will retain precedence in guiding Beijing’s diplomatic relations with conflict-affected states.”

But something important has happened: Facing a situation in which the principle of nonintervention doesn’t tell it what to do, China has been forced to join the United States and other countries, as well as the African Union, in actively trying to end a brutal conflict. China has supported Sudan over the last decade because Sudan supplied China with oil. Last year, however, when South Sudan became independent, Khartoum lost most of its oil-producing territory. China immediately began courting the new country with visits from senior officials and a blizzard of proposed investment deals. Only last week, while South Sudanese President Salva Kiir was in Beijing, China announced an $8 billion loan to the new country to build major infrastructure projects. But though South Sudan has most of the oil, Sudan has the pipelines and the refining equipment. So China needs both countries — and the rising spiral of violence between them, provoked largely though not wholly by Khartoum, has forced China to get off the sidelines.

FULL ARTICLE (Foreign Policy)