SOUNDBITE - Understanding the Ongoing Threat of North Korea
![](https://www.eastwest.ngo/sites/default/files/podcast-images/14372616394_a36ebf5304_o.jpg)
David Firestein, Perot Fellow and Senior Vice President of the EastWest Institute, joined students at the U.S. Army War College on Thursday, June 22, to discuss the strategic perceptions and assumptions between the U.S. and China in the South China Sea.
Firestein contends that--although the media in both countries continue to perpetuate an adversarial, zero-sum narrative--we must go beyond this conventional media narrative to effectively analyze the South China Sea dispute.
Firestein believes that even though the competing territorial and maritime claims are unlikely to be resolved in the short term, the United States and China are still unlikely to go to war over the South China Sea. However, if left unaddressed, the dispute will continue to hamper strategic trust in the U.S.-China relationship. With a more thoughtful probing of the doctrines, policies, assumptions and perceptions, the issue can be managed better, thus generating a higher-quality status quo for all parties involved.
Watch the entire talk here.
The EastWest Institute (EWI), the National Institute of Strategic Communication at Peking University (NISC), the Centre for China & Globalization (CCG), and the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation (CAITEC) convened on June 15-16 an international symposium entitled “’Afghanistan Reconnected’: Renewed Opportunities Under China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)” in collaboration with the Embassy of Afghanistan to China, Kabul University and the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO).
Following the Belt & Road Summit in Beijing in May of this year, the EWI symposium was the first follow-up event dedicated to one particular country along the “New Silk Road.” Given the tragic backdrop of the recent terror attacks in Kabul, the symposium was a timely event in reinvigorating a collective hope for the future as the general consensus was that peace in the region is dependent upon a stable and thriving Afghanistan.
The event focused on how China’s new outgoing economic strategy can provide benefits for Afghanistan's stability, security and prosperity in a regional context. To this end, it aimed to build trust between political and business contacts among countries (India, Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan) with significant interests in the future stability of the country as well as to develop policy recommendations for regional economic cooperation.
Conceived as a Track 2 dialogue, the symposium brought together parliamentarians, diplomats, academics and professionals from across the private sector and several international organizations. Despite being an unofficial event, significant assurances from speakers associated with the National Reform and Development Commission (NDRC), the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) and the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) represented the authentic expression of Chinese government strategy.
Key Themes
As a consequence of Afghanistan’s weakened governmental institutions and endemic corruption, the need to address the very real concerns that BRI may forgo Afghanistan completely was a main topic of concern. However, amongst Chinese reassurances that Afghanistan is very much a central cog of BRI, other delegates warned that an unstable and economically regressive Afghanistan will also hamper the future success of its neighbors.
Chief among several tangible Chinese pledges was the commitment to further financial investment and professional training. Improving and increasing the possibilities for people-to-people exchanges between all countries along the New Silk Road was also emphasized as a perquisite to BRI’s possible success. Several Chinese speakers voiced China’s commitment to provide 10,000 scholarships to train Afghan researchers, managers and engineers to run 50 jointly-organized laboratories. The mining industry, in particular, was identified as a specific area of win-win cooperation, as Afghanistan boasts rich deposits of several minerals and can benefit from the infrastructure and technical expertise of China to exploit these resources.
Along with discussions concerning trade and transit, investment and infrastructure, and energy cooperation, sustainable or “green” development was a new theme to emerge as a guiding principle of BRI. In order to ensure the New Silk Road is conscious of its environmental impact, there were calls for concerted efforts from the Chinese government and its international partners to share information in order to develop thorough regulation and policy. In addition to its abundant natural resources, Afghanistan also has masses of renewable energy potential waiting to be tapped into, such as 23,000 megawatts of hydropower which, if developed, could be exported to Pakistan. Furthermore, well over 200,000 MW of solar energy and tremendous possibilities for wind energy are yet to be realized. As a concrete outcome, cooperation between Kabul University and Poly Solar Technologies was concluded to help both the university train Afghan students and the company invest in the Afghan market.
During the discussions, participants drew attention to how BRI can both learn and expand from previous initiatives which attempted to revitalize and reestablish the centrality of the Old Silk Road in global economics. Several philosophies underpinned previous attempts, but BRI’s strength lies in its extensive research and identification of significant focus areas, including Afghanistan. A major task for BRI in this regard is to address the large trade imbalance between China and Afghanistan by creating stronger trading links through the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).
When considering the more polarizing foreign policy emanating from Washington, a significant geopolitical observation to come out of the symposium was the prospect for BRI to be a driving force in convincing regional states to put aside their differences in order to foster a richer culture of cross border cooperation. With over 20 terrorist groups said to be operating in Afghanistan, several delegates dispelled the myth that a difference between “good” and “bad” insurgent groups exists. Delegates, therefore, expressed the hope that both the U.S. and China would use their leverage over Pakistan and Afghanistan to work towards a common understanding of combatting violent extremism, and at the same time towards connecting the two countries through the existing and new rail and road systems. EWI’s CEO Cameron Munter, former U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan, pointed out that BRI and the converging interests of the U.S. and China represent not only an immense mobilizer of unprecedented economic opportunities, but also an opportunity to strengthen institutional capacities and state building.
These arguments echoed Afghan President Ghani’s sentiments just a week prior, while he was in Astana, Kazahkstan as part of the latest Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit, where he expressed his willingness to step up cooperation in transportation to enhance connectivity. Chinese influence is seen as a potential driver for brokering bilateral agreements regarding border management control along the hotly contested, and often tense, Durand Line. A common complaint, reiterated several times throughout the symposium, was that despite hundreds of agreements and MoU’s in place between Afghanistan and its neighbors, these policies often go unimplemented. In terms of the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, Chinese/U.S. influence was envisioned as serving the dual purpose of providing an independent check on illegal crossings and assisting with trade management processes for trucks transiting goods in and out of either country.
Contrary to more pessimistic reports amongst geopolitical and international relations analysts, and with respects to other local infrastructure projects in the region, delegates at the event highlighted the potential synergies between the Iranian Chabahar and Pakistani Gwadar ports. Some see the construction of the two ports as physical manifestations of the wider geopolitical tensions in the region, especially considering the former is largely viewed as an avenue by which India and Afghanistan can increase trade by circumventing Pakistan. Yet, it was the compatibility of the two ports which garnered most discussion at the symposium with comments that Gwadar could complement the overall function of Chabahar by handling any spillover cargo. Moreover, the short distance between the two ports was seen as the ideal reason to implement a feeder vessel service, transporting both cargo and people to greatly enhance the economy and build trust between Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan.
All parties to the symposium were thus unanimous in their insistence that Afghanistan will be an indispensable building block in the realization of BRI as it shall provide the bridge between east and west. More importantly, all delegates agreed BRI offered a unique chance for the countries of the region to focus on their mutual interests, rather than their mutual differences, in pursuit of economic prosperity and peace. As one delegate put it succinctly, this is a chance the region must not pass up.
Beijing, China — The EastWest Institute (EWI), the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation (CAITEC), the National Institute of Strategic Communication at Peking University (NISC), and the Centre for China & Globalization (CCG) will co-host the international symposium “’Afghanistan Reconnected’: Renewed Opportunities Under China’s Belt and Road Initiative” in collaboration with the Embassy of Afghanistan to China, Kabul University and the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) from June 15-16, 2017.
The symposium will focus on ways to unlock both Afghanistan’s and the region’s economic potential during a time of transition, and on fresh opportunities provided by China’s Belt and Road Initiative. In light of a declining security situation, these discussions will be a timely reminder of the importance of stabilizing Afghanistan and utilizing its strategic location as a pivot towards greater economic cooperation. Senior political and business leaders from Afghanistan, China, India, Iran, and Pakistan will work in multiple panels towards producing a set of feasible recommendations concerning trade & transit, investment & infrastructure, energy, and regional dynamics.
The opening event will offer keynote addresses from EWI’s CEO Amb. Cameron Munter; Mr. Mou Xiongbing, Director of International Economic Cooperation Office, Academy of Macroeconomic Research, National Development and Reform Commission; and Ambassador of Afghanistan to China, H.E. Mr. Janan Mosazai.
The Beijing symposium is set to be the final stage of EWI’s multi-year “Afghanistan Reconnected Process.” Sponsored by the government of Germany and private donors, the Process addresses regional economic security issues in Afghanistan and its neighborhood. The focus is promoting the win-win potential of enhanced regional economic and political cooperation in order to not only foster development but also security and stability in Afghanistan and greater Central Asia. EWI established a network of senior experts from governments, parliaments, and the private sector, mainly from Afghanistan, Iran, India, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkey, China, the U.A.E., the U.S., and Europe, as well as from multiple regional and international organizations. Through a series of high-level consultations, this network identified major obstacles to regional trade and transit. A set of practical recommendations on how to overcome these obstacles have been presented to the governments of Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, Tajikistan and Iran.
Hassan makes his comments in an interview on TRT World's The Newsmakers program. The segment focuses on the question: "Is President Assad hurting or protecting Christians?" in Syria.
EastWest Institute (EWI) Director of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) program, Kawa Hassan, delivers his remarks at the 2017 Global Peace Convention in Manila, the Philippines.
Hassan was part of the panel for “Dialogue & Trust: Real Lessons in Countering Violent Extremism” on March 1. EWI partnered with the Global Peace Foundation to organize the four-day convention, bringing together leading global experts and practitioners to share best practices and develop multi-sector partnerships for sustainable peace and development and the achievement of the UN 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Organizers said the event drew 3,500 participants representing over 100 organizations from 42 countries.
Below is Kawa's remarks, beginning around the 6:00 mark.
Ladies and Gentlemen, Friends and Colleagues good morning,
Thank you so much for the kind invitation to speak at the Global Peace Convention 2017. It is an honor to speak again at an event organized by Global Peace Foundation and its partners. I had the honor to speak at the last conference in Belfast in September.
The questions we are asked to address at this session are immensely crucial and relevant. Yet I think they are more or less the same questions we discussed in Belfast. This doesn’t mean they are not important; on the contrary, they deal with one of the core issues of our time, which is at the same time at the heart of what my organization EastWest Institute is addressing, namely how to counter violent extremism and make our world a safer place. But in order for these questions to be dynamic and responsive in the face of rapid political changes in the West and the Middle East, I would like to connect countering violent extremism to two transformative phenomena that would impact peace building in the coming years, namely authoritarianism in the Middle East and populism in the West.
How much a difference six months can make! Last time we met in Belfast. Back then Brexit was a fact but the U.S. (and with it the world) was engulfed in an existential election campaign that had the potential to change world politics with wide ranging implications for the fight against ISIS and other extremist groups.
The election of Donald Trump and possible victories of populist and far-right parties in upcoming elections in France and the Netherlands may reshape the fight against violent Islamic groups such as ISIS. This will definitely impact the work of peace building organizations. While ISIS and other radical Islamist groups who are committing horrible crimes against Muslims and non-Muslims should be defeated, the key questions are: what is the best approach, and who are the best strategic and sustainable allies in this tectonic battle?
Geopolitical shifts and populist surges in the West alongside fatigue with complex conflicts in Iraq, Syria, and beyond strongly suggest that a hard-core security approach and alliance with authoritarian regimes in Middle East perhaps will be the most dominant strategy in the coming years. This would result in the rehabilitation and resilience of repressive regimes such as Syria’s Assad and authoritarian and corrupt leaders in Iraq and other countries in the region. This strategy might yield military successes in the short term but in the long run will only strengthen apocalyptic groups like ISIS. To make matters worse, it will give autocrats a new lease on life. This means the Middle East could be condemned for the foreseeable future to a vicious cycle of violence committed by autocrats and apocalyptic ideologues. The civilian population and peaceful activists who want a dignified and democratic rule will be caught in between and will continue to remain the real victims as is the case at the moment. Going back to the topic of our session, namely root causes of violent extremism, what is the link between Jihadi Salafi terrorism and authoritarianism?
In my view, one of the structural reasons for the rise of groups like ISIS is the systemic use of violence by the so called “secular” and religious regimes alike to quell dissent. The history of post-colonial states in Iraq, Syria, Libya and most other countries in the Middle East is a history of horrible human rights violations against civilian people, peaceful protests, and armed groups including public executions- even stoning and beheadings- and use of chemical and biological weapons.
The barbarism of the henchmen of Abubakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS, does not originate from a vacuum. They build on, are the logical conclusions of, and even refine the unimaginable brutality of the human rights violations of Saddam Hussein, Hafez & Bashar Al Assad, Gaddafi and other dictators. ISIS is an authoritarian byproduct, a consequence and not a cause of the current catastrophe in the Middle East. The overall extremely violent political culture and prisons were and are top universities for the graduation of the leaders as well as rank and file fighters of ISIS and other extremist groups. The only difference between ISIS and dictators is that ISIS meticulously documents and broadcasts its barbarism with a showcase of pride.
The most recent report of Amnesty International on Syria entitled “Human Slaughterhouse: Mass Hangings and Extermination at Saydnaya Prison, Syria” is a gruesome reminder of the terrible human rights violations committed by the regime and a warning of what may yet still happen. These regimes create the right environment for the birth of barbaric leaders like Abu Bakr Albaghdadi rather than Nelson Mandela.
Political violence and human rights violations are related to economic corruption. By corruption I don’t mean petty corruption of low-mid level bureaucracy but rather systemic corruption at the highest echelons of power. Despite their many historic, political, economic and social differences Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Nigeria and some other countries, they share one common curse and that is the ubiquitous, exorbitant and unprecedented corruption of ruling elites that creates failed states and provides the perfect habitat for the emergence and advancement of violent extremism. Perhaps one of the books that pays sufficient attention to this global problem is the one aptly entitled “The Thieves of State: Why Corruption Threatens Global Security” by Sarah Chayes. To quote Ms. Chayes, “Since the late 1990s, corruption has reached such an extent that some governments resemble glorified criminal gangs, bent solely on their own enrichment. These kleptocrats drive indignant populations to extremes―ranging from revolution to militant puritanical religion.”
The political order that emerged in Iraq after the fall of Saddam Hussein dismally failed to produce an inclusive political pact in which all groups and citizens see the state as ‘their Iraq’. When Mosul fell to ISIS in June 2014, Iraq's national budget was over 141 billion USD. Ruling elites from Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish backgrounds have used these billions to enrich themselves and their cronies, strengthening party militias instead of building inclusive national institutions including professional armies.
The outrageous carelessness and scandalous double-standards of the international community towards the Syrian conflict has led to Syrian heartbreak, the worst refugee crisis since World War II and a protracted state of violence with no end in sight. Al-Assad's chemical weapons were destroyed by the UN, but his barrel bombs were left untouched only to wreak death and destruction in Syrian cities. Thus, it is no surprise that ISIS and other radical groups are mushrooming in such a conducive and ideal habitat. The Trump administration’s ban on Syrians and nationals from seven Muslim majority nations is the latest example of the rehabilitation of the Assad regime. U.S. immigration authorities barred entry to a 21-year-old Syrian cinematographer, even though he had a valid visa, who worked on a harrowing film about his nation's civil war, "The White Helmets”. This 40-minute documentary gives a window into the lives of the group's volunteers as they scramble to pull people from the rubble of buildings flattened in bombing raids. According to the founder of white helmets Khaled Saleh, the group saved 82,000 lives, including children and babies. I urge everyone to watch this documentary (which won an Academy Award in this year's ceremony).
President Trump’s travel ban will only strengthen Assad, al Qaeda and ISIS. We live in an extremely dark time. Middle Eastern despotism, violent Jihadi Salafism and Western populism strengthen each other with disastrous consequences for the world. One way to counter this terrible trend is to link the struggle for dignity and democracy against Middle Eastern authoritarianism and terrorism to the new struggle against populism in the West. We need, though, to distinguish between the majority of voters who vote for populist and far right parties and those who are xenophobic. People are genuinely, rightly and truly terrified by the threat of terrorist attacks by ISIS in the West. It is this social base and fear that needs to be addressed in order to make the world a safer place and help peaceful protesters against autocrats in their long march for a dignified and democratic existence in Middle East. In these dark times this is a tall order. But we don’t have an alternative. More than ever we should commit to energized activism, new and transformative ideas, and above all hope. To quote Raymon Williams: “To be truly radical is to make hope possible rather than despair convincing.”
Thank you very much for your attention.