Middle East & North Africa

I would first of all like to thank the organizers of this event, CCME (Council for Moroccans Abroad), for providing me with the opportunity to speak here about such a current topic. Having recently emigrated myself – albeit within the European Union - and working in the field of international relations, I feel today’s topic of ‘Migration, Identity and Foreign Relations’ is close at heart.

But allow me first to say a couple of things about my work, so as to give a background to the discussion points I would like to raise. I am the Program Coordinator for the Parliamentarians Network for Conflict Prevention. This Network celebrates its 5th anniversary this year, as it was launched at the European Parliament in 2008 by the EastWest Institute upon the recommendation of a high-level task force. This task force existed of seasoned diplomats and politicians, who are convinced that parliamentarians are in a unique position to not only identify the early warning signs of civil unrest and looming conflict, but that they are also capable of acting upon such early warning and respond with preventative measures.

So today we have a network of nearly 100 parliamentarians from all over the world dedicated to prevent conflict. Conflict in the traditional military or armed sense, but the network also tackles more contemporary sources of conflict, such as access to water, food and energy, as well as issues of cyber crime. And although many of these sources of conflict are addressed by parliaments individually, bringing parliamentarians together to force joint strategies is often times more effective, given the fact that these threats will not stop at any country’s border. This is the reality of globalization in which we live; we cross borders for work, we travel for pleasure, and our governments increasingly need to look outwards for partners to cooperate with. New cultures and countries are only but a click away.

But how do we make sure that in this interconnected world, we stay true to our culture and values? This can be a particular challenge for people emigrating. The new culture in which they will be absorbed might not seem welcoming and it might be difficult to overcome the language barrier. It is therefore very positive that organizations such as CCME exist in order to assist those who have moved abroad, as a focal point, ensuring they have a voice as well.

In my professional capacity, I meet parliamentarians on a daily basis and some of them worry about the amount of immigrants their country is taking up. They worry about the fact that large scale migration might change their culture and some might blame domestic issues, such as unemployment, on the immigrants. Yet other countries struggle with actively engaging immigrant communities, because they live secluded by their own traditions, hardly interacting with the host country’s culture. Many large cities have a China town, where the Chinese population lives in relative solitude, protecting values and customs from outside influences. Many of these countries struggle with being able to provide the immigrant communities with a sense of belonging. Most of these problems can be overcome, for example by providing language courses which also touch upon cultural aspects of the host society. Religious and cultural organizations, or indeed organizations such as CMEE, can also play a key role in fostering understanding and can act as a focal point for authorities to approach. The goal is to create social conditions in which people from different background can live together in harmony and enjoy their fundamental freedoms.

We encounter potential dangerous conflict when either group wishes to force their identity upon the other group, demanding assimilation. In the aforementioned scenarios dialogue might overcome misunderstanding and misinterpretations. When the host or the immigrating community insist upon the assimilation of the other is when we experience conflict. Insistence of the host community might lead to even more seclusion by the immigrant population and can lead to a strengthening of their native identity, even radicalization in extreme cases. Insisting on assimilation of the host community to accept norms and standards of the immigration community might lead to discrimination and that crimes based upon the notion that the immigrants are intruders out to destroy the values of the host community.

We believe parliamentarians have a key role to play in ensuring that the debate is taking place. Not discussing problems arising from migration does not solve any problems, but it makes them fester in society until there is a – usually violent – eruption of the build up pressure this has caused. In both the host country of the immigrant, as well as the home country parliamentarians can hold open dialogue and engage with parliamentarians on the other side of this dialogue to help foster understanding.

But also the migrating communities themselves have a large role to play when it comes to parliament. Immigrant communities with a strong sense of identity have in the past successfully lobbied parliamentarians for recognition of their particular problems. And in countries where we speak of ‘second or third generation’ immigrants – a group which often feels disenfranchised with links both (or neither) to the host county’s culture and that of the country of origin of the previous generation(s) – it is key to have political participation by the immigrant communities. As they often have grown up in the host community, we need to encourage them to vote, elect officials who advocate their cause within the host community’s culture and eventually elect role models of these groups as elected officials.

A good example of such integration where the cultural identity has not been lost is that of the Indian community, the Sikhs, in the United Kingdom. This community at first was viewed upon as foreign and almost as one encroaching upon British culture, although India had been a dominated by the British empire. By now, however, the British parliament has an ‘All Party Parliamentary Group for British Sikhs,' which deals with issues relevant to the Sikh community. That does not mean that all problems have been solved and everyone in the British society is just peacefully living next to one another. 2011 saw the first Sikh Member of Parliament wearing a traditional turban in parliament. The Sikh community found this ‘too little, too late’ whilst for many British this was already going out on a limb to give a cultural minority the right to display a religious symbol in parliament. Many European countries share this rigid separation between religion and State. Only in recent years have European societies come to accept that immigrant communities have become such an inherent part of their national identity that allowances should be made for their traditional garments. This is not something which can be changed with one single generation of immigrants though; it takes decades for such change to be broadly supported by and indeed incorporated into the culture of the host community.

I feel it is my duty, however, to point out that this is not an issue dealt with merely in Western Europe, as we sometimes are inclined to think. Let me cite another example: In Turkey the separation between religion and State may be even stricter than in some Western European countries. In 2011 it was the APK party of the current Prime Minister Erdogan who placed a female candidate on its list for the district of Antalya who was known to wear a headscarf. Now, the APK knew that the candidate in question had no chance of winning in this district, thereby preventing a full-blown parliamentary crisis, but it still caused quite the commotion. This goes to show that whilst our discussions mostly focus on Moroccans abroad and that the majority of those who emigrate to (Western) Europe, these are not issues unique for this relationship between Moroccan immigrants and European host communities.

I will leave it at that for now, but I would be delighted to continue the discussion after the interventions of the other most honorable speakers on the panel and I would welcome any questions there might be afterwards.

Thank you.

EWI's Parliamentarians Network for Conflict Prevention mobilizes members in parliaments across the globe to find pioneering ways to prevent and end conflicts

The Arab Spring began on 18th December 2010 when a young, jobless Tunisian graduate was selling vegetables from a cart. After his wares were consistently seized by the police, he set himself on fire in protest. This act sparked demonstrations and protests across Tunisia, which led to the toppling of the 23 year reign of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. The wave of protest quickly spread across North Africa and the Middle East, with pro-democratic rebellions that toppled regimes and left many Arab citizens with increased civil rights.

Women were essential

Women were essential to helping maintain the movement. In Yemen, it was a young woman who first led demonstrations on her university campus against the long rule of Ali Abdullah Saleh. In Bahrain, women were some of the first to pour into Pearl Square in the capital city demanding change, often carrying their children with them. In Cairo, women were involved in arranging food deliveries, blankets and medical help which allowed a moment to turn into a movement.

Even in the more conservative regimes of the region women reacted against their leadership’s actions. Hundreds of Syrian women marched through the town of Beida to protest the detention of their men. When Yemini President Saleh announced that it was un-Islamic for men and women to march side by side in protest, thousands of women flooded the streets just to prove him wrong.

Women continue to support the demonstrations by working as nurses in makeshift hospitals, cooking food for protesters, and giving speeches and singing songs at demonstrations. Their support has been vital in sustaining the Arab Spring. However, the movement itself does not rest upon gender equality. Women of all countries involved agree on that. It is about regime change to bring freedoms to people of genders, all religions and race.

Above all, it is about the freedom to express oneself. In addition to the right to freedom psychologically, socially, and economically, the demonstrators call for the ability to speak their minds and simply be themselves.

Even though the movement is about the rights of everyone, women make up a substantial proportion of the Arab Spring countries. In Tunisia, for example, it was the grievances of the young, well educated and unemployed people that sparked the revolution. Two-thirds of that population is made up of Tunisian women.

Women in Arab nations like men face problems in terms of lack of opportunities and employment options. But it is worse because while more and more Muslim women are attending university, they have even fewer opportunities than their male colleagues to speak or to secure a job. It is only natural then for them to question the nature of the system in their country. This frustration can be seen by the level of support women have contributed to the movement.

Will only men benefit?

The question remains as to whether the Arab Spring has benefited women. After all their hard work and support, many women fear that only the men will gain the freedoms for which both genders fought. Many women report that while the men were happy for the women’s support during the revolution, some men feel that now it’s time for women to go back home to their “normal lives.” It is alarming that women’s efforts are at risk of being unrewarded and that men who welcomed their support on the street may not welcome their presence in business or government.

Additionally, rape and sexual assault are being used as weapons against women. Assault and harassment were problems before the revolutions, but heightened levels of such violence has led many to believe that they are being used as a way to silence women and keep them indoors. Ultra-conservative Islamists have blamed women who are sexually assaulted at demonstrations by saying the harassment was their fault for mixing inappropriately with men.

There have also been high profile accounts of female journalists being attacked and sexually assaulted during protests. These stories include that of Natasha Smith, a young British journalism student who went to Egypt to cover women’s rights for her final project. She was separated from her two male companions by dozens of frenzied men who dragged her across the ground as they ripped off her skirt, undergarments, shoes and shirt. She was ultimately saved from the continued assault by a different group of Egyptian men.

Cases like these are appalling in and of themselves, however what is even more shocking is that law enforcement has been unwilling to challenge this wave of sexual violence. Indeed, when law suits have been filed against perpetrators of sexual assault the victims themselves have been targeted. A lawyer from Benghazi named Iman Al-Obaidi told journalists that she was raped by security forces in March 2011; she was then accused of defamation against the Qadaffi government. She was subsequently arrested by security police, forced into a car, and detained for several days.

The detentions have often brought sexual discomfort. In 2011, Samira Ibrahim and Maha Mohamed brought a case to the Egyptian courts challenging the legality of forced virginity tests of female protesters. In the face of increased sexual violence towards women, both Samira and Maha won their cases.

Driven into traditional roles?

Despite Samira and Maha’s landmark cases, women express their concern of being driven into more traditional roles due to increasing violence and the militarisation of the economy. At the same time, many of the Arab Spring nations have been experiencing the rise of “political Islam.” These are Islamic parties such as Egypt’s Freedom and Justice Party or Tunisia’s formerly outlawed Islamic Ennanhda party. Ennanhda has since dropped the Islamic portion of its name but its core values remain the same. Both of these parties recently secured over 40% of the available seats in their respective countries.

The rise of these Islamic parties has multiple causes. In addition to the religious backing they have, under previous regimes Islamic organisations have been able to provide charities, social services, jobs and business opportunities to the population establishing a network of support across the country.

However, it is not only male conservatives that support the Islamic parties. While proportionally more men indicated in a 2012 Gallup poll that they think Sharia should be the only source of law, proportionally more women indicated that it should be a source, but not the source.

Nevertheless, the effects of the increase in Islamic party power have had a disproportionate effect on women. Salafist students, who support a strict interpretation of Islam, have called for gender separation in their courses and for women to be fully covered when attending university. Worryingly, the second demand has met little resistance from university administrators.

Once considered the most liberal of the Middle Eastern countries, Tunisia has seen a sharp rise in the number of women wearing veils. All the while, campaigns promote Islamic parties as a platform for change even though some of these groups look to implement a purist interpretation of Islam that would call for secular laws to be rolled back. And with the rise of these parties, in some instances women have less representation in government than before the revolutions.

Women’s representation in government

Many of the newer Arab democracies have employed electoral quota laws to try and increase women’s representation in government. The effectiveness of quota systems is however under debate.

Tunisia, for example, has implemented a “zipping” system where every other candidate on an electoral list must be female. Egypt issued a decree abolishing a quota requiring 64 of 518 seats be filled by women and instead requires all electoral lists to include at least one women. There are concerns with both systems. In Egypt, few women are nominated and are often placed at the bottom of the list. Women in Tunisia fear that the regulations won’t be enforced if officials claim that there aren’t enough qualified women to run. This, they assert, is a farce because even in the most rural regions there are female doctors, lawyers, and teachers.

The performance of electoral lists seems to be disappointing as only 2 women are currently in cabinet positions in Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya, all countries that maintain quotas. Yet are these results better than not having a provision at all? In Tunisia 4 of 6 constitutional draft committees were headed by women but in Egypt, the number of women parliamentarians has dropped from 12% to 2%. The international average is around 21%.

Gaining a sense of empowerment

However, despite the hardships women have endured as a result of the Arab Spring, there have been distinct benefits as well. Women activists in Arab Spring countries most notably point to the sense of empowerment that women have found by fighting for their rights. The experience they have obtained pushing for collective, national goals has been invaluable. They cannot be legislated away or removed from an individual’s memory. This experience of coming together to be agents of positive change has become a seed that will grow into greater demands for women’s rights. Women have learned that they have to fight for their freedoms and that these freedoms are worth fighting for.

In fact, this mobilization is working. Last November, the Egyptian government dropped the controversial Article 68 which had affirmed the government’s commitment to gender equality as long as it didn’t interfere with the rulings of Sharia. Now, there will be equality for all citizens, regardless of gender, race, or religion. Similarly in Tunisia, the draft constitution guarantees non-discrimination on any grounds, including gender.

However, there is still work to be done and that work is being done by very dedicated women in the Arab Spring nations. Protests continue over the implementation of Tunisia’s Article 28 which describes women’s roles in the family as “complementary” to those of men’s. After women’s positive experience mobilising for their rights, women will not accept the definition of their roles in relation to those of a man. Women must be defined in their own right.

Furthermore, mobilization has continued at the grassroots level. Anti-harassment backlash in Egypt has been undertaken in a variety of forms. In addition to self-defence courses, there have been marches in Cairo against sexual harassment. These women are responding to ultra- conservative Islamists who say women invite sexual assault by attending anti-government demonstrations where they mix with men. As recently as early February, an Egyptian lawmaker remarked that women are sometimes fully responsible for rape because they put themselves into that situation. In response, women brandish knives at the rallies and threaten to cut off the hands of attackers.

However, there are also creative reactions that don’t respond to violence with violence. An app called Harassmap now sends text alerts to women regarding “danger zones” where harassment or assaults have been reported.

There has also been a push to make sure that all voices, including women, are being included in the conversations about constitutions, law, and the role of religion. In Tunisia, Amira Yahyaoui founded Al Bawsla, an organisation that helps people understand the role politics plays in their lives and how to work together to protect their rights. Likewise, as in Tunisia, Alaa Murabit is publishing a Libyan Women’s Charter that has been produced in consultation with women across Libya. It will lay out the specific needs and demands of Libyan women which will then be used to influence the writing of the new constitution.

Ultimately, the women of the Arab Spring nations have faced hardship. They have endured continuing sexual abuse and have fought to maintain their rights in the face of powerful conservative Islamic parties. Despite these difficulties, the Arab Spring has provided an opportunity for women to participate politically by toppling regimes and to fight for the issues that affect them. While, the quantifiable results of this fight have been disappointing thus far, it is up to the women of these nations to push against traditionalist forces that look to diminish their rights. The revolution won’t truly be over until there are rights for everyone, not just the men of the Arab Spring nations.

Young democracies are the most vulnerable to political and economic instability. A growing number of countries, including in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), are also exposed to risk-multipliers emerging out of the climate-energy-resource nexus. Renewed food price shocks in Tunisia and Egypt for example could tip both countries into violence again. The risk of an eruption of violence over people’s inability to feed their families is very real due to the prospect of a food price spike this year driven by the US drought in 2012.

This is an issue for preventive diplomacy. Its success depends on anticipating threshold moments when latent conflicts may erupt and translate into violence. Prices for food, fuel and other resources can be such thresholds. Although the increase in the price of bread was not the cause of the Arab Spring it was the spark that ignited it. Nevertheless, current external interventions and support packages for the region have done nothing to improve resilience to food and energy spice spikes.

Projections on climate, energy and resource trends for the MENA region suggest that risks of instability remain high well into the 2020s. Climate change will likely impact severely on agricultural production and the attractiveness of the region to international tourism. Continuing dependency on the import of fossil fuels at volatile prices in several countries in the region will further impose significant constraints on the prospects of economic growth.

At the same time, stronger GDP growth alone cannot address negative development trends. Economic development can be undermined by systemic risks emerging out of instabilities in global markets but also, in the medium term, by climate, energy and water pressures. Therefore, a greater focus is necessary on directly building national resilience against these risks. Current external stabilising efforts in MENA, especially from Europe, are focusing on providing incentives for continued democratic reforms, building civil society institutions and providing immediate jobs for young people. Whilst these are important areas a focused approach by donors to improve the prospects of medium term stability is lacking.

There is currently a gap in the political understanding of connections between political and economic stability on the one hand and the risks emerging from a changing climate as well as energy, food and water pressures on the other. Preventive diplomacy could greatly increase its impact if these factors were taken into account. External support for instable countries should not only be more joined up but also informed by an analysis of medium term drivers of risk to help prevent the eruption of violence. Support packages by international financial institutions, security sector reform efforts, diplomatic engagement, etc. have to be informed by the same understanding of systemic risks and the need to build national resilience.

It is therefore vital to use diplomatic means to “lobby” decision-makers in young democracies on the need to address their countries’ vulnerabilities. A better understanding of the risks emerging from climate change in particular could help build political will around resilience investments. Tackling vulnerability to drought and rising sea levels in the MENA region, for instance, can improve the prospects of stability. Resilient energy and water infrastructure is a key component of economic development and growth. It is also decisive for agricultural production, and hence food security. Thus, some of the most pressing issues in MENA such as energy poverty, economic development, and public health can be addressed through investments in the areas of renewable energy systems, energy efficiency, water infrastructure, desalination and irrigation systems. Joining forces around these issues could make a major difference. It is also the best use of scarce resources.

Parliamentarians can play a critical role in ensuring that these issues have been fully addressed in programming development assistance and economic support packages to vulnerable countries. The post-Arab Spring investment flows from Europe and the US provide a high-profile test case in a highly vulnerable region for parliamentarians in the relevant countries to use their oversight powers to improve the impact of preventative diplomacy programmes.

Nick Mabey is the founder, director and chief executive of E3G (Third Generation Environmentalism), a non-profit international organization dedicated to accelerating the transition to sustainable development. In addition to his management role, he leads E3G’s work on European climate change policy, climate diplomacy and foreign policy, and the security implications of climate change. As a member of the International Task Force on Preventive Diplomacy, composed of 24 outstanding experts and practitioners in the field of conflict prevention and resolution, Nick Mabey was one of the initiators of the Parliamentarians Network for Conflict Prevention.

Sabrina Schulz is the head of office of the E3G office in Berlin. She is a policy expert working on climate change and energy and resource security. Her current work focuses on climate and energy issues in the MENA (Middle East and North Africa) region, low-carbon urban development in China and the German Energiewende (energy transformation).

The "Power 100 list," which was published by Arabia Monitor, recognizes the world’s 100 most influential Arab women in business, science, media, entertainment, arts and sports.

Noting that she holds "senior roles in several organisations in the UK and internationally as well as seats on the boards of cultural and educational institutions and NGOs," the ranking affirmed that "her influence is widely accepted."

In a recent interview, Al Kaylani noted that "empowering Arab youth and supporting the role of Arab women leaders is the utmost priority if we are to achieve true and lasting peace and prosperity in the Arab world."

This is the third consecutive year that Al Kaylani's leadership has been recognized by this Arabia Monitor.

Click here to read the 100 Most Powerful Arab Women feature at ArabianBusiness.com.

In Syria, a dictator is waging war against his own people, targeting men and women standing in line at bakeries. By now, according to UN reports, more than 60,000 people have lost their lives. There is no telling when the terror will end. Those who have witnessed the wars in Yugoslavia in the 1990s are reminded of the helplessness and powerlessness they felt during those years. At that time, the international community began to develop the idea that it would not be acceptable any more for a regime to turn on its own civilian population. The result: the “responsibility to protect.” And today, two years after the outbreak of the conflict in Syria, we still hardly have a clue how to live up to this obligation. Perhaps a look back at the wars in former Yugoslavia – during which we had to learn our lesson the hard way – can help.

In the 1990s, it took us a long time to understand that the threat or even the use of military power is sometimes necessary to reach political goals and advance peace: In Bosnia, without the intervention of NATO, the Dayton accords that ended the civil war never would have been possible. Understandably enough, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have made Western societies tired of intervening. The West has come to realize that military interventions – as morally justified as they may be in individual cases – are rarely effective if they are not embedded in a sustainable political strategy. But hasn’t our skepticism gone too far? Could we not have saved many thousands lives with, for instance, a no-fly-zone and the suppression of Bashar al-Assad’s air force? Could the mere presence of NATO missile batteries a year ago have demonstrated the resolve of the West?

The experience in Yugoslavia has also underlined the importance of a joint position of the members of UN Security Council. The NATO air strikes alone could not end Milosevic’s regime. The Serbian president was not run from power until Russia turned its back on him as well. Today, the disunity of the UN Security Council allows Assad’s killings to continue unabated. For more than a year, the veto powers Russia and China have been blocking all efforts to pass a resolution.

It would, however, be too simplistic to attribute responsibility to Russia alone. To some degree, the West is also to blame. From Moscow’s perspective, the Western nations have time and again disregarded Russian interests. Former NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer once said that it was very difficult to cooperate with somebody who thinks of himself as a victim. Moscow feels that it is not being taken seriously as a partner. Again, the memories of the Yugoslav wars play a role: In Russia’s view, the West would ask Moscow for concessions when these were indispensable. Yet after Russia had cooperated, the West would, as seen from Moscow, again ignore Russian interests. Moscow knows that while its power to shape is limited, it still has a considerable power to obstruct.

Of course, the West is aware of that power. At the Munich Security Conference in 2009, just days after President Obama’s first inauguration, U.S. Vice President Joe Biden announced a reset of the U.S.-Russia relationship. Promising results ensued: Obama and then-President Medvedev adopted the most important arms reduction treaty in the past two decades – “New START” – and agreed to cooperate on missile defense. However, the relationship cooled for a number of reasons. As the West grew more concerned over the domestic situation in Russia, Moscow insisted on full partnership in missile defense cooperation – on terms that NATO could not accept.

The case of Syria again reveals the fundamental underlying issue: If the West does not want to undermine the authority of the United Nations, it will have to find a way to convince Moscow. The fact that Russia is not fundamentally opposed to any kind of intervention became clear when it abstained on the Libya resolution 1973. Nonetheless, with respect to Syria the Russian government will only agree to sanctions or even the use of military force when it feels it won’t – again – regret changing positions.

Thus, we should hope for a clear signal towards Moscow from the second Obama administration. After all, the U.S. president now does have “more flexibility”, as he had said in the “open mic” incident with Dmitri Medvedev last year. If the U.S. decided not to re-engage Russia, it would be a missed opportunity. No one wishes to gloss over or ignore deplorable domestic developments in Russia. But the fact remains that our foreign-policy interests require that we finally address the obstacles in the NATO-Russia relationship. This includes an agreement on missile defense cooperation: The base lines for a compromise are, in principle, known, yet neither side has dared to make a real move.

Without progress in our relationship, a comprehensive Euro-Atlantic security community that includes Russia will not become reality. Or, to put a positive spin on it: As the NATO-Russia relationship grows stronger and deeper, conflict resolution outside the Euro-Atlantic region will become more likely – not only in Syria.

Russia and the West share key interests in Syria. Nobody really sees a future for Assad, nobody wants to have Syria become a failing state, nobody wants an Islamist regime in Damascus. Considering the strong historical ties between Moscow and Damascus, a solution for the Syrian conflict will have to go through Moscow. The Russian secret service is superior to those of the West when it comes to information on the Assad regime. Again, a similarity to Yugoslavia.

In 2012, we jointly failed in solving the Syrian conflict – the West and Russia. Now we can and must better prepare for the time after Assad – but only if Russia is part of the solution, not part of the problem. This makes new U.S. impetus on a missile defense compromise necessary. In addition, Russia must be integrated more closely into the efforts for Syria. Similarly to the contact group on Yugoslavia, we need a contact group for Syria. The group would have to focus on strengthening the moderate opposition forces, developing a joint peace plan, and aiding refugees.

Only with the help of all Security Council members, the UN envoy Lakhdar Brahimi will be able to succeed. Those who do not want to be forced to intervene militarily after all (as in Mali) need to strengthen the UN Security Council. The path goes through Moscow.

Otaiba and his diplomatic corps, who have drawn attention for their international aid efforts, were presented with the Distinguished Diplomatic Service Award at the World Affairs Council-Washington, D.C.'s annual gala.

"My team and I have worked very hard to build new relationships," said Otaiba, explaining that they have travelled "throughout the country to share the story of the deep ties that bind our two countries."

The embassy's significant aid to Joplin, Missouri following a devastating tornado and pledges to New York and New Jersey in the wake of Hurricane Sandy were cited as major factors in determining the recipient of the award.

Click here to read full coverage of the award presentation at The National.

“We spot needs and we try to help,” said Otaiba.

The article focused on major UAE contributions to tornado-ravaged Joplin, Missouri, which included a $5 million gift to build a neonatal intensive care unit and $1 million towards student laptops. 

The article noted that the donations "mark a small but remarkable shift in global economic power."

Click here to read the article at The Washington Post.

Zafar Adeel, director of the United Nations University, Institute for Water, Environment and Health, moderated a distinguished panel of experts who helped identify and address global action points for water dialogue and partnerships.

“The time for silo thinking is over,” Ursula Schaeffer-Preuss, chair of the Global Water Partnership, said in her remarks which focused on sustainable approaches. She urged nations to think outside of the traditional ways of tackling water management issues. “This is a global issue that cannot be addressed from one vantage point.”

Olcay Ünver, coordinator of the United Nations World Water Assessment Programme of the UN-Water and director of the UNESCO Programme Office on Global Water Assessment, echoed that sentiment. “Many of the challenges to water security and management come from other sectors and water managers are seldom consulted when dealing with these challenges,” said Ünver.

“Water must become part of the equation,” he continued, stressing that water impacts a huge number of issues in any nation—including public health, jobs, energy, food, sustainability and many women’s issues.

Sanjay Pahuja, senior water resources specialist at the World Bank, stressed the importance of education as key to water cooperation, illustrating his point with an example of Indian farmers, who moderated their own water use after learning pertinent elements of hydrogeology.

“Let the farmers be the scientists,” Pahuja stated, as he elaborated on this bottom-up approach.

Panelists address the crowd at the UN.

He explained further that these farmers did not have much formal education, yet they were able to develop a proficiency that increased their profits and positively impacted their standard of living. “This is how we can alter the course of people’s lives,” Pahuja added.

An additional panelist, Christian Holmes, USAID’s Global Water coordinator, stressed the importance of data exchange as a key catalyst to change. “Bilateral and regional development provide replicable opportunities,” he said.

EWI President John Mroz emphasized that water is key to nation building and that nations must act on it. “We are all aware of this. Now, it’s no longer enough to name the ball, now we have to move the ball down the playing field,” he urged event participants.

The International Year of Water Cooperation is intended to unify all efforts, both undertaken and planned by the UN system, other international and regional organizations, governments, civil society and entrepreneurs, in order to increase people's awareness of freshwater-related problems and ways to resolve them. This follows the 2012 UNGA adopted resolution (A/Res/67/204) on the implementation of the IYWC through convening a series of global high-level events.

Focusing on studies of Egypt and Tunisia, this project has resulted in this new report, which argues that MENA countries already face disproportionate future challenges from and constraints on growth due to energy and water pressures, vulnerability to volatile international food prices, and climate impacts on critical industries.

Click here to download the E3G report Underpinning the MENA Transition: Delivering Climate, Energy and Resource Security.

According to E3G, climate challenges, population growth, and industrialization will result in a growing scarcity of water. Food prices are also expected to increase dramatically, contributing to economic shocks in the region. Developed countries have a strategic interest in successful democratic transitions but current support pledged to the region does not address the critical economic and resource challenges.

The report suggests that “external support for energy and resource investment should ‘stress test’ the value of long lived infrastructure against future resource and climate change scenarios to ensure their economic value is resilient in the medium term.” It goes on to recommend that donor countries and regional partners work together to focus on four strategic priorities: improving resilience to shocks, economic diversification into resource efficient industries, building resilient infrastructure, and focusing support on a few high-impact stability and development objectives.

EWI was pleased to work with E3G in holding workshops in Berlin, New York, Washington D.C., and Brussels with policymakers and relevant experts from the public and private sector for roundtable discussions on the issue. We are particularly grateful to Planet Heritage for funding the project and to the Embassy of Switzerland in Washington, D.C., for hosting the roundtable there.