Number of results to display per page
Search Results
852. Security Sector Reform and Sustaining Peace Proceedings of the High-Level Roundtable
- Author:
- Vincenza Scherrer and Alba Bescos Pou
- Publication Date:
- 04-2018
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Geneva Centre for Security Sector Governance (DCAF)
- Abstract:
- On 23 April 2018 in New York, Slovakia and South Africa, on behalf of the UN Group of Friends of SSR, co-hosted a High-Level Roundtable on Security Sector Reform and Sustaining Peace. The event took place on the eve of the High-Level Meeting of the UN General Assembly on “Peacebuilding and Sustaining Peace” and was organized with the support of the Security Sector Reform Unit of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO), the Bureau for Policy and Program Support at the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF), and the African Centre for the Constructive Resolution of Disputes (ACCORD). The High-Level Roundtable was the third in a series of three high-level events held in the period of a year. It was preceded by a High-Level Dialogue on Global Experiences in SSR, hosted in New York in May 2017 – especially a seminar on “The Nexus between SSR, Conflict Prevention and Peace Sustainment” co-hosted by South Africa and Slovakia, and a seminar on “Conflict Prevention and Peace Sustainment on the African Continent” co-hosted by South Africa and Senegal – as well as a High-Level Conference on the “Role of Security Sector Reform in Sustaining Peace: Challenges and Opportunities” that was hosted by Slovakia on 5-6 June 2017 in Bratislava. These events served to highlight important challenges to SSR support in the context of sustaining peace that needed to be addressed, and to develop a series of recommendations worth pursuing further. The High-Level Roundtable on Security Sector Reform and Sustaining Peace held on 23 April 2018 sought to build on important insights from these past events, as well as on the body of relevant policy and research that has been developed over the past year in the areas of sustaining peace and SSR.
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, Security, Peacekeeping, and Reform
- Political Geography:
- Africa, New York, Europe, South Africa, United Nations, Slovakia, and United States of America
853. 9/11 as a Symbol of Terror: Responses and Actions
- Author:
- Bilal Mahmood and Abdul Majid
- Publication Date:
- 07-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- South Asian Studies
- Institution:
- Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
- Abstract:
- The phrase of "the Global War on Terror" was adopted by the media. It was announced that Washington Administration would utilize all its resources to uproot terrorism and will punish all those who are responsible for the 9/11 tragedy. Both Islamic Jihadists and two Bush administrations have deployed spectacles of terror to promote their political agendas; that both deploy Manichean discourses of good and evil which themselves fit into dominant media codes of popular culture; and that both deploy fundamentalist and absolutist discourses.
- Topic:
- Terrorism, History, Taliban, Violent Extremism, and 9/11
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, North America, Punjab, and United States of America
854. Afghanistan Imbroglio: The Unintended Consequences of Foreign Interventions
- Author:
- Asifa Jahangir and Umbreen Javaid
- Publication Date:
- 07-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- South Asian Studies
- Institution:
- Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
- Abstract:
- The war-torn Afghanistan has long suffered from the dynastical contests and fraught economic strategies of foreigners, which instigated constant internal strife and regional instability. The foreign interventions have made this land a sphere of influence and initiated the great game politics sporadically. This paper attempts to examine the historical geostrategic tussles in Afghanistan between international players on the one hand and regional actors on the other hand over control and manipulation of Afghanistan and its surrounding regions through the lens of conceptual framework of unintended consequences approach, which deals with irrational aspect of foreign policy of the states. This study makes interesting contribution to the existing literature of the [old] Great Game of the late 19th century between Czarist Russia and Great Britain or New Great Game by re-conceptualizing this idea into a new concept of the Grand Great Game or the 3G in place of explaining the unintended consequences of the historical events i.e. the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan of 1979, the post-Cold War era when the regional players Pakistan and India got involved in Afghanistan; and the US invasion of Afghanistan of 9/11 incident. The findings of the paper suggest that the unintended consequences of these historical events are bitter than the reality. The foreign interventions have paralyzed the Afghan society and made it more insecure by promoting clandestine terrorist activities and proxies. The interview technique helps to verify the 3G concept and present its unintended consequences. The critical content analysis of the primary and secondary data is of assistance to understand that the current 3G to be not only multidimensional competition, embodying multiple stakeholders but also incorporating complex self-defined rational as well as irrational foreign policy objectives and national interests.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Terrorism, History, Power Politics, Territorial Disputes, Taliban, Geopolitics, and Military Intervention
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, Afghanistan, Europe, South Asia, India, Punjab, and United States of America
855. Pakistan-US Relations after 9/11: Points of Divergence
- Author:
- Muhammad Imran Rashid, Umbreen Javaid, and Muhammad Shamshad
- Publication Date:
- 07-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- South Asian Studies
- Institution:
- Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
- Abstract:
- The research has explored the nature of US-Pakistan relationship particularly after the major event of 9/11 of 2001 in United States. It has highlighted the major points between Pakistan and the United States that have diverted them from each other in case of gaining their common goals in the region ranging from the containment of terrorism to the assurance of security and democracy. Through describing and analysing the facts and figures, mentioned in the published books, research articles, newspapers and other prevailing and relevant data and literature, the research has attempted to mention drone attacks by America in Pakistan‘s Tribal Areas, US-India strategic partnership, US covert military actions in Pakistan, US do more policy, nuclear proliferation, US‘ pressure tactics, US policy towards the Muslim world and America‘s antiIslamic propaganda as the points of divergence due to which Pakistan and United States are experiencing the lowest ebb of relations. The research is helpful for the students of foreign policy of Pakistan, current affairs and the American Studies. In addition to that, the reader will be able to know about the initiatives taken by the Pakistani and the US leadership that have caused deterioration to the cordial relationship of cold war, of late 1980s and mutual concerns to get rid of terrorism and militancy in the 21st century. The last section of this research paper prepared some of the recommendations which can be followed to restore the lost prestige of Pak – US relations based on the mutual understanding for achieving the common goals and to find a better position in the comity of nations.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Terrorism, Bilateral Relations, Counter-terrorism, and 9/11
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, South Asia, India, North America, Punjab, and United States of America
856. Public Policy Failure: ‘How Often?’ and ‘What is Failure, Anyway’?
- Author:
- Matt Andrews
- Publication Date:
- 12-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
- Abstract:
- Observers claim that public policies fail ‘often’. This paper asks, ‘how often’? It is an important question, because public policies absorb resources to address major social issues. We should know if policies are proving bad social investments; routinely failing to solve focal problems at high costs. Unfortunately, it is not easy to assess this. Many public policy organizations—governments in particular—do not provide accessible views onto overall success or failure. The World Bank does, however, provide such view—and it supports policy interventions one finds in governments across the world. The paper thus examines World Bank failure rates. It finds that there are different answers to the ‘how often’ question, depending on responses to a second question, ‘what is failure anyway?’ In studying both questions, the paper identifies a bias in the World Bank—and probably all organizations adopting rational ‘plan and control’ policy processes—to measuring ‘project and product success’ rather than a broader view of success as ‘problems are solved with development impact’. This means that policy organizations like the Bank judge success based on whether planned products are delivered through an efficient process; not whether policies solve the problems that warranted intervention in the first place, or whether the policies promoted development outcomes. Is this how citizens would want their public policy organizations to conceptualize success?
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Government, World Bank, and International Development
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus and United States of America
857. Two-Stage Examinations: Can Examinations Be More Formative Experiences?
- Author:
- Dan Levy, Mae Klinger, and Theodore Svoronos
- Publication Date:
- 09-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
- Abstract:
- Two-stage examinations consist of a first stage in which students work individually as they typically do in examinations (stage 1), followed by a second stage in which they work in groups to complete another examination (stage 2), which typically consists of a subset of the questions from the first examination. Data from two-stage midterm and final examinations are used to assess the extent to which individuals improve their performance when collaborating with other students. On average, the group (stage 2) score was about one standard deviation above the individual (stage 1) score. While this difference cannot be interpreted as the causal effect of two-stage examinations on learning, it suggests that individuals experienced substantial performance gains when working in groups in an examination. This average performance gain was comparable with the average difference between the top performer of the group in stage 1 and the group’s stage 1 average, and was equivalent to about two-thirds of the difference between the “super student” score (i.e. the sum of the maximum score for each question in stage 1) and the group’s stage 1 average. This last result suggests that group collaboration takes substantial (albeit partial) advantage of the aggregate knowledge and skills of the group’s individual members. Student feedback about their experience with two-stage examinations reveal that that these types of examinations are generally perceived to be more helpful for learning and are less stressful than traditional examinations. Finally, using data on group gender compositions, we investigate the potential role of gender dynamics on group efficiency.
- Topic:
- Education, Gender Issues, Collaborative Learning, and Collaborative Efficiency
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus and United States of America
858. Iron Curtain over the Arab world: Evaluating Trump’s inaction on the murder of Jamal Khashoggi
- Author:
- Adham Sahloul
- Publication Date:
- 01-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Harvard Journal of Middle Eastern Politics and Policy
- Institution:
- The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
- Abstract:
- The murder of Saudi Arabian columnist Jamal Khashoggi on October 2nd in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul has been a clarion call for the Washington foreign policy community, one that is redefining the United States’ relations with the Saudi Kingdom and, by extension, US strategy in the Middle East. The Khashoggi affair will outlive President Donald Trump; the reputation of Saudi’s leadership is beyond repair, and with Global Magnitsky sanctions and the newly proposed bipartisan Saudi Arabia Accountability and Yemen Act, the US Congress appears ready to act where the executive has fallen short. The CIA has concluded that Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) ordered Khashoggi’s murder. Trump, who has threatened “severe consequences” for whomever is found responsible, seemed over the past month to be looking for a way out of naming, shaming, and punishing MbS himself. In his statement on November 20th, Trump confirmed many observers’ worst fears about this president’s worst instincts, saying that US security, economic, and political interests transcend this incident. For a sitting US president to balk at the notion of holding an ally accountable and making even a symbolic effort to address such a gruesome crime with clear chains of responsibility constitutes a new low in US foreign policy
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, Crime, Human Rights, Politics, Trump, Journalism, and Crisis Management
- Political Geography:
- Turkey, Middle East, Saudi Arabia, North America, United States of America, and Gulf Nations
859. Going nowhere alone: US sanctions on Iran and the afterlife of the JCPOA
- Author:
- Fridtjof Falk
- Publication Date:
- 01-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Harvard Journal of Middle Eastern Politics and Policy
- Institution:
- The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
- Abstract:
- On November 5th, 2018, the Trump administration re-imposed severe sanctions on Iran. These sanctions, which President Obama called the “toughest sanctions ever faced by the Iranian government,” were lifted by the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as the Iran Deal. The JCPOA was signed with a view to blocking Iran’s alleged pursuit of nuclear weapons, allowing international inspectors into Iran in return for sanctions relief. Withdrawing the United States (US) from the deal was a prominent promise of Donald Trump leading up to the presidential elections of 2016. In a May 2018 speech that described the deal as rooted in “fiction,” President Trump made good on his promise to leave the JCPOA and to move to unilaterally re-impose sanctions on Iran.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, Sanctions, Nuclear Power, and Economy
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
860. Militarization and Marginalization of American Diplomacy and Foreign Policy
- Author:
- Anthony C. E. Quainton
- Publication Date:
- 03-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- American Diplomacy
- Institution:
- American Diplomacy
- Abstract:
- These days Generals are thick on the ground in Washington. Not only is the Secretary of Defense a general, but so too are the current and former National Security Advisors to the President and so is the White House Chief of Staff. Military discipline would seem to be the order of the day. Their culture of discipline may seem particularly ironic in one of the most disorganized administrations that we Americans have ever seen. It is nonetheless real.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Government, National Security, Military Affairs, and Trump
- Political Geography:
- North America, United States of America, Washington, and D.C.