Archives for June 2019

Republican Congressman Mike Gallagher

Representative Mike Gallagher is a rising star in Republican foreign policy circles. The 35- year-old congressman represents the eighth district of Wisconsin, which includes the city of Green Bay. He was first elected to Congress in 2016 and served in the military before earning a PHD in International Relations.

He’s very thoughtful, and this conversation offers listeners some key insights into how an emerging leader in Republican foreign policy circles considers American global leadership, the value of multilateralism and international institutions, and role of a values-based foreign policy.

We kick off discussing Iran, before having a broader conversation about US foreign policy writ large.

Get the Global Dispatches Podcast

​iTunes  |  Spotify  |  Stitcher  | Google Play Music​  | Radio Public

The bonus episodes I’ve posted this week for premium subscribers includes my conversations with Joseph Nye and Carolyn Miles. Joseph Nye is the international relations theorist who coined the term “soft power” and Carolyn Miles is the longtime CEO of the global humanitarian organization Save the Children. In both conversations they trace their career path with me and tell stories from their life and career. To access those episodes, and other rewards like complimentary subscription to my news clips service, please visit Patreon.com/GlobalDispatches or follow the links on GlobalDispatchesPodcast.com 

 Support the show! Become a Premium Subscriber! Unlock Rewards!

You listed yourself as an Eisenhower aficionado on your Twitter. I like it when people self-identify that way.

It is a very cool thing to do these days amongst the kids!

Through the Atoms for Peace Program that Eisenhower started, Iran got its first nuclear technology transfer for medical purposes in the 1950’s, and here we are today.

You have out-nerded me on Eisenhower, which is not an easy thing to do.

We are speaking at a moment of profound crisis. Would you support some sort of congressional mandate that Congress use its authority to authorize the use of military force against Iran?

It depends on the content of that authorization. I do not believe that the administration currently has the authority to conduct a sustained campaign against Iran. I think under the War Powers Resolution, should one of our assets be attacked, the President would have a time stamped flexibility to respond in time, but would eventually have to seek congressional authorization.

A strike, such as the one envisioned after the downing of the drone, would not have qualified?

You could make the argument that it is permissible under the War Powers Resolution. But, if Trump were to continue to conduct legal operations against Iran, then he would need authorization. This gets difficult because the Obama administration, in their campaign against Iraq, would trigger separate War Powers Resolutions clocks every time they conducted a new operation in Iraq, effectively extending the clock to infinity. It is always a wise decision, when there is ambiguity, for the President to come to congress and seek authorization.

What would you advise as an appropriate diplomatic course of action for the US?

We need to reinforce the parameters that Mike Pompeo announced a few months ago. Now, these parameters may seem impossible, but they are a sensible starting point. In order to drive Iran to the negotiating table, we need to continue our policy of maximum pressure. We need to slowly and steadily increase economic pressure against the regime in Iran. Most importantly, we need to remember that while the situation is volatile, we hold the upper hand.

How do you balance alienating key allies like France and Germany who consider this a key pillar to their own security against the policy that you just advised, maximum pressure, which includes pressuring European countries against doing business with Iran? How do you balance those priorities?

It is difficult and it is not easy. All of the promises in European businesses immediately inking agreements with the Iranian regime and businesses flooding into the country did not happen as rapidly as some predicted. When we got out of the JCPOA, we did not see the chaos that many proponents of the deal predicted. That shows us something. When given the choice of doing business with the US or Iran, the answer is clear. That is not to be insensitive to our allies. Everything we do on the world stage is stronger in concert with our allies. So, even where we have a disagreement with our allies on this issue, we need to be making the case in good faith about the nature of the regime and the failure of the whole theory of the JCPOA.

You referenced the value of multilateralism. Can you discuss multilateral alliances and the value you attach to institutions like the UN?

I sense there is a sentiment right now that is growing more hostile to multilateral institutions. I understand to the extent that we are surrendering our own sovereignty, that is probably not the right thing to do. However, in defense of the international order, it is one that we built. The US was the author of all of these institutions. At that time, it was in our interest to bring the world to a forum of cooperation. Unless we want to be in the business of doing everything by ourselves, we have to find a way to work by and with our allies. If you buy the premise of the National Security Strategy and the National Defense Strategy, you are left with the conclusion that our most valuable asset in this competition with the Chinese is that we have friends around the world that want to work with us. The core of competition between the US and China comes down to who has better friends. Those of us in public office need to do a better job of explaining to people why it is useful for us to work through IMF, through the UN, and the value of NATO. We are having new versions of old arguments.

There is an argument to be made that the US is not nurturing these alliances.

It is a mixed bag. In the Middle East, the Trump administration has done a great deal to restore our relationships with our traditional regional allies. The Trump administration is astutely harnessing the historic level of cooperation between the Sunni-Arab gulf states and the Israelis in opposition to Iran. In that sense he has restored and enhanced our alliances in the region.

In Asia it is more nuanced. There are a lot of countries that are welcoming renewed attention, and then in Europe there is a bigger question mark. There is a disparity between statements made by the President on Twitter and some of his speeches that talk beautifully about Western alliances. We do need to have a conversation, however, about modernizing NATO.

So, on China, you are sponsoring a resolution to impose restrictions on the transfer of technologies that could be used to abrogate the rights of Uyghurs Muslims in terms of things like facial recognition, which Silicon Valley has provided to the Chinese Government.

There is the Uyghur Act that would mandate that the US create a website for confidential reporting of harassment or surveillance by Chinese Communist Party agents. There is separate legislation that would restrict any US technology that could be used as surveillance technology by the Chinese. Basically, what we are seeing with the concentration camp with over a hundred Uyghur Muslims is a harbinger of things to come. Regardless of whether or not you think we should do something or criticize them; we can do better to make sure our technology does not facilitate this human rights abomination.

It is interesting that people on both sides are willing to engage on Chinese human rights issues now in ways we have not seen before.

In a time of intense partisan division, there is a lot of bi-partisanship on this issue. This is a case where human rights concerns are in alignment with our broader strategic concerns. We can talk loudly about their human rights abuses and get a strategic effect at the same time.

Is there any blowback against the US ability to press human rights in other countries when we have abominations in our own country?

Not at all. In the US, we have a messy political system and that is by design. Our history is rife with mistakes, but ultimately, America is a force for good in this world. We are a generous country. There are complaints that we spend so much on our military and the rest of the world doesn’t. We do that in part because it is in our own interest, but it also provides an enormous service. We are not perfect, but we are the good guys.

Finally, how do you think Eisenhower would judge Trump’s foreign policy so far?

He’d be like – what the hell is Twitter?

Eisenhower was a master of using the press in a strategic way. He may scratch his head at the usage of this new communication, like Twitter. Eisenhower might like that we have tried to modernize and throw more money at the military. He was a master of using his military experience to convince the American people to go along with something that they might have at first been uncomfortable with. He would have been an advocate for staying engaged in the world and talking with people about the value of having friends to work with. The world we built is far more peaceful than the one China and Russia want to build.

Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Google Play Radio, Radio Public.

Shownotes by Lydia DeFelice

Meet Kelly Craft, Donald Trump’s Pick for UN Ambassador

M. Pence

Donald Trump’s pick to serve as the United States Ambassador to the United Nations is unlike any other previous nominee for the US-UN role. Kelly Knight Craft currently serves as the US Ambassador to Canada, a position she was conferred for the fact that she is a major Republican donor. Her family owns a major coal company with deep roots in Kentucky.

It is not at all unusual at all for Democratic or Republican administrations to reward major donors with plum ambassador roles. For better or worse that is part of US diplomatic tradition. But this is the first time that the UN ambassadorship is going to a major donor.

This sets up some interesting political dynamics that were on display during Ambassador Kelly Craft’s confirmation hearing at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week. On the line with me to discuss how Kelly Craft may fit in the role of UN Ambassador is Richard Gowan. He is the UN director for the International Crisis Group and recently wrote a piece in Politico examining some of the key debates and diplomatic dynamics that the next US Ambassador may face. He was also the lead contributor to a new Crisis Group report on the UN Security Council. 

Coming into this job, Kelly Craft did not have much a foreign policy profile, particularly on issues relevant to the UN. This conversation provides a useful introduction to her and the issues into which she’ll be thrust.

Get the Global Dispatches Podcast

​iTunes  |  Spotify  |  Stitcher  | Google Play Music​  | Radio Public

What’s up first?

One thing you hear from people who interacted with Kelly Craft in her previous post as Ambassador to Canada is that she is a decent and reasonable person to work with. There has been some criticism of her absences in Ottawa, but her staff in the embassy and Canadian officials found her likeable and approachable. She is also taking a lot from the Nikki Haley playbook, who was on the side of Trump and tough on the UN, but was still a moderate behind the scenes. Haley was very popular with Republicans. Craft knows many of the same folk, like Marco Rubio, so she is playing the same way towards the Senate. The question is, how influential is Craft in the era of Bolton and Pompeo?

Like Haley, both of them came to this hearing without much of a profile in foreign policy. I was interested to see Craft’s vision for US-UN relations, and she did not articulate, to my view, that vision at all in the context of that hearing.

That is broadly fair. The issue she emphasized in her testimony was her focus on humanitarian issues. She framed that as trying to spread the cost of UN humanitarian operations away from the US to other countries. Their humanitarian work is relatively uncontroversial, so it may be a big focus for her. Further, she did not expect to be in New York for very long. She implied she would only serve for the rest of the President’s current term.

Unlike any other US Ambassador to the UN, Kelly Craft is in that role because she is a major Republican donor. Every single Republican seemed to know her well and lined up behind her. She will take up her post at the UN having this back door channel to key Republican law makers in the Senate.

Haley had good relations on the Hill as well. You are right to say that Craft is unusual as she plays an important funding role. That is interesting because no one is sure how much clout she will have with Washington. She may be a more significant political actor than some give her credit. She can go to Pence, Rubio, and McConnell.

One thing she may improve is being the UN’s Ambassador to the US for more skeptical audiences.

It won’t be long until Security Council ambassadors are invited to Kentucky for a bowl of fried chicken with McConnell. That “folksy diplomacy” is quite helpful for US-UN relations.

She did acknowledge a conflict of interest and stated she would recuse herself from conversations around coal and climate change because of her family’s investments in coal energy.

Craft did acknowledge that climate change was a man-made threat. In the past she has not been so outwardly clear. This was a significant concession. On the specific promise not to engage in negotiations involving coal, that was not substantively significant, but was a good point.

For the last six months, there has been no appointed US Ambassador to the UN. Can you describe the diplomatic context that she will enter?

It is a mess. The fact that there has been no full time, politically appointed representative has been a real problem. Diplomats liked working under Haley. Since she has left, the US-UN has lost a lot of leverage. For instance, in regular conversations about the ceasefire in Yemen, the US diplomats are frustrating their counterparts because they don’t have instructions. They do not know what Washington wants. The nature of power in the UN works so that if the US is not engaging, a lot of diplomacy just dies, especially in the Security Council.

Many people around the UN don’t even know the position of the US on Libya. Would installing a politically appointed ambassador improve such situations?

Not necessarily, the National Security Advisor, John Bolton, has much more influence than the US Ambassador to the UN. Bolton understands the UN very well, and will try to drive the majority of US policy in New York. However, I do think if it gets bad, Craft can go back to Pence or McConnell and insist that she needs a minimum to have the leeway to represent the US with dignity.

Are there areas you could foresee that Craft would be able to put her own stamp?

One interesting aspect of the confirmation hearing was that she talked about the Rohingya refugees and the need to assist them. It is possible she could also take up the Myanmar file in terms of attempting to find a way to improve the situations of those driven out of Myanmar. Haley found she was able to get stuff done on South Sudan and the Congo. If there is any hope of reaching peace agreements in Yemen, Craft could focus some energy on that.

Is there anything in the weeks to come that will illuminate what kind of ambassador she will be?

There are two and a half major tests for Craft on the horizon. The first is the roll out of the Middle East peace plan. If that plan drops, and it ignores the UN, then Craft will face an enormous amount of blowback. She is likely to face Security Council and General Assembly resolutions insisting on the continued validity of past resolutions on the two-state solution. She may have to cast a veto in the Security Council to block criticism of the US.

The second test is Iran. There are very few countries in the Security Council that are sympathetic to the US position on Iran. There is a real risk that Craft may have to justify US pressure on Iranians, which will be difficult.

The half test is something that could happen, but we do not know if/when it will, which is some sort of flare up of the Korean peninsula.

Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Google Play Radio, Radio Public.

Shownotes by Lydia DeFelice

How the World is Responding to the Ebola Outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

According to the latest estimates from the World Health Organization, an outbreak of Ebola in the Democratic Republic of Congo has killed over 1400 people. This makes it the second worst ebola outbreak in history, following the 2014 outbreak in West Africa that killed over 11,000 people.

The current outbreak in the DRC is so far confined to the eastern part of the country, which has long been beset by insecurity and violence. There were, however, two cases reported over the border of Uganda from a family that contracted the disease while attending a funeral in the DRC. This marked the first time that this outbreak crossed an international border which brought this long festering outbreak back into the news.

On the line to discuss some of the international efforts to halt the spread of ebola is Ambassador John Lange. He is a retired US Ambassador and currently serves as the senior fellow for global health diplomacy at the United Nations Foundation. We kick off discussing why this outbreak has been so hard to contain and then have a broader conversation about strategies the international community, including the World Health Organization, are using to halt this outbreak.

If you have 20 minutes and want to learn why this outbreak is still festering and not under control, have a listen.

Get the Global Dispatches Podcast

​iTunes  |  Spotify  |  Stitcher  | Google Play Music​  | Radio Public

What’s up first?

The outbreak that is currently going on in the DRC actually began on August 1st of last year. It has not been possible to get it totally under control for two reasons. Firstly, it is the result of insecurity in North Kivu and eastern DRC. Secondly, it is hard to get community acceptance to change burial practices and other traditional factors to control this outbreak.

There have been 174 attacks on health care resulting in five deaths and 51 injuries of health care workers and patients. It is a difficult and tumultuous situation in terms of the different groups involved. The DRC does not have full control over all the districts in that part of the country.

There is a challenge of getting communities in Ebola affected areas to cooperate with health officials. Can you discuss why that element has been lacking?

There was the Ebola outbreak in 2014 in West Africa involving Sierra Leone, Guinea, and Liberia. There are certain community practices that will be followed during an outbreak, like touching the dead body of a loved one. This practice can cause the disease to spread further, so it really must end. Secondly, when someone takes a loved one to an Ebola treatment center they are separated from them. That can be very difficult because it is a human’s natural response to want to be close to a loved one if they are sick or dying. It is not as simple as just explaining these factors in advance to communities in parts of the world where Ebola could break out. Instead, you have to deal with it after Ebola breaks out in a particular situation. The communities tend to focus on their local needs rather than what the government wants them to do. Therefore, WHO and other organizations must work closely with community leaders to bring about change.

What are some of similarities/differences in how the international community is responding now compared to in 2014?

It is totally different. Prior to 2014, WHO was not expected to have a robust emergency response capacity. By August of 2014, it was clear the world needed a stronger emergency response capability. There have since been massive changes, first under Director-General Margaret Chan, and now under Director Tedros.

How is that being manifested on the ground in the DRC?

They now have an Assistant Director-General based in the DRC. They also have around 670 people on the ground working there. Dr. Tedros himself, just Saturday, was in Butembo. He has visited several times to point out that WHO needs the funding to meet those needs, and boost morale. The Secretary of Health and Human Services, Dr. Alex Azar, was speaking positively about the response of WHO and Dr. Tedros.

Can you talk about the role of the vaccine and how it is being deployed?

It is still experimental but it has proven to be highly effective with a 97.5% efficacy rate. WHO has vaccinated 32,000 health care and front line workers and over 39,500 children. The total number of individuals they have vaccinated is over 133,000. They use what is known as a ring vaccination. So, the way you deal with Ebola is to talk to the affected person, find out all of that person’s contacts who also could have been infected, and then talk to those contact’s contacts. You end up bringing the number of cases gradually down to zero.

One wonders if vaccine campaigns are the answer to the challenge of community engagement.

All of the cases except three have been in the DRC, and the three in Uganda were a family that crossed the border from DRC.

The fact that it is a localized situation was the principal reason why a panel of advisors to the WHO declined to declare this a public health emergency of international concern. What does a public health emergency of international concern really mean?

One of the few parts of international law that involves global health is the international health regulations approved in 2005 (in response to the SARS outbreak). The idea was to ensure countries were transparent when they had infectious disease outbreaks that could become global. The decision that was made by an emergency review committee not to declare a public health emergency of international concern was a decision that could have gone either way. It certainly meets one of the criteria that the outbreak an extraordinary event. The other criteria is there must be international spread, and the committee did not believe it constituted a threat beyond the immediate region.

There is a robust response, not just from the WHO, but also the UN. They have just announced that David Gressly will be the UN Emergency Ebola Response Coordinator in the Ebola affected areas of the DRC. WHO is the technical lead, while the UN has a broader role. Other UN agencies, like UNICEF, the World Food Program, and many NGO’s have been involved as well. Declaring this a public health emergency of international concern would not necessarily have enforced a more robust response.

There is still a funding gap, can you talk about that?

You can tell an international organization, “you need to create a robust emergency response capacity, we can’t risk a global Ebola outbreak.” Then the organization tries to create that and the money is not forthcoming at the levels needed. WHO requested 98.4 million dollars but there is a still a gap for over 50%. On the whole, the international community has not fully funded this effort. There is not a choice, we cannot risk a global outbreak. The longer it goes on, the greater that risk is.

The fear of Ebola can be so distorting to policy. In 2014 there were US governors who undermined the global Ebola response by quarantining nurses and doctors when they arrived back in the US. Now the concern is that if an emergency is declared there may be travel bans which can deter the robust response required to confront this crisis.

Exactly. If you closed US borders you would only gain about one week in terms of an advantage prior to the time a vaccine could be created. Modelling has shown that even if you close your borders it won’t make much difference, yet that is the natural inclination of people in government leadership positions. One of the fears, if this were to be declared a public health emergency of international concern, is that countries would close their borders rather than monitor the potential people who could be infected. Closing the border does more harm than good.

What sort of indicators will you be looking toward that will suggest if this outbreak is trending in the right direction?

The goal is to get to zero. To get there, you have to reduce the number of cases each week. The idea is to look community by community.Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Google Play Radio, Radio Public. 

Shownotes by Lydia DeFelice

Can Protests in Hong Kong Stop Beijing?

The protests in Hong Kong represent a key turning point for China, Hong Kong, and the world.

Hong Kong is in the midst of the most significant protest movement since China assumed sovereignty in 1997.  These protests were sparked by a proposed law that could permit people in Hong Kong to be extradited to mainland China to face trial. Protesters fear that this law could be used by authorities in Beijing to erode the rights and liberties currently enjoyed by people in Hong Kong.

At the heart of these protests is the longterm viability of Hong Kong’s independence from China

When sovereignty over Hong Kong was transferred from the United Kingdom to China in 1997, there was embedded in that agreement the principle of one country, two systems. In other words, while Hong Kong is formally part of China, the political and judicial system, civil liberties and rights enjoyed by the people of Hong Kong would be respected by authorities in Beijing.

However, as my guest today MK Tam explains, that principal of one country, two systems has been eroding in recent years. China has been steadily encroaching on civil and political life in Hong Kong and this protest movement is a profound demonstration that the people of Hong Kong are willing to defend their rights.

Man- Kei Tam is the director of Amnesty International Hong Kong, which puts him very much at the forefront of this fight. We kick off discussing the proposed extradition law itself, which is up for a potential vote in the Hong Kong legislative assembly, before having a longer conversation about the causes, consequences and implications of the shrinking space for civil rights and political freedom in Hong Kong

 This conversation is obviously very timely. It will give you the context you need to understand what is driving these protests from someone who is directly impacted by Beijing’s encroachment on rights and liberties in Hong Kong.

Get the Global Dispatches Podcast

​iTunes  |  Spotify  |  Stitcher  | Google Play Music​  | Radio Public

The Crisis in Sudan, Explained

Protesters outside military headquarters in Khartoum. M. Saleh/ Wikimedia Commons

Sudan is at a crossroads. In April, popular protests in Khartoum lead to the ouster of the country’s longtime ruler, Omar al Bashir. He was toppled in a coup by military leaders.  But the peaceful protests did not stop. Rather, the protesters held their ground and rallied outside the headquarters of the military junta demanding that civilians — not the military  — lead the transition to democracy.

The standoff between the military council and civilian protesters held firm until early June, when a paramilitary group known as the Rapid support forces, or RSF, attacked the protesters, killing over 100. The protests were dispersed and a general strike ensued.

On the line with me to discuss the situation in Sudan is Zachariah Cherian Mampilly, a professor of political science at Vassar College. We last spoke in early January, just as the protest movement was beginning to pick up steam. That is where we pick up the story today. We kick off discussing the circumstances that lead to the ouster of Sudan’s longtime ruler Omar al Bashir and then have a longer conversation about the political and geo-political dynamics that are shaping events in one of Africa’s largest and most strategically significant countries.

If you have 20 minutes and want to learn about the ongoing crisis in Sudan, the protests in Khartoum, and how this situation may evolve, have a listen.

Get the Global Dispatches Podcast

​iTunes  |  Spotify  |  Stitcher  | Google Play Music​  | Radio Public

What’s up first?

The protests began in December, initially triggered by a tremendous spark in the cost of bread. The protests accumulated strength and their demands shifted from a reduction in bread prices to the fall of the regime itself. In April, after four months of protests and a massive number in the capital of Khartoum, the military forced Bashir to give up the presidency and he was placed under house arrest. Since then, there has been a transitional military council largely comprised of generals and commanders who were close to the Bashir regime. There is a stalemate between the leaders of the transitional military council and the protest movement, who instead of retreating, only increased their presence in front of military headquarters.

Protestors have been able to greatly increase pressure. 

The Sudanese protestors have learned a lot from the history of Sudan and from failed transitions in places like Egypt. So, what you see are very resilient and inspirational protestors who will not settle for less than a fully civilian-led transition to democracy. That is why the stakes are so high. 

At the time of recording, roughly 200 people have been killed. What led to this crackdown?

The key figure here is a man named Hemeti, the second in command in the military council. He has a long history in Sudan. He was the commander who was put in charge by Bashir to establish the paramilitary force known as the Janjaweed, which in the mid 2000’s was accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Hemeti’s hands have been dirty for two decades now. His status in the military demonstrates that the military is not a legitimate partner for a democratic transition.

In terms of this specific crackdown, once the War in Darfur was largely pacified, the Janjaweed moved to Khartoum and took on a different name of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). They operate independently of the national military. Hemeti essentially controls a private militia force and is the prime mover behind the latest crackdown. It is his forces, the RSF, orchestrating the terror in the streets of Khartoum.

The RSF are accused of human rights abuses in the southern part of Sudan as well.

They have basically been the force that does the military’s dirty work around the country. RSF is kind of a proxy force that can be deployed to do all of these ugly things without tainting the Sudanese military, which is really a false distinction, but one that the military insists upon.  

The military hoped the departure of Bashir in April would satisfy the protestors. The negotiations continued for two months, but in the end, protestors were demanding that civilians be allowed to oversee the transition to democracy. That was a non-starter and the talks came to a halt. Sudan has since been in a state of limbo. When the talks broke down, the violence escalated. The RSF was given free rein to go break up camps where protestors had been converging.

The protest movement has moved underground and has been organizing a general strike.

The previous protest camp had become a tremendous site of creativity where people converged and were hosting concerts, educational activities, and more to spread the word. There were innovative things occurring –like the Occupy Wall Street movement, but at a larger scale. It is devastating to see the site now.

We should not assume that this is the end of the protest movement. There is a general strike and Khartoum is at a standstill. Businesses are not open and services are not being provided.

How do you assess the role of the influence of outside powers?

Saudi Arabia’s role has been abominable. The Saudi regime has given the Sudanese military the green light to engage in the crackdown like they orchestrated last year. The military in Sudan does not have a lot of popular support. Whatever credibility it had evaporated as a result of the violence it has orchestrated. Saudi Arabia has an ongoing relationship with the RSF and has funded them for quite some time now. 

No major western power has done much to push back against the Saudis. Further, the Russians and Chinese have prevented discussion over this crisis in the UN Security Council.

What could the US do?

The US has tremendous leverage over the Saudis. However, it is hard to see under the current Trump administration, that the US would condemn the behavior of the Saudis. The African Union (AU) has tried to lend support to the protestors, but the AU right now is headed by the Egyptians so that support is questionable. However, to their credit, they have condemned the regime for the massacres of last week.  

Can you talk about how you see the protest movement strategy changing in this new era?

There are a couple of trajectories. Amongst the organizers there is a strong desire to retain the non-violent character of the movement so far. The risk is that people may feel there is no other option than to turn towards violence. There are a number of opposition groups who have stayed out of the protest so far but could be mobilized to use violence.

These sorts of movements are about building counter-power to the existing regime. On that level, the Sudanese protestors are going far beyond what the Egyptian or Syrian protestors could accomplish.

Lastly, are there any key inflection points that you see down the road that would suggest what the next iteration of this crisis will be? 

The big question is the economic situation. The regime has been able to persist with external support from Saudi Arabia and the UAE, but the economy has come to a standstill and there is very little production going on. That means the regime will face an economic crisis in the near future. It is important to remember that the initial trigger for the protest was the decline in performance of the Sudanese economy. The economy was already fragile, so now to be dealing with a large scale protest movement, it is unclear how much longer the regime can go forward, unless outside actors massively increased the support they are offering. Saudi Arabia would have to keep its financial pipeline open.

There are a number of factors for why Saudi Arabia is interested in Sudan. One is, Saudi Arabia has massive investments in Sudan’s agricultural sector and has been trying to use Sudan as a breadbasket for the country. It is not simply about autocrats trying to prop each other up, but there are financial considerations as well. 

Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Google Play Radio, Radio Public. 

Shownotes by Lydia DeFelice

The Persecution of Iraqi Christians

In 2003, before the US invasion of Iraq, there were an estimated 1.2 million Christians living there. Today, that number is less than 250,000 — an eighty percent drop in less than two decades.

If this trend continues, a religious minority that has been in Iraq for centuries will be gone entirely.

A recent article in The Atlantic by reporter Emma Green describes the plight of Iraq’s Chaldean Catholic community and the incredible pressure that they have been under since the fall of Saddam. This not only includes ISIS’s reign of terror, but day-to-day discrimination against Christians that is causing so many to seek to leave the country.

Emma Green is a staff writer at The Atlantic covering policy, politics and religion. We kick off discussing the history of Christianity before having a broader conversation about the causes and consequences of the fact that a religious minority is fleeing Iraq in droves.

The plight of Iraq’s Christians has key geo-political consequences as well as serving as an indicator of the healthiness and strength of Iraqi democracy itself. This conversation explains why what happens to Christians in Iraq matters to the entire world.

If you have 20 minutes and want to learn why the persecution of Christians in Iraq has global implications, have a listen.

Get the Global Dispatches Podcast

​iTunes  |  Spotify  |  Stitcher  | Google Play Music​  | Radio Public

***Become a Premium Subscriber. Support the Show. Access Rewards. ***

Over the course of six years of running this podcast, I have interviewed hundreds of astounding people who have lived fascinating lives and had storied careers in international affairs. This includes foreign ministers, diplomats, famous academics, journalists, social entrepreneurs and more. I’ve decided to collect the very best of these interviews and offer them exclusively to premium subscribers. 

I have already posted several of these interviews Premium Subscribers unlock the growing archive of these unforgettable interviews. Each week, I will be posting one or two of these episodes, exclusively for premium subscribers.  

What You Need to Know About Internally Displaced People Around the World

Over 41 million people were internally displaced last year due to conflict and violence, according to a new report from the Internal Displacement Monitoring Center. This is a record high and excludes an additional 17 million people who were internally displaced due to a natural disaster.

When we say “internally displaced” we mean people who are forced to flee their homes, but do not cross an international border. This distinguishes “internally displaced persons,” or IDPs, from those would be considered international refugees. This distinction is significant because, while there is a robust international law obligating governments to treat international refugees in a certain way, there is not much that international law or norms governing internal displacement.

My guest today, Alexadra Bilak, is director of the Internal displacement Monitoring Center which just released its flagship report on global displacement. In our conversation, Alexandra Bilak describes the drivers and trends in internal displacement and also explains why cities are becoming a major focal point for interventions to support potentially vulnerable people who are internally displaced.

When policy makers reference the “global refugee crisis” that has caused over 65 million people displaced around the world, they often lump together IDPs and refugees, of which there are over 40 million and 25 million, respectively. This conversation focuses on that former figure–over 40 million IDPs to explain the unique challenges facing people who are internally displaced.

Get the Global Dispatches Podcast

​iTunes  |  Spotify  |  Stitcher  | Google Play Music​  | Radio Public

Shownotes

What’s up first? 

This year’s report reveals shocking findings. It shows the highest number of internally displaced people (IDPs) by conflict and violence across the world. Further, this number is growing in scale and is a complex phenomenon. It is not receiving the attention it deserves.

What is driving the rise of conflict related IDPs?

The highest levels of internal displacement are found in Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East. Ethiopia erupted into communal and ethnic violence two years ago has continued to generate high levels of internal displacement in certain pockets of the country, with 2.9 million new movements recorded throughout 2018. Other countries including Nigeria, DRC, South Sudan, CAR, and Somalia remain high on the list of concern. The DRC has continued with cyclical waves of armed violence with has made it one of the country’s worst affected in 2018. Further, the Middle East continues to be one of the regions most affected. The highest levels of internal displacement were amongst cities across Syria, Libya, Yemen, and Iraq. Displacement in urban areas is a high focus in this year’s report.  

What do you mean by displacement in cities?

The reality of urban warfare is prevalent here. Cities are targeted and bombed so the levels of destruction are particularly high. The triggers of displacement and the kinds of violent events that cause people to leave their homes is a serious reality. Moreover, there are repeated patterns of displacement. People may flee to the city from a rural area and then have to flee again. Cities are places where people flee to, because they see it as somewhere they will find opportunities for better livelihoods. In the case of the Middle East, you are looking at physical threats to safety and security. In other places like Asia, urban population density and other forms of natural hazards accumulate in cities, so then cities can generate displacement.

Can you discuss trends this report showed around natural disaster related displacement?

The majority of the disaster related displacements were weather related. This displacement can be linked to floods, typhoons, storms, cyclones, hurricanes, and to a lesser extent, drought, extreme temperatures, and landslides. The countries most exposed to these hazards are predominantly in Asia, South East Asia and South Asia. The countries worst affected in 2018 were the Philippines, China, and India. The effects of climate change impact high income and low income governments. An interesting finding is that the U.S. was responsible for 1.2 million IDPs, particularly due to wildfires in California.  As a result, governments often have to evacuate their populations which is a form of displacement.

The data you are collecting serves as an interesting index and tool to measure the impact of climate disaster.

The data is not yet historically sufficient to be able to draw definitive trends, but it does show the risk of someone becoming displaced by a disaster has increased over the last forty years and will continue to do so as climate becomes more extreme and the impacts more severe. This is a call for much more investment on the preparedness side, on the disaster risk reduction side, and on the climate change adaptation side.

How did you collect the data for this report?

The IDMC’s role is to examine already existing data. The type of data can vary hugely from humanitarian data to government data. Further, this could include a civil society report or media report. In other contexts, satellite images or mobile phone data may be used. All the data available is analyzed and the best estimate is derived.

What is the purpose of creating a dataset like this?

Internal displacement is an issue that cuts across so many other global challenges from climate change to state building to sustainable development to urban planning. Given how important the issue is globally, it is important for governments to track their progress. Additionally, they can then evaluate the extent to which internal displacement may be hampering their commitments and objectives under other frameworks.

The international community does not have the same obligations to IDPs as it does to international refugees.

First of all, in terms of the scale, publishing this data on a regular basis is a strong reminder that there is a huge part of the migration picture that is consistently missing from the debate. There are more IDPs than refugees in the world right now, so it is important to reiterate this issue to the international community. However, this is not to say that when a refugee crosses a border they will be automatically be picked up by UNHCR or another agency. There are huge vulnerabilities when it comes to refugees and migrants, but certainly the levels of severity are also extremely high in an IDP context.

The report this year focuses on cities and municipalities. Can you discuss an example of authorities approaching this problem in a useful way?

Rebuilding a city to allow citizens to return in a short period of time, reintegrate, and rebuild a community is a massive investment. This process of rebuilding and reintegrating is far more challenging in more fragile countries with less resources. The example of Mozambique and Cyclone Idaisprings to mind. 

Solutions are linked to the issue of housing and employment. IDPs need access to quality and affordable housing. Further, they need employment opportunities so they have the income to rent said housing. There are examples, such as the Ukraine, where they have allowed IDPs to move from an informal situation to a formal process of land or apartment ownership. This encourages municipalities and countries to consider local integration as a solution to displacement as much as return, because in some cases return is not an option.

To listen to this podcast:

Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Google Play Radio, Radio Public. 

Shownotes by Lydia DeFelice

How a Census Can Drive Sustainable Development in Africa

An enumerator works with staff at a psychiatric hospital in Accra to accurately count their patient population. Jordi Perdigó/Global Partnership for Sustainable Development Data

In 2020 the West African Country of Ghana will conduct a census. This is a massive undertaking. Some 60,000 people will be deployed across the country in an effort to count every single person in Ghana on what is known as “census night.” This is expected next March.

In a recent reporting trip to Ghana, I got a sense of what this process entails. Along with a few other journalists, I shadowed census takers, known as enumerators, as they tested their systems in a few places around Accra. This included a mental health hospital and an urban slum. The idea is to ensure that even marginalized groups are counted in this census, so enumerators are designing strategies to count people who have no fixed address or might be in institutions, like hospitals.

The enumerators were also field-testing their tablets. Unlike in previous census rounds in 2010 and 2000, in 2020 census data will be collected using tablets, which provides for a far quicker turnaround time than conventional paper processing.

On the line with me to discuss how the census will be conducted, the kinds of questions that will be asked, and how census data can be harnessed to advance national goals around sustainable development is Omar Seidu. He is the Head of Demographic Statistics and Coordinator for the Sustainable Development Goals at the Ghana Statistical Service, a government agency.

This conversation offers a unique perspective on the kind of herculean effort that is required to conduct a census in a developing country like Ghana. We also offers a really good grounding in why a census is such a valuable undertaking to advance development goals. As Omar Seidu explains, better data adds increased efficiency and informs government interventions intended to advance the sustainable development goals.

If you have 20 minutes and want to learn how census data is both collected and put to use in the service of sustainable development, have a listen.

Get the Global Dispatches Podcast

​iTunes  |  Spotify  |  Stitcher  | Google Play Music​  | Radio Public

Shownotes

About the 2020 Census in Ghana

This will be the third time Ghana attempts to do a combined housing and population census. A census is a huge undertaking in terms of cost, the number of people engaged, and the resources required. As a result of the logistical demand, conducting a census is a particular challenge in developing countries. The government and people of Ghana have committed to conducting a census every decade since the year 2000. The work begins years before the publication date. Currently, there are several teams on the ground demarcating the country into smaller areas.

How will tablets be used to collect the data?

Seidu states that Ghana has been using tablets since 2014, but this is the first time they are being used for the housing and population census. They have about 60,000 people staffed, which means they would need more than 60,000 tablets. Tablets are beneficial because they reduce the time between the end of data collection and the data publication, and further, they reduce human error associated with data collection. Therefore, the data produced would be of higher quality. There are serious challenges, though. Firstly, people would need to be trained to use the tablets properly. Secondly, staff would need electricity to charge these tablets. Furthermore, the census will be conducted during the dry season, and people will need to go far away from most structures to count people and this presents a range of security issues.

What efforts are underway to hone your office’s strategy to target and fine population’s that may otherwise be missed?

Seidu states that this is a de facto census, so every individual within Ghana’s borders must be counted, irrespective of their social status. The census is the single most important statistical investigation, providing information on all individuals. Every effort must be made to capture everyone. Most people live in households, but others live in institutions. For example, Goldberg accompanied an enumerator to a mental hospital who was trying out a survey of patients.These people must be accounted for as well. Another difficulty is that some people are constantly in transit.

What questions will be included in the census survey?

The census survey will take the social demographic details of the individual and information on the households. This includes name, age, sex, educational background, literacy, nationality, religion, economic activity, migration, fertility of females, and mortality within households. It will also take note of any individual who has a disability.

Goldberg notes that the Ghanaian census goes far more in depth than that of a US census. Seidu responds noting that in many developing countries, the administrative system is not robust enough to provide information on individuals, so the census provides a great opportunity. A country like the US has other sources of data, like the DMV.

How can this data help inform policy?

The census is used to demarcate the districts, which helps break up local governments and administration accordingly. Further, the census tells us who needs better access to educational services, potable water, who has a disability, and who is living below the poverty line. This helps locate people who need social protection. The census is able to disaggregate data by location, gender, age, income, and more, which helps target interventions.  

The census night will probably be March 19th, 2020.

This night serves as a reference point and helps ensure people are not double counted or missed. Whoever is within the territory of Ghana is expected to have been counted. This night is treated like a holiday, and celebrations take place including carnivals, bonfires, church bells, police sirens, to help people remember this night.  

Obtaining the tablets is a huge challenge, and this could affect the census being carried out in time.

The cost associated with procuring these tablets is huge. Not many countries in Africa have done this, so Ghana cannot borrow enough tablets either. Malawi completed a census, but they are a smaller country so they used fewer tablets. Further, Ghana would need tablets that are in adequate shape for data collection. The equipment cannot be defective, so they really need more than 60,000 to account for any technical difficulties.

To listen to this podcast:

 Spotify, iTunes, Stitcher, Google Play Radio, Radio Public. 

Shownotes by Lydia DeFelice