BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Center for International and Regional Studies - ECPv6.15.15//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Center for International and Regional Studies
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/Moscow
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0400
TZOFFSETTO:+0300
TZNAME:MSK
DTSTART:20141025T220000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20140427T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20140427T180000
DTSTAMP:20260511T223542
CREATED:20140915T054415Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T103822Z
UID:10000885-1398585600-1398621600@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Gary Wasserman Lectures on “Why Are We Here (in Doha)?”
DESCRIPTION:Gary Wasserman\, professor of Government at the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\, delivered a CIRS Focused Discussionlecture titled\, “Why Are We Here (in Doha)?” on April 27\, 2014. Encouraging discussion among members of the Georgetown University in Qatar community\, Wasserman noted that he did not have an answer to the question posed in the title of the lecture\, but would offer five different possible models that approach an answer. \n \n \nThe first model is to consider Georgetown University in Qatar as an extension of the American imperium. In this model\, the United States offers the Middle East region two of its key capabilities: military bases for regional security\, and US schools providing world class education—in other words\, what political scientists call hard power of economic wealth and military weapons as well as soft power of ideas. In this sense\, Wasserman argued “we are the American superpower in its educational garb.” \n \n \nThese offerings are not necessarily negative and may be key to the current peace and prosperity in much of the world. The limitation to this model\, however\, is that the faculty and educators at Georgetown in Qatar do not necessarily serve as ideal ambassadors of US government policy. They are more likely to dissent\, to question\, and to challenge official US policy in their critical scribblings\, and in their informed debates with students and others\, whether at home or abroad. Moreover\, the Qatari hosts are hardly a passive colonized people; they initiated this relationship\, they pay for it\, and they negotiate the contract under which Georgetown in Qatar operates\, at the least as equals.  \n \n \nOn the opposite end of the spectrum lies the second model offered by Wasserman—the “expat model.” Here\, individual members of the Georgetown community travel abroad to practice their professions; a practical task that is not always integrated into that of any larger\, more idealized notion of a Western institution. In this sense\, he argued\, “we are well-compensated hired help. We are here to fill a job and provide a service that cannot be produced locally; arguably a home-delivered prestige commodity—a Western brand name.” However\, Wasserman’s objection to this model is that\, whether consciously or not\, Georgetown is expected to\, and is in fact\, changing behavior\, as all educational institutions are wont to do. \n \n \nThe third model is the “contract model\,” where Georgetown is obligated to act as a professional school for training diplomats in and for Qatar. The institution was invited by its Qatari hosts to offer some\, but not all\, aspects of the Georgetown college experience\, sanitizing the more controversial elements of US culture and society. Wasserman’s reservations of this model center on the fact that very few of the graduates actually end up in the foreign service\, and so the Georgetown education is far more encompassing than merely a training center for diplomats. “We are in fact as close to a liberal arts college as Education City gets\,” he explained. \n \n \nWhich leads to the fourth model\, that of “liberalism\,” where Georgetown can be seen as spreading secular humanism in the form of the widest possible inquiry and tolerance of freedom of thought and expression\, especially as for those who struggle with social oppression in terms of gender\, race\, or sexual orientation. However\, Wasserman’s objection to the applicability of this model is that even though Georgetown invites students to think for themselves\, the institution is in fact asking them to subscribe to a particular Westernized ideal of thinking. By being in Qatar\, Georgetown must reconcile with the reality that it does not operate in a liberal society that elevates individual thought above all.  Rather it is one where family\, community\, and religious ties are more highly valued. The students from this region are a complex mix of loyalty and obligation to their families and societies\, along with a desire to integrate into globalizing outlooks and identities. This mixed campus experience makes it difficult for Georgetown to “cleanly” deliver the traditional Western ideals of liberalism. Nor should we\, Wasserman stated. \n \n \nThe fifth and concluding model Wasserman offered is what he called “the muddled bubble.” In this model\, Georgetown in Qatar is operating\, without a set blueprint\, in an environment of messy uncertainty. This\, he argued\, will necessarily mean that the institution is at the interface of different and changing cultures. “We occupy what should be an uncomfortable\, unpredictable\, but potentially innovative space\,” he argued. The model of the bubble demands that Georgetown in Qatar seek a degree of autonomy\, not only from potentially reactionary local pressures\, but also from the foreign traditions and interests of the main campus. The “muddled” part of the model\, he explained\, comes from the experimental\, unclear process by which we create an unusual blend of transnational students prepared for an unclear and unique future. Thus\, Wasserman concluded\, we should celebrate our unique position of being muddled “not by a clash of civilizations\, but by a confusion of civilizations.”  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, Manager and Editor for CIRS Publications.  \n \n \nGary Wasserman has fashioned a career in teaching\, political consulting and writing. Previously he taught graduate students at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies in Nanjing\, China.  He received his Ph.D. with Distinction from Columbia University. He recently wrote Politics in Action: Cases in Modern American Government (2012)\, and Pearson is publishing the 15th edition of his text\, The Basics of American Politics (2015). His MOOC\, “The Game of American Politics\,” is available online this spring. 
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/gary-wasserman-lectures-why-are-we-here-doha/
CATEGORIES:American Studies,Dialogue Series,Distingushed Lectures,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/09/events_14941_9101_1410759855-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20140427T180000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20140428T180000
DTSTAMP:20260511T223542
CREATED:20140914T150427Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210901T124123Z
UID:10000864-1398621600-1398708000@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Healthcare Policy and Politics in the Gulf States Working Group I
DESCRIPTION:On April 27-28\, 2014\, CIRS convened the first working group under the research initiative Healthcare Policy and Politics in the Gulf States. Healthcare practitioners\, strategists and social scientists from various disciplinary backgrounds gathered over two days to discuss the rapidly changing health profile of the region\, the existing conditions of health systems\, and the challenges posed to healthcare management across the six countries of the GCC. \n \n \nIn recent decades\, Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) governments have heavily invested in socioeconomic development and have increasingly played an instrumental role in the development of healthcare systems. Rapid transformation of health systems took place between the mid-1970s and the early 1990s across the six GCC States. Commonalities between GCC states\, such as geographic location\, political order\, the presence of hydrocarbon reserves\, and the large influx of foreigners into the region\, have created common threads across the healthcare industries of Bahrain\, Saudi Arabia\, Oman\, Kuwait\, Qatar\, and the UAE. The evolution of healthcare systems\, however\, has not been uniform across the region\, with Oman (ranked 8th in the 2000 World Health Report on health systems) and Bahrain experiencing more successful models of development as compared to their Gulf counterparts. The participants attributed this development to two salient features in healthcare planning: local healthcare leadership and progressive planning that focused on comprehensive health services. The healthcare leadership involved in the organization and planning of Oman’s healthcare system in the early 1970s was predominantly comprised of local expertise allowing for models of development that were based on local needs and that were conducive to the local environment catering towards long-term development of the sector. This stands in comparison to the “mercenary mentality” that was characteristic of foreign healthcare leadership in other GCC States. Bahrain was amongst the first in the GCC to set up primary healthcare centers enabling a significant proportion of the population to easily access health services—a sector that continues to be under-developed in other GCC states as they disproportionately give emphasis to secondary and tertiary care.  Despite disparate levels of healthcare services development across the GCC\, the GCC secretariat has adopted some common plans and models that provide a regional approach to the sector. One example is the GCC-wide common purchasing in the pharmaceutical industry\, which started in the mid-1970s and has\, accordingly\, had a major impact on the market. More recently\, GCC ministers of health have agreed to create a unified mental health improvement plan to develop a sector that has long been neglected in the region and that is in need of transformation. \n \n \nWhile GCC healthcare expenditure continues to be on the rise\, there remains a significant gap between investments in healthcare and health outcomes of Gulf citizenry. Rapid urbanization rates and changes in lifestyle have resulted in populations that exhibit a high prevalence of diabetes and obesity (in Qatar\, for instance\, 70% of nationals are overweight and 40% are obese). Chronic non-communicable disease is on the rise in the Gulf and\, as such\, preventive medicine and lifestyle health are of growing importance\, emphasizing a necessary shift from the current focus on secondary curative care.  Moreover\, primary care – considered to be the “gate-keeper” of healthcare models in developed countries around the world – plays a key role in preventive medicine\, emphasizing the need to provide incentives to patients for its utilization. In addition to the type of care\, participants emphasized the need for multidisciplinary teams—incorporating nutrition experts and diabetes educators\, for instance—to effectively prevent a rise in the prevalence of chronic disease. \n \n \nWhile Gulf nationals predominantly suffer from these lifestyle diseases\, the expatriate and migrant populations of the GCC have health profiles that are distinct from nationals.  The three tiered population of the region—comprised of locals\, long-term residents\, and more transient migrant workers—requires Gulf governments to plan accordingly for the health needs of each population. One segment of the population\, short-term migrants\, is largely employed in the construction sectors of the GCC and\, as such\, incorporation of occupational health and safety in the healthcare model is another component that the Gulf is increasingly focusing on. Much like the need for preventive care in the case of lifestyle diseases\, primary needs for occupational health—such as safety assessments and hazard identification—are not healthcare related but are related to prevention. To have an effective systems approach to occupational health however\, a feedback system needs to be incorporated that includes frontline workers and allows for open communication with higher management. Achieving this form of participatory health planning and management\, however\, is very challenging in hierarchical settings that lack labor unions and labor management. \n \n \nIn addition to satisfying the health needs of foreign migrant residents—who comprise the bulk of GCC populations—GCC states have to cope with their reliance on foreign skills to supply their healthcare workforce. This poses broad risks to the region as the excessive reliance on foreign human resources may leave GCC states vulnerable in times of regional sociopolitical instability should there be an exodus of the foreign workforce. In the absence of political crises\, however\, challenges remain. In the hospital setting or workplace where nurses\, physicians\, and staff come from a variety of different cultures\, speak a multitude of languages\, and have been trained under different schools and standards\, the effectiveness of providing care is challenged. Additionally\, the hierarchical social organization that was outlined in the context of the construction industry is also prevalent in hospital settings—much of it due to many of the GCC states’ sponsorship system (kefala) where tenuousness exists in the work-status of foreign staff. This tenuousness affects relationship dynamics between local and foreign staff and between patients and hospital staff. \n \n \nWhile participants of the working group tackled a multitude of topics—ranging from substance abuse in the Gulf to social organization of nursing practices—a common challenge facing scholars studying healthcare in the region is the lack of both available and published data. Thus\, while the industry is rapidly evolving\, scholarship on the topic remains limited and is constrained by the limited availability of information\, underscoring the need for additional research on the area. \n \n \n\nRead the participant bios\nSee the working group schedule\nRead more about this research initiative\n\n \n  \n \n \nParticipants and Discussants: \n \n \n\nMohamad Alameddine\, American University of Beirut\nSamir Al-Adawi\, Sultan Qaboos University\nZahra Babar\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nMatt Buehler\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nNerida Child Dimasi\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nSuhaila Ghuloum\, Weill Cornell Medical College in Qatar; Hamad Medical Center\nBarb Gillis\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nCother Hajat\, United Arab Emirates University\nMehran Kamrava\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nNadir Kheir\, Qatar University\nNabil Kronfol\, Lebanese Healthcare Management Association; Center for Studies on Ageing\nRavinder Mamtani\, Weill Cornell Medical College in Qatar\nTatjana Martinoska\, Enertech Qatar\nSuzi Mirgani\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nDwaa Osman\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nJanet Rankin\, University of Calgary Qatar\nSalman Rawaf\, Imperial College London; WHO Collaborating Center for Public Health Education and Training\nGanesh Seshan\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nRosemary Sokas\, Georgetown University\nElizabeth Wanucha\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\n\n \n  \n \n \nArticle by Dwaa Osman\, Research Analyst at CIRS
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/healthcare-policy-and-politics-gulf-states-working-group-i/
CATEGORIES:Focused Discussions,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/09/events_15616_8971_1411057402-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR