BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Center for International and Regional Studies - ECPv6.15.15//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:Center for International and Regional Studies
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:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0300
TZOFFSETTO:+0400
TZNAME:MSD
DTSTART:20090328T230000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0400
TZOFFSETTO:+0300
TZNAME:MSK
DTSTART:20091024T230000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0300
TZOFFSETTO:+0400
TZNAME:MSD
DTSTART:20100327T230000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0400
TZOFFSETTO:+0300
TZNAME:MSK
DTSTART:20101030T230000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0300
TZOFFSETTO:+0400
TZNAME:MSK
DTSTART:20110326T230000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20120123T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20120123T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141023T094028Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105003Z
UID:10000935-1327305600-1327341600@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Anthony Appiah Lectures on Ideas of Cosmopolitanism
DESCRIPTION:On January 23\, Kwame Anthony Appiah\, Professor of Philosophy at Princeton University\, delivered the first CIRS Monthly Dialogueof 2012 titled\, “Being a Citizen of the World Today.” Appiah’s lecture was centered on the question of global citizenship and how historical intellectual theories of “cosmopolitanism” have a bearing on how people live their lives in the contemporary world. Appiah pointed out that the etymology of the word “cosmopolitan” is derived from the Greek “kosmos” meaning “world” and “polites” meaning “citizen\,” and so “cosmopolitanism” literally means a “citizen of the world.” Taking the audience on a journey back to ancient Greece\, Appiah relayed how current understandings of cosmopolitanism are inherited from ancient Greek political philosophy. \n \n \nAppiah recounted that Diogenes\, a philosopher and founder of the Cynic movement\, was the first known European to ever look beyond the borders of the ancient Greek Empire to claim that he was a citizen of the world. Appiah explained that this statement made by Diogenes is a metaphor for tolerance of otherness and does not necessarily mean that Diogenes favored a single world government\, which is precisely what Alexander the Great was attempting to do at that time through his project of world conquest and domination. People can think of themselves as fellow citizens and can care about the fate of their fellow human beings even if they are not members of a single political community. “Cosmopolitanism believes that every human being matters and that we have a shared obligation for one another\,” he said. \n \n \nDiogenes’ idea of cosmopolitanism entered Western philosophical traditions through the Stoics and has survived to this day through Christian and Islamic traditions that emphasize a spiritual affinity between all human beings. Similarly\, the intellectual core of European enlightenment was based on the idea of global concern for humanity\, without advocating a centralized world government. With the rise of Westphalian ideology\, the idea of the nation state was consolidated through common cultural and linguistic affiliations between the people of a single geographical area. Although calls for national unity and homogeneity are always strong\, Appiah noted that they are not all encompassing and there will always be diverse groups of people living in a single country. “Different communities are entitled to live according to different standards because human beings can flourish in many different kinds of society and because there are so many values worth living by\,” Appiah said. \n \n \nBecause cultural diversity is a condition of the world\, “conversation across identities\, religions\, races\, ethnicities\, and nationalities is worthwhile\, because through conversation\, you learn from other people with different\, perhaps even incompatible\, ideas from your own\,” Appiah argued. As such\, today’s globalization has made the ancient ideal of cosmopolitanism even more relevant; an individual can reach millions of international others through communications technologies and global media and economic systems. \n \n \nAs a final thought\, Appiah explained that cosmopolitanism is an empowering concept and one that forms the basis of mutual respect for oneself and for others. He concluded that “if people were to manage their own lives\, which is what they are responsible for\, then they need the powers to do so. And the closer the powers are to people\, and to small communities of people\, the greater the control they can have over the shaping of their lives.” \n \n \nKwame Anthony Appiah joined the Princeton faculty in 2002 as Laurance S. Rockefeller University Professor of Philosophy and the University Center for Human Values. His current interests range over African and African-American intellectual history and literary studies\, ethics and philosophy of mind and language; and he has also taught regularly about African traditional religions. Professor Appiah was educated at Clare College\, Cambridge University\, in England\, where he took both B.A. and Ph.D. degrees in the philosophy department.  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/anthony-appiah-lectures-ideas-cosmopolitanism/
CATEGORIES:American Studies,Dialogue Series,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_21846_16676_1414679467-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20111212T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20111212T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141023T112341Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105011Z
UID:10000936-1323676800-1323712800@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Walter Denny on New Ways of Looking at Islamic Art
DESCRIPTION:Walter B. Denny\, Professor of Art History at the University of Massachusetts Amherst\, gave a CIRS Monthly Dialogue lecture on “Innovation in the Visual Arts of Islam: New Ways of Looking at Islamic Art” on December 12\, 2011. The lecture was a follow-up to a previous one Denny gave for CIRS at the “Innovation in Islam” conference that took place back in 2008. Subsequently\, Denny contributed to the CIRS edited volume on Innovation in Islam: Traditions and Contributions\, which was edited by Mehran Kamrava and published in 2011 by the University of California Press. \n \n \nContextualizing the concept of “innovation\,” Denny described the ways in which it is understood in relation to art. He argued that innovation does not relate solely to the contemporary\, but is\, paradoxically\, a historical feature of creative endeavors in all artistic categories. “One of the things that has always fascinated me about the history of Islamic art is the way that the past is constantly used as an inspiration for the present\, and of course for the future\,” he said. As an example\, Denny said that the Mamluk style has been continually revived in the history of Egyptian architecture\, as has the Ottoman style been reproduced in Turkey and elsewhere in the former Ottoman Empire. Innovation in art history is always based on something that came before\, and “there is no such thing as total innovation. Innovation is always\, to one extent or another\, incremental\,” he explained. \n \n \nIn much of the Islamic art that Denny examined\, patterns and forms are not newly designed\, but are borrowings from previous times\, locales\, and traditions that were either forcibly learned or subtly transferred as cultures came into contact with one another across the centuries. The geometric designs that have come to define art-works of the Islamic world are in fact derived from previous Roman traditions\, Denny argued. This is not to say\, however\, that these works should not be considered innovative. Each iteration of a previous form is creating something new\, and yet\, it is something that must acknowledge its debt to a past formulation. Denny gave an example of how themes or motifs have been transferred from one culture to another to produce entirely new meanings. In ancient China\, for example\, the dragon was used as a powerful symbol of the cosmos\, but when used in Ottoman artworks\, it lost this meaning entirely and was instead used to symbolize a fearsome creature. \n \n \nDynastic patronages in Ottoman and Persian art ensured that certain styles were used in order to set their works apart from others\, or\, as Denny explained\, the use of particular motifs is in fact\, a traditional form of “branding.” These are innovations that are created specifically for works of art to stand out in the marketplace\, and to signal the uniqueness of one culture or another. “The Ottoman Empire\, consciously\, as a matter of state policy\, adopted certain forms in its art\,” he said. \n \n \nNot only is innovation a feature of art itself\, but\, Denny argued\, it is also an aspect of how art is viewed and how we conceive of our relationship with artworks. Denny\, Senior Consultant in the Department of Islamic Art at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York\, described how displays at museums are constantly updated over the years in order to give the viewer a better sense of the work. The ever new and sophisticated ways in which art is being displayed\, lighted\, and categorized\, all move toward the development of a new type of relationship between the work of art and the viewer. \n \n \nIn conclusion\, Denny said that the artist is constantly in a state of transmutation between the past and present\, even at times being accused of plagiarism when his or her work too closely resembles another’s. Yet\, Denny argued\, much of what we consider to be works of art are in fact created by emulating what has come before. After surveying several innovations in the history of Islamic art\, he concluded that “we are beginning to look at Islamic art as we should have looked at it all along – as a phenomenon; art that reflects the totality of the human experience\, from the human psyche\, to human belief\, to patronage systems.” \n \n \nWalter B. Denny joined the faculty of the University of Massachusetts Amherst Art History Program in 1970. His primary field of teaching and research is the art and architecture of the Islamic world\, in particular the artistic traditions of the Ottoman Turks\, Islamic carpets and textiles\, and issues of economics and patronage in Islamic art. In addition to curatorships at the Harvard University (1970-2000) and Smith College (2000-2005) art museums\, in September of 2002 he was named Charles Grant Ellis Research Associate in Oriental Carpets at The Textile Museum\, Washington\, DC. He pursued graduate study at Istanbul Technical University and Harvard University\, receiving his M.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard.  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator.
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/walter-denny-new-ways-looking-islamic-art/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_21851_16686_1414679550-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20111121T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20111121T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20140915T055703Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105051Z
UID:10000892-1321862400-1321898400@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Fouad Ajami Lectures on the Arab Spring
DESCRIPTION:On November 21\, 2011\, CIRS hosted Fouad Ajami\, a Senior Fellow of The Hoover Institution at Stanford University and co-chairman of Hoover’s Working Group on Islamism and the International Order\, to discuss the recent Arab Spring in the Middle East. The event which was sponsored by Georgetown’s Center for International and Regional Studies (CIRS) took place at the university’s campus\, and drew a large number of members from the Doha community. \n \n \nThe lecture\, titled “Tracking the Arab Spring: The Best Day After a Bad Emperor is the First\,” explored how the “Arab Awakening” started in Tunisia\, went on to Egypt\, then to many other countries\, including Syria and Libya. Ajami described how the Arab Spring started with Mohamed Bouazizi\, a Tunisian street vendor\, whose act became the catalyst for the Tunisian revolution that led to the stepping down of their former president and the spreading of riots to different countries in the Arab world. \n \n \n“Arabs\, for several decades walked by the wall and did nothing against these tyrannical regimes\, but now they are eager to take their freedom and full rights… Luckily\, now they decided not to heed and react to these regimes\,” said Ajami while addressing the audience. \n \n \nAccording to Ajami\, who is a frequent contributor on Middle Eastern issues and contemporary international history for The New York Times\, Foreign Affairs\, The New Republic\, The Wall Street Journal\, among many other journals and periodicals. \n \n \n“I am all in with the Arab Spring\, I believed in it and still do; however\, I am really worried about Egypt… If the Arab awakening did not succeed in Egypt\, it will definitely affect the political\, social\, and economic situations in the other Arab countries… The economic freedom is linked to the political one; there is no political freedom in the absence of economic freedom\,” he explained. Ajami believes that there will be a time when Arabs will chant in support of a great leader. \n \n \nThe event concluded with a question and answer session which generated a great deal of participation from the audience\, whose members posed a range of questions for the speaker. \n \n \nGeorgetown University’s CIRS hosts a variety of regional and international experts through its Distinguished Lecture Series. Former speakers include prominent Middle East news correspondent Robert Fisk and Pulitzer Prize-winning author Thomas L. Friedman. These lectures are designed to raise awareness of regionally-relevant international issues. \n \n \nGeorgetown’s Center for International and Regional Studies in Qatar is a premier research institute devoted to the academic study of regional and international issues. CIRS sponsors a number of forums throughout the year facilitating dialogue and an exchange of ideas on a broad range of issues with the aim to engage and enrich the university students and community. \n \n \nFrom 1980 to June 2011\, he was the Majid Khadduri professor and Director of Middle East Studies at The Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. He began his academic career after receiving his PhD in political science from the University of Washington in 1973. He is the author of The Arab Predicament\, The Vanished Imam\, Beirut: City of Regrets\, and The Dream Palace of the Arabs\, The Foreigner’s Gift: The Americans\, the Arabs and the Iraqis in Iraq and other works. 
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/fouad-ajami-lectures-arab-spring/
CATEGORIES:American Studies,Dialogue Series,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/09/events_15671_9116_1411059223-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20111114T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20111114T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141023T112921Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105058Z
UID:10000938-1321257600-1321293600@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Arab Food\, Water\, and the Big Gulf Land-Grab that Wasn't
DESCRIPTION:On November 14\, 2011\, Eckart Woertz\, Visiting Fellow at Princeton University\, delivered a CIRS Monthly Dialogue lecture titled\, “Arab Food\, Water\, and the Big Gulf Land-Grab that Wasn’t.” Woertz placed the question of food security within a historical and cultural context. Food\, he said\, has historically been a highly politicized commodity and has been subject to political maneuvering regardless of the actual resources of food available. He argued that “with rising import needs\, the GCC faces increasing problems\,” and so food security is important for the political legitimacy of any government in its ability to satisfy social needs now and in the future. \n\nHistoric experience shows that countries have always been dependent on imports of one kind or another and are\, as such\, always susceptible to any fluctuation in energy or food supplies. This relationship of interdependence where countries find themselves vulnerable within the global matrix is capitalized upon by regional and international power politics. \n\nThe availability of food is considered a basic human right that all governments must provide their populaces. In the rentier arrangement of Gulf countries\, the ruling elite are particularly susceptible to criticism and social unrest if social welfare is not maintained. The food price hikes and export restrictions by food exporters like Russia\, India\, and Vietnam caused wide-spread panic in 2008 all around the world. This prompted Middle East countries\, and Gulf states in particular\, to become increasingly aware of their vulnerabilities in relation to issues of food security. In order to address the growing problem\, several Gulf states have invested in various agricultural enterprises\, both domestically and abroad. \n\nMany of the domestic food security projects are not environmentally or economically rational endeavors. For example\, Woertz explained how Saudi Arabia\, despite water shortages and harsh desert conditions\, became a wheat grower and exporter in the 1990s\, placing heavy demands on already strained water supplies. Currently\, Saudi has one of the largest dairy farms in the world and imports large amounts of sheep. In order to properly sustain this livestock industry\, Saudi has become one of the largest importers of barley. \n\nOn the international level\, many GCC governments have announced foreign land acquisitions\, known to critics as “land-grabs\,” mainly in nearby Sudan\, but also in countries as far away as Brazil and Australia. The bulk of these land acquisitions usually take place in the poorer third world countries and so many question whether human and land rights are respected and whether international laws are being properly enforced. In the 1980s\, Gulf countries wanted to develop farmlands in Sudan to serve as a “Bread Basket” to feed populations back home\, but this scheme was terminated due to various problems\, among them corrupt governance during the Nimeiri regime. \n\nThe discourse of food security is prone to high levels of fear-mongering. Woertz recounted the health problems that exist in the Gulf and that are caused by bad dietary habits. He explained that high levels of obesity and diabetes are generally a sign that “Gulf countries are food secure. If there’s a problem\, it’s with too much food\, not too little\,” he said. \n\nEckart Woertz was former Director of Economic Studies at the Gulf Research Center in Dubai and held senior positions in financial services companies in Germany and the UAE. He is currently finishing a book about Middle East food security and has published widely on financial markets and economic development in the Gulf and is a well-known commentator for international media outlets. He holds a PhD in economics from Friedrich-Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg.  \n\nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/arab-food-water-and-big-gulf-land-grab-wasnt/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Environmental Studies,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_21861_16691_1414679817-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20111113T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20111114T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20140924T171837Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105103Z
UID:10000904-1321171200-1321293600@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Food Security and Food Sovereignty in the Middle East Working Group I
DESCRIPTION:On November 13–14\, 2011\, CIRS held a two-day working group meeting\, to discuss issues related to its research initiative on “Food Security and Food Sovereignty in the Middle East.” The working group consisted of experts in the field who deliberated the historical\, economic\, and political aspects of the discourse as well as specific case studies of some Middle East countries. Also taking part in the meeting were some of the CIRS Research Grant recipients who updated the other working group members on their ongoing research projects and shared some of their preliminary findings. \n\nDue to the unfavorable natural conditions in many Middle Eastern and Gulf countries\, these states have never been fully self-sufficient in terms of food and have always had a strong dependence on imported food stuffs. This relationship of dependence on others for a basic human right\, make issues of food and food security highly politicized areas. Historically\, food and access to food have played pivotal roles in the social contract between governments and their populations and have had major effects on the domestic politics of Arab countries. Especially since the food price hikes of 2008\, governments have mandated special strategies and policies to address issues of inflation and simultaneous public unrest. The participants explained how the rise in food prices in the Middle East were a direct trigger for the Arab uprisings and the toppling of entrenched governments. Availability of food is thus a way for governments to gain political legitimacy and not just an issue of healthcare or social welfare. \n\nIn the Gulf region\, the ruling bargain based on rentier arrangements means that GCC governments must ensure the current and future stability of food supplies and so have invested in several long-term food security plans\, both locally and internationally. The participants explained that there was no comprehensive GCC-wide strategy regarding food security\, even though there are similarities in their approaches. Currently\, rather than addressing the root causes of food price hikes\, there is a tendency to treat the symptoms of the problem in the GCC by issuing policies that suppress food prices in order to stabilize the market. \n\nOne of the most controversial and highly publicized areas of food security initiatives is the strategy of foreign “land acquisitions.” Although many of these schemes are highly successful in terms of yield\, these initiatives are problematic for a variety of political and ethical reasons. Land acquisitions in poor third world countries are not always subject to consensual international laws. It is often the case that laws ensuring land and property rights are weak and not properly enforced\, thus paving the way for corrupt practices and forced takeovers of local farms. \n\nOn the global level\, climate change and environmental issues should be studied as an important part of the research. From a sociological perspective\, changes in life-style and habits have increased demand for increasingly diverse types of food\, and this in turn has added to increased environmental and economic strains. To the extent that Middle East and GCC countries will continue to be dependent on imports of particular foods\, there is considerable scope for regional cooperation. The participants advised these countries to invest in regional or international food storages\, whether actual or virtual. The Gulf states need to develop stronger relationships with foreign partners like the World Trade Organization to increase capacity-building measures\, rather than rely on the idea of self-sufficiency\, which\, the participants argued\, is ultimately unsustainable. \n\nThe participants cautioned that governments’ sudden interest in food security as an area of investment should be viewed critically. Historically\, countries have always been subject to fears over future food reserves\, making the idea of “food self-sufficiency” a fallacy. Storing food during times of war is part of the world’s collective memory and governments should not give in to the fear mongering inherent in the discourse of food security. Oftentimes\, the fear over the availability of current or projected food supplies is used as a pretext to achieve alternative political agendas. Calls for greater domestic food production in the Middle East and the GCC are not rational programs given the limited budgets and/or resources.  \n\nClick here for the working group’s agendaClick here for the participants’ biographiesRead more about the research initiative \n\nCIRS Grant Recipients:\n\nElisa Cavatorta\, University of LondonShadi Hamadeh\, American University of BeirutJane Harrigan\, SOAS\, University of LondonKarin Seyfert\, American University of BeirutBen Shepherd\, University of SydneySalwa Tohmé Tawk\, American University of BeirutMary Ann Tétreault\, Trinity UniversityDeborah L. Wheeler\, United States Naval Academy \n\nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/food-security-and-food-sovereignty-middle-east-working-group-i/
CATEGORIES:Environmental Studies,Focused Discussions,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/09/events_16616_11191_1411579117-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20111102T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20111102T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141026T113143Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210902T085321Z
UID:10000853-1320220800-1320256800@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:The Kofi Annan Legacy for Africa
DESCRIPTION:Gwen Mikell\, Professor of Anthropology and Foreign Service at Georgetown University\, gave a CIRS Focused Discussion on the subject of “The Kofi Annan Legacy for Africa” on November 2\, 2011. She noted that the lecture grew out of a project that she began in 2006\, where she was invited to write about Kofi Annan’s African initiatives over his two terms in office as Secretary General of the United Nations. With support from Georgetown University and the Carnegie Corporation\, Mikell’s goal was to investigate\, from an anthropological perspective\, the impacts Annan’s initiatives had in Africa. \n \n \nMikell outlined the extent of her research on Annan’s initiatives in four areas: African human rights\, peacekeeping\, development and growth\, and governance. She stated that her research was centered on much more than just an investigation into Kofi Annan\, as she “wanted the research to reflect people’s perceptions and interpretations – the meanings they derived from his leadership. I wanted the research to show how Kofi Annan’s African initiatives were shaped; what their dynamics were; how the international community and African countries had interacted with each other to carry out these initiatives; and\, finally\, the unique perspectives of different constituencies about his legacy.” This\, she explained\, was research that differed markedly from the existing biographical works written about Annan’s personal or professional life. \n \n \nKofi Annan\, Mikell argued\, was responsible for a major turnaround in perception regarding African affairs at the United Nations as well as on the international stage. She explained that various historical events\, including the shadow of the Cold War\, had “left Western countries relatively unconcerned about political instability and human rights issues in Africa.” Although Mikell acknowledged that African countries have long been victim to Western exploitation through selective development and investment\, she asserted that “Kofi Annan’s advocacy had put Africans on the international ‘hot seat’ and demanded that they also be responsible national and global leaders and citizens.” Mikell’s research indicated that “universal\, Western values such as human rights and democracy were at the core of much of what he did and\, therefore\, the African initiatives.” These ideals\, however\, caused a rift in perception between Western UN officials and their African counterparts. Many African heads of state perceived of Annan as a spokesman for\, and a product of\, the West and so actively supported Boutros Boutros-Ghali to become Secretary General for a second term against Annan’s bid. \n \n \nSome of the highlights that emerged from the research Mikell conducted included a picture of the UN as a highly fractured institution that entrenched existing group rivalries. As such\, to make drastic changes within the UN\, Annan was committed to perusing institutional reform. Although these reforms were not always popular\, his actions in this area gained him respect from competing groups within the United Nations. Annan outsourced programs in order to give them greater visibility and to avoid giving any one group within the UN the power to dictate policy direction in this regard. During this time\, Mikell explained\, Annan “was being very productive and creative in things like the Global Fund for HIV/AIDS\, tuberculosis\, malaria\, and other diseases.” His policies thus resulted in the turn towards strengthening social justice\, anti-poverty rights\, and grass-roots initiatives. Further\, in light of certain failures on the part of the United Nations\, especially in Rwanda\, Mikell examined how Annan “put in place institutions that were extremely important for bringing to justice genocidaires\, or military officers\, or state officials. He was instrumental in allowing the ICC and the human rights council to classify rape as a tool of war.” \n \n \nAs a final thought\, Mikell stated that “Annan’s initiatives were intended to interject elements of equality and socioeconomic justice into the democratizing processes underway within Africa.” Despite these efforts\, many of the African leaders thought that the moral authority of the United States during Obama’s administration would have far greater benefits for Africa than was the case. As for Annan\, Mikell said\, he has exclaimed that being out of office has afforded him more the ability to get things done\, and has freed him from the impediments of competing groups. \n \n \nGwendolyn Mikell was the Director of the African Studies Program in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown (1996-2007); and Senior Fellow in African Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations from 2000-2003. Her research and writing have been focused on political and economic transitions in Africa\, and on gender and peace building during African transitions.  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/kofi-annan-legacy-africa/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_22131_19941_1414920283-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20111010T180000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20111010T190000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141023T113749Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105113Z
UID:10000940-1318269600-1318273200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Mari Luomi Lectures on Unsustainability in Qatar and the GCC
DESCRIPTION:Mari Luomi\, one of the 2011-2012 CIRS Postdoctoral Fellows\, gave the inaugural CIRS Monthly Dialogue lecture of the Fall 2011 semester. She lectured on the topic of “Natural Resources and Environmental Unsustainability in Qatar and the GCC” to an audience of academics\, students\, ambassadors\, and interested members of the general public. \n \n \nLuomi introduced the topic by noting that her research was geared towards suggesting a new conceptual framework for understanding the relationship between sustainability\, political economy\, and development in the states of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). She defined the term “sustainability\,” as “the use of natural resources in a way that allows for welfare for humans and the environment\, presently and in the future.” \n \n \nOutlining the main argument\, Luomi said that “the Gulf monarchies’ dependence on fossil fuels\, on fossil fuel revenues\, and on social contracts based on these revenues produces unsustainability.” Major issues such as\, economic growth\, population increase\, and pressures to diversify the economy in the region\, all add tremendous pressure on economic\, social\, and environmental sustainability. In the GCC states in particular\, the rentier set-up and the need to preserve the social contract between government and citizens is a unique factor leading to long-term unsustainability. She explained that “if we step back and look at the broader challenges that the GCC states are currently facing to the ‘business-as-usual’ ways of conducting their development\,” it would be counter-productive to continue with the current model. “We must not forget\,” Luomi said\, “that we are living in a harsh\, but\, at the same time\, very fragile environment.” \n \n \nIndicators of unsustainability include greenhouse gas emissions\, of which “the GCC produces 2.5% of global carbon emissions.” In Qatar\, “we are looking at a society and economy that has the highest per capita emissions in the world\,” Luomi said. A second indicator of unsustainability is the idea of an “ecological footprint\,” which measures human consumption in relation to the Earth’s resources\, with “the Qatari footprint representing six times the biological capacity of the world – so we are living six times over the world’s current capacity here on average\,” she explained. In an attempt to tackle these high energy consumption and carbon emission rates\, the Qatari government has made efforts to address the problem by viewing “environmental development” as one of the main pillars that form the Qatar National Vision 2030 plan. \n \n \nLuomi concluded the lecture with suggestions regarding how the GCC states could encourage their societies to be more sustainable: “What we need for things to move onward is political will and determination.” She argued that it was necessary to have open debates on the environmental impacts of current natural resource consumption patterns as well as a well-grounded infrastructure for transmitting the message of sustainability through educational campaigns\, recycling initiatives\, and the encouragement of public transport\, among other practical enterprises. \n \n \nLuomi summed up the lecture by highlighting the simultaneous privilege and responsibility we have as residents and citizens of Qatar. Currently\, there is an “illusion of plenty” that is incompatible with a sustainable future. She said\, “here\, economically\, we have the possibility to continue consuming business-as-usual\, but the moral question is\, if we can\, should we?”  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator. \n \n \nMari Luomi is a Postdoctoral Fellow at the CIRS for the academic year 2011-2012. She holds a PhD in Middle Eastern Studies from Durham University. She has previously worked in various positions for the Middle East Project and the Programme in the International Politics of Natural Resources and the Environment of the Finnish Institute of International Affairs.
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/mari-luomi-lectures-unsustainability-qatar-and-gcc/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Environmental Studies,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_21866_16696_1414679911-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20111009T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20111010T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20140924T165353Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210902T085451Z
UID:10000902-1318147200-1318269600@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Sectarian Politics in the Gulf Working Group I
DESCRIPTION:On October 9–10\, 2011\, CIRS convened the first of its “Sectarian Politics in the Gulf” Working Group meetings. Participating in the research initiative were several experts on the issue of sectarian politics in the Middle East region in general and the Gulf in specific. This first gathering took the form of a brain-storming session\, where the participants debated the importance of overall thematic issues pertaining to the project. One of the main objectives for the meeting was to identify gaps in the literature. Although sectarian issues are not new to this region\, exclusive and detailed academic studies are still lacking and need to be addressed. Often\, there are individual studies written on individual countries\, but an overall comprehensive look at sectarianism in the Gulf is glaringly lacking. For many people in the Gulf region\, sectarianism is still a taboo subject and so has not been addressed with the necessary academic rigor. At the conclusion of the research initiative\, each participant will write a paper on their particular field of expertise. CIRS will gather these individual papers and prepare them for publication. \n \n \nOne important issue that was raised was contestation regarding the term “sectarianism” and whether or not this should be qualified and broadened to include “identity politics\,” as ethnicities and tribal linkages are often bound up together. Although each of these has a different set of variables\, they are difficult to separate along clear lines. Traditionally\, sectarianism has had negative connotations in its ability to segregate people along religious lines. To unpack the term\, it is necessary to submit to the idea that any form of identity\, whether sectarian or otherwise\, is always fluid\, negotiated\, and changes from one area to another and one historical period to another. \n \n \nThe participants agreed that it was important to point to how sectarianism can be politically manipulated and how governments or others have had a direct hand in quelling or inciting sectarian strife at particular historical periods. Sectarianism therefore\, plays a crucial role in the politics\, economy\, and social infrastructures of most\, if not all\, countries in the Gulf. As such\, some of the speakers argued for the need to locate sectarianism – as we understand it today – in its historical context to question whether it is a modern phenomenon that has its roots in colonial exploitation of regional differences or a feature much more ancient. Such segregation based on sectarian identification has had lasting effects\, especially in the Gulf region\, on rentier politics regarding how a state’s wealth is distributed and to which sectors of society. \n \n \nThe obvious sectarian struggles in the region play out between the Shia and Sunni communities as they vie for political power. However\, the participants argued that it was important not to view these as homogenous entities\, but to point to their internal differences. Further to examining the more prominent sectarian divisions\, the participants argued for the need to highlight some of the less visible sectarian struggles that have been taking place for many years and that go undetected by the larger power players. For example\, there are very few studies on the socio-politics of minority groups such as Sunni and Jewish communities in Iran. \n \n \nOther issues\, such as how sectarianism can be a transnational as well as international concern were clearly demonstrated with the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the political turmoil that ensued affecting domestic\, regional\, and international relationships. Currently\, in the wake of the Arab Spring\, with rise of new media and social networking\, the idea of a more globalized world has been created\, but it is also one where people are more aware of their differences. In Bahrain\, for example\, sectarian struggle has become top of the agenda of political discourse in the Gulf as other countries with the same sectarian divisions attempt to pacify or coerce the subversive elements in their societies. \n \n \nThese are just some of the issues that the participants addressed over the two-day meeting and which they will narrow down over the course of their next visits to CIRS and the Georgetown University in Qatar campus. \n \n \n  \n \n \n\nClick here for the working group’s agenda\nClick here for the participants’ biographies\nRead more about the research initiative \n\n \n  \n \n \nParticipants in the “Sectarian Politics in the Gulf” research initiative are:\n \nRogaia Abusharaf – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarMohammad Akbar – American University of KuwaitAbdulaziz Al Fahad – Kingdom of Saudi ArabiaMohammed Al Ghanim – Georgetown UniversitySultan Al Hashmi – Sultan Qaboos UniversityGhanim Al Najjar – Kuwait UniversityZahra Babar\, CIRS\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarLois Beck – Washington University in St. LouisJohn T. Crist – CIRS\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarKristin Smith Diwan – American UniversityMichael Driessen – CIRS\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarKhaled Fattah – Lund UniversityFanar Haddad – University of LondonMehran Kamrava – CIRS\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarLaurence Louer – CERI\, FranceMari Luomi – CIRS\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarRoel Meijer – Radboud University\, The NetherlandsSuzi Mirgani\, CIRS\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarGwenn Okruhlik – Trinity UniversityLawrence Potter – Columbia UniversityGuido Steinberg – German Institute for International and Security Affairs  \n \n \n  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/sectarian-politics-gulf-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_16606_11181_1411577633-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110914T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110914T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141026T121215Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105148Z
UID:10000856-1315987200-1316023200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:The Role of Universities in National Awakenings
DESCRIPTION:CIRS hosted a Focused Discussion by Mohammad-Javad Zarif\, Vice President for International Relations at Iran’s Islamic Azad University\, on September 14\, 2011. Zarif spoke to a small gathering of ambassadors and embassy staff about “The Role of Universities in National Awakenings.” He argued that the recent uprisings can be attributed\, in part\, to the increased level of education among the youth in the region and to their growing political awareness\, leading to further social demands. In order to deal with these new developments and patterns of frustrated behavior towards leadership\, it is necessary to question old political paradigms and come up with new ways of dealing with public pressures. Zarif argued that the idea of globalization can no longer be challenged; we live in an interconnected world where one country’s actions will affect another’s – whether within the same region or across the globe. \n \n \nZarif has had a long and illustrious career in the Iranian diplomatic corp. From 2002 to 2007\, Zarif served as the Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic to the United Nations\, and from 1992 to 2002 he was Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister for Legal and International Affairs.
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/role-universities-national-awakenings/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_22126_19946_1414920211-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110913T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110913T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141026T121817Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105155Z
UID:10000857-1315900800-1315936800@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Libya and the International Community: The Way Forward
DESCRIPTION:CIRS began its 2011-2012 lecture series with a Focused Discussion on “Libya and the International Community: The Way Forward” given by the Director of Brookings Doha Center\, Salman Shaikh\, on September 13\, 2011. During the lecture\, Shaikh outlined some significant ways in which the Libyan uprising differs from others in the region and the lessons that can be learned from the success the rebel movement has had in gaining international support. “One very important lesson that we did learn – very different from Iraq – was the importance of moving with international legality. That is why I place such emphasis on UN resolutions – something we didn’t work through satisfactorily in the Iraq case\,” he commented. \n \n \nThe Libyan revolution\, which began in February 2011\, followed on from other uprisings in the Arab world. Shaikh argued that “Tunisia and Egypt\, in particular\, acted as a catalyst for unprecedented courage being exhibited by Libyans themselves in throwing off the despotic rule of Muammar Qaddafi for 41 years.” What sets this particular revolution apart from neighboring ones\, however\, is that it had the backing of the international community through United Nations resolution 1970\, which refers Qaddafi to the International Criminal Court and resolution 1973\, which sanctioned a “no-fly zone” over Libyan air space. The United States was instrumental in setting up the no-fly zone and\, yet\, he explained\, the US government has been successful at maintaining some distance from any active engagement in the fighting so as not to be seen supporting yet another war in the Arab world. \n \n \nShaikh argued that the GCC states and the Arab League paved the way for other nations to join the coalition against Qaddafi and galvanized the opposition. Such support for the fall of the regime\, he said\, countered the hesitancy exhibited by Russia and China to get involved in council action. The GCC and the Arab League called for the international community to support the rebels and oppose Qaddafi. Other actors who have a direct stake and play a significant role in the changes currently taking place in Libya include NATO\, the United Nations\, and the African Union. Yet\, Shaikh pointed out\, it is not only countries and governments that support the ousting of Qaddafi and give legitimacy to the rebel movement\, as the majority of civilians in the region also gave their backing. Importantly\, he said\, whether through the media or on the ground\, “we didn’t see a single significant protest in the Arab world against the military intervention in Libya. Very different again to what we saw regarding the Iraq case.” \n \n \nConcluding with some thoughts on what needs to be done for a smooth transition of leadership in Libya\, Shaikh described the roles that need to be filled and the actions that need to be taken in the near future. “I suspect that there is no real appetite from NATO member states to have real ‘boots on the ground\,’” he said. However\, Shaikh continued\, Libyans will need assistance in other areas\, such as technical assistance in terms of policing and demobilization of fighters. It will also need support in constitution and electoral reformation as well as ensuring the socioeconomic welfare of the people. \n \n \nAn area that needs much attention during the transition is in terms of reconciliation. “It is interesting to note\,” Shaikh said\, “that Libya is a fairly homogenous society in terms of its ethnic and sectarian make-up\, but\, of course\, it is a tribal society.” Thus\, there needs to be real inclusivity and representation in decision-making regarding any changes made at a governmental level. He argued that “putting in a timetable for speedy elections or for a quick constitution-making process is not a panacea. This requires a much larger process of national dialogue and reconciliation.” \n \n \nSalman Shaikh is the Director of the Brookings Doha Center and a Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy in Washington\, DC. Shaikh has held numerous posts of significance both in the international system and the Middle East. In particular\, he worked with the United Nations for nearly a decade\, primarily on Middle East policy\, as the special assistant of the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process and as political adviser to the UN Secretary General’s Personal Representative for Lebanon during the 2006 war. He also served as the Director for Policy and Research in the Office of Her Highness\, Sheikha Mozah Bint Nasser Al-Missned\, the Consort of the Emir of Qatar.  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/libya-and-international-community-way-forward/
CATEGORIES:American Studies,Dialogue Series,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_22116_19951_1414920154-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110522T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110522T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20140915T060010Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105203Z
UID:10000894-1306051200-1306087200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Rashid Khalidi on the Arab Revolutions of 2011
DESCRIPTION:On May 22\, 2011\, Rashid Khalidi\, Edward Said Professor of Modern Arab Studies at Columbia University\, delivered the final CIRS Distinguished Lecture of the academic year on the topic “The Arab Revolutions of 2011.” Khalidi noted that not enough time has passed to be able to truly analyze the impact and consequences of the Arab Spring\, and so he offered some preliminary observations regarding the uprisings. He argued that “this juncture may be unprecedented in modern Arab history. Suddenly\, despotic regimes that were entrenched for over forty years are vulnerable.” In a short period of time\, some key regimes crumbled after having clung to power for so long and as a result of the challenging efforts of ordinary people. Khalidi said that “This is a moment\, when we are suddenly facing the prospect of entirely new possibilities in the Arab world.It comes after decades\, when nothing seemed to change in this region.” \n \n \nSeveral factors distinguish these uprisings from previous Arab revolutions\, including the peaceful nature of the movements and the protestors’ insistence on abstaining from violence\, Khalidi argued. Although the publics of Tunis and Egypt came out in force to air their displeasure with the status quo\, they rejected the use of violence. For the first time in recent years\, Western media carried images of peace-loving\, middle class\, and charismatic Arabs\, instead of the usual portrayal of Middle East publics as violent Islamic fundamentalists. “This is thus a supremely important moment\, not only in the Arab World\, but for how Arabs are perceived […] in the West – a people that has been systematically maligned in the Western media for decades are for the first time being shown in a realistic and positive light\,” he said. \n \n \nThe Arab uprisings stemmed from the public’s frustration not only with despotic Arab regimes\, but also with injustices made global through corporate privatization of public resources at the expense of social welfare. “What we have been seeing across the Arab World are not just revolutions for democracy\, for freedom\, for dignity\, and for the rule of law\, they have also been revolutions against the neo-liberal world order and the free-trade market fundamentalism dogma underpinning it\,” Khalidi maintained. Any new government formed after the ousting of the old regime must attempt to fulfill the economic and social needs of their populaces whilst resisting pressure from the West to engage in the very economic globalization practices that led to the revolutions in the first instance. \n \n \nKhalidi pointed out that many of these Arab countries are still unstable and that nothing has been concretely decided about their future political paths. He argued that the task ahead will be daunting for the new leaders of these societies as they will have to envision new social and political forms. “Building a workable\, functioning\, democratic system will be much\, much\, harder than overthrowing Mubarak or Ben Ali\,” Khalidi argued. Any new system must avoid the pitfalls of the old regime and needs to target the old centers of power and corruption which have not altogether disappeared. This\, he said\, is a scenario that is not unique to these Arab countries as “we know a lot about entrenched powerful interests dominating a democratic political system from the American experience. This is a problem every democratic polity suffers from.” \n \n \nIn sum\, Khalidi explained that “we must never forget that this is the Middle East\, which because of its energy resources and its unique strategic position is the most coveted region of the world and\, in consequence\, the region of the world most penetrated by foreign interests.” \n \n \nKhalidi is editor of the Journal of Palestine Studies and was an advisor to the Palestinian delegation to the Madrid and Washington Arab-Israeli peace negotiations from October 1991 until June 1993. He is author of many books\, includingSowing Crisis: American Dominance and the Cold War in the Middle East (2009); The Iron Cage: The Story of the Palestinian Struggle for Statehood (2006); and was the co-editor of Palestine and the Gulf (1982) and The Origins of Arab Nationalism (1991). \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, Publications Coordinator 
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/rashid-khalidi-arab-revolutions-2011/
CATEGORIES:American Studies,Dialogue Series,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/09/events_15676_9121_1411059288-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110428T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110428T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141026T122107Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210902T085530Z
UID:10000859-1303977600-1304013600@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Arab Spring: European Insights
DESCRIPTION:On April 28\, 2011\, CIRS hosted Teodor Baconschi\, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Romania\, who gave European insights into the recent and ongoing Arab uprisings taking place in the Middle East. Attending the lecture were Qatar-based ambassadors and embassy staff\, representatives from both regional and international think-tanks and research institutes\, as well as Georgetown University faculty.
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/arab-spring-european-insights/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_20841_19956_1414326067-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110419T180000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110419T200000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141026T122505Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105258Z
UID:10000861-1303236000-1303243200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Part 2: Imam Yahya Hendi's Journey with Islam
DESCRIPTION:Imam Yahya Hendi delivered a two-part CIRS Focused Discussion series taking the audience on “A Journey with Islam in the 21st Century.” The lectures were co-sponsored and hosted by the Museum of Islamic Art in Doha. Hendi’s second lecture took place on April 19\, 2011\, and highlighted “Women and Gender in the Islamic Religious Texts and Culture.” He argued that the Qur’an clearly states the respected place that women occupy within Islam and argued that many current instances of sexism are as a result of misinterpreting religious text for particular instances of social and political control. Hendi explained that gender relations in the Arab world and beyond are often the result of particular cultural settings rather than scriptural interpretations. Finally\, he said that one gender can only be understood in relation to the other and so it is important for each to always speak of women in Islam in relation to men. \n \n \nThe first lecture took place on April 18\, 2011\, and focused on “The Paradigms of Islamic Ethics\, Human Rights and Social Justice.” \n \n \nImam Hendi is the Muslim chaplain at Georgetown University\, the first American University to hire a full-time Muslim chaplain. Imam Hendi is also the Muslim Chaplain at the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda\, MD. He has written numerous publications on many topics\, including women in Islam\, women and gender relations in Islam\, the second coming of the Messiah\, Islam and biomedical ethics and religion and Islam in the United States.  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/part-2-imam-yahya-hendis-journey-islam/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Distingushed Lectures,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_22111_19961_1414920059-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110418T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110418T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141026T123057Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105303Z
UID:10000977-1303113600-1303149600@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Part 1: Imam Yahya Hendi's Journey with Islam
DESCRIPTION:Imam Yahya Hendi delivered a two-part CIRS Focused Discussionseries taking the audience on “A Journey with Islam in the 21st Century.” The lectures were co-sponsored and hosted by the Museum of Islamic Art in Doha. The first lecture took place on April 18\, 2011\, and focused on “The Paradigms of Islamic Ethics\, Human Rights\, and Social Justice\,” where Hendi examined the religious roots of social justice in the Qur’an. \n \n \nHe argued that since Islam’s main goal is to bring about peace and social justice to the world\, there is a prominent theme that calls for the welfare of all within society with a particular focus on the poor and vulnerable. Hendi said that themes of benevolence and social democracy are often forgotten or even belittled by Muslims who have interpreted the text to suit their own political agendas. “I challenge Muslims\, asking them to produce\, what I call\, a new agenda of how they speak about Islam and how they understand Islam in a way that preserves the authenticity of the text and the authenticity of the essence of faith and yet allow themselves to question and ask tough questions\,” he said. \n \n \nAlthough the past should be respected\, contemporary socio-political challenges and the needs of the moment should be respected as well in order to deal with these new realities. Muslims\, Hendi said\, need to be honest in the critique of the negative aspects of their communities\, rather than fear backlash. Historically\, communal knowledge\, public practice\, and debating known as “’urf” was considered to be a valuable source of Islamic ethics that was consensual and agreed upon by members of the public or Umma. However\, more recently\, Islamic ethicists and scholars have tried to exclude social contributions to Islamic knowledge by claiming sole authority in such matters. “We need to have ethical teachings that are realistic\, that deal with reality\, and that actually can be practiced\,” in order for ethics to be an attainable and manageable concept that is performed by all. Indeed\, the Imam said\, “Islamic ethics honors the concept of ‘wajib’ and tells us about our responsibilities – both personal and public.” \n \n \nImam Hendi is the Muslim chaplain at Georgetown University\, the first American University to hire a full-time Muslim chaplain. Imam Hendi is also the Muslim Chaplain at the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda\, MD. He has written numerous publications on many topics\, including women in Islam\, women and gender relations in Islam\, the second coming of the Messiah\, Islam and biomedical ethics and religion and Islam in the United States. \n \n \nRead about Part 2 of the Imam’s lecture series.  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/part-1-imam-yahya-hendis-journey-islam/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Distingushed Lectures,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_22106_19966_1414919985-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110410T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110410T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141026T124338Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210902T085617Z
UID:10000979-1302422400-1302458400@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Aly Verjee on Current Events in Côte d'Ivoire\, Djibouti\, and Sudan
DESCRIPTION:On April 10\, 2011\, CIRS and the African Student Club at Georgetown University in Qatar hosted a Focused Discussion with Aly Verjee\, Senior Researcher at the Rift Valley Institute and a specialist on the contemporary politics of Africa. The lecture was on “Current Events in Côte d’Ivoire\, Djibouti\, and Sudan.” These were countries in which Verjee spent significant amounts of time conducting research and working as an elections observer. \n \n \nVerjee began by describing current events in the Sudan and the possible outcomes of the recent referendum which was voted in favor of splitting the country into two. He argued that “One of the most interesting and important things about the referendum in Sudan was\, of course\, that it was accepted by both sides.” Despite the positives\, Verjee said\, the peace agreement privileges the ruling parties of both sides at the expense of the people. The referendum had very serious authoritarian undertones where the extremely high percentage of voter turnout was not necessarily due to an organically-formed civic mobilization movement\, but\, rather\, because the ruling party went house to house to ensure all registered voters cast ballots. However\, Verjee said\, despite the exhilaration produced by radical social and political change to the country\, it is important to not to lose sight of the unimplemented social and political rights of the people. Currently in Sudan\, “We have this very unusual circumstance that the vote\, which was largely democratic and which will herald the newest country in Africa\, actually also means that we will have\, from July when Southern Sudan becomes an independent country\, two one-party states. That is a very unorthodox outcome of a democratic process\,” Verjee argued. \n \n \nEver since the referendum took place\, the international media has focused on describing what the “new” Sudan might look like. Since the north-south issue has become so prominent a topic\, it is important not to forget the other areas of struggle such as Darfur and Kordofan\, which have multi-ethnic and multi-religious populations that do not necessarily identify with the ruling Arab Muslim elite. The communities in these areas would like their rights respected and to enter into self-governance just as the south did. \n \n \nThe second country Verjee examined was “Djibouti\, which is a stable country in a very unstable neighborhood.” The country is located in a geographically strategic area on the Bab el-Mandeb; the coastal gateway between the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea\, which is one of the busiest shipping channels in the world. Verjee said that “Djibouti itself is not important in terms of international trade\, but is very important in the international trade of East Africa.” This is because “85 million Ethiopians depend on all their imports coming through the port of Djibouti” since Ethiopians can no longer rely on Eritrea as a seaport because of deteriorating relations after Eritrea’s secession from Ethiopia. Further\, he noted\, although Djibouti is at the heart of international anti-piracy and anti-terror operations and “the host of the only U.S. military base in the whole of Africa\,” its strategic location is simultaneously important as a channel for illegal migration from Africa into Arabia and Europe. \n \n \nMoving on to Côte d’Ivoire\, Verjee said that most people in the world should have an interest in what happens there\, not least because it “is the most important country in the world in determining the price of chocolate\,” as it is a main producer and exporter of cocoa beans. However\, despite the country’s relative wealth\, civil war has plagued the country for most of the last decade\, leading to large numbers of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs). Currently\, the country is again divided by the controversy surrounding the last round of presidential elections\, where both Laurent Gbabgo and Alassane Ouattara claim that they are the true winners. “The elections that were held last year were supposed to end the crisis\, but in fact\, they have only deepened it\,” he explained. \n \n \nAs a final thought\, Verjee linked the three countries by drawing parallels between them\, including the ways in which the media has shaped public perception and response to events in these places. Secondly\, all three countries are linked by a history of disappointing interpretations of democratic elections. Thirdly\, “in all three of these countries\, there are strategic considerations” and each becomes prioritized internationally based on the richness of its resources or geographic location. Lastly\, Verjee said\, “In all three of these examples\, we can see the prominence and centrality of individuals over systems.” \n \n \nAly Verjee is author of the recently published Race Against Time: the Countdown to the Referenda in Southern Sudan and Abyei. From 2006-2008\, Verjee helped manage the logistics of the repatriation of Sudanese refugees from Kenya\, Uganda\, DR Congo and the Central African Republic. From 2008–2010\, he helped lead the first ever international election observation mission in Sudan for The Carter Center. In addition\, Verjee also has worked on various assignments in Afghanistan\, Botswana\, China\, Cote d’Ivoire\, DR Congo\, Ghana\, Kenya\, Mozambique\, Senegal\, Somaliland and South Africa. 
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/aly-verjee-current-events-c%c3%b4te-divoire-djibouti-and-sudan/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_22101_19971_1414919924-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110406T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110406T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141023T114613Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210902T085637Z
UID:10000942-1302076800-1302112800@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Brendan Hill on Sin and Civil Society
DESCRIPTION:Brendan Hill\, Associate Dean of Student Affairs at the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\, delivered a CIRS Monthly Dialogue lecture on “Sin and Civil Society: Modernity and Moral Regulation in 18th Century England” on April 6\, 2011. Attending the lecture were students\, faculty and staff\, locally-based ambassadors\, and other members of the Qatar community. \n \n \nTrained as a legal historian\, Hill said that he did not set out to study morality and sin during his research\, but soon became engrossed in the subject of eighteenth century criminalization of behavior and began to study the subject more seriously. Hill’s research focuses on the jurisdictional shifts and the movement away from ecclesiastical courts into secular courts and how this new form of legal\, rather than religious\, control and fashioning of behavior had different effects on society. He pointed to the paradox at the crux of his research which is that the eighteenth century is widely believed to be a time of enlightenment and growing secularization and\, yet\, Hill said during this time there was a growing number of prosecutions for moral offences largely documented by puritans in a movement called the Society for the Reformation of Manners. \n \n \nAlthough there is no common definition of puritanism\, Hill argued\, there is a general consensus among historians that puritans believed that society should be ordered according to an ethical code that is derived from scripture. According to Calvin’s doctrine “the church instructs and the state enforces.” The reason why the fashioning of civil society was so important to puritans\, Hill said\, was because they believed that one person’s guilt was something that was burdened by all individuals in society. “If guilt and judgment are collective\, then the crimes of even a few of us are going to visit God’s wrath upon the whole society. So\, if the notion of sin becomes collectivized\, then the notion of punishment also becomes collectivized\,” Hill explained. \n \n \nHill highlighted the three main contributions that his research makes to the study of legal and church history. The first contribution is to further the understanding of the process of secularization that occurred in England in the eighteenth century and\, by so doing\, problematize the idea that enlightenment Europe was a complete move away from religion into the realm of reason. “Historians and political scientists tend to nowadays take it for granted that English society – and essentially European society – is a secular society” that worked toward the presumed replacement of religious imagination with reason and the separation of church and state. Hill argued that “my research is pointing toward less of a ‘secularization’ of the European imagination and more toward a ‘sacralization’ of civil society. Rather than becoming secular in the eighteenth century\, England was in the process of conflating the secular and the sacred.” \n \n \nThe second contribution his research makes\, Hill said\, was highlighting the fact that puritans and puritanism didn’t really die out in the manner that the restoration literature suggests. Historians usually portray puritans as comical figures that no longer had a voice in the body politic during the eighteenth century. Hill\, however\, suggested that puritan movements actually found a more effective way of channeling their efforts to reform society through “the colonization of civil society” and infiltrating the emerging secular state as officially elected members of parliament. \n \n \nA third contribution to the literature\, Hill said\, is to question the notion of positive progress. He argued that “there is an idea that civil society brings progress and that civil society eradicates old forms\, and that civil society pushes the way through tradition and moves toward modernity.” But\, he said\, the complexities of civil society mean that a new formation of that society can never be fully divorced from the former ideology. Any supposedly liberal society will certainly have strong elements of conservatism in the mix. Hill said that he examines how “civil society in the eighteenth century was not only responsible for the creation of tolerance and the separation of church and state\, but was also responsible for the sacralization of secular society.” \n \n \nHill concluded by outlining the reasons for the decline of official puritanim in England. He argued that the puritans became so prevalent a force in the ordering of civil society that the truly secular elements of the state\, including the monarchs\, became increasingly worried. Regardless of the decline of puritanism per se\, puritans were in fact responsible for the creation of the police state and its monitoring of society as one of the hallmarks of modernity. “In a very strange way\,” Hill said\, “the Society for the Reformation of Manners created the modern state\,” but their influence on current behavioral codes has been forgotten. Over the years\, people have become increasingly ignorant of the puritanical basis of current laws\, including those pertaining to prostitution and blasphemy. \n \n \nBrendan Hill earned his B.A. in Philosophy from the University of Hawaii at Manoa and his Ph.D. in European History from Georgetown University. He specializes in church and legal history\, and his research focuses specifically on the criminalization of sin and the creation of a godly society at the dawn of the modern era in England. In addition to teaching survey courses on the history of Europe\, England and Ireland\, he teaches smaller seminars on the cultural roots of ethnic conflict and on the evolving relationship between the secular and the sacred in modern Europe.  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/brendan-hill-sin-and-civil-society/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Distingushed Lectures,Race & Society
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/cirs_17_small-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110322T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110322T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141026T130050Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105324Z
UID:10000981-1300780800-1300816800@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:New Geo-Political Realities of the Gulf
DESCRIPTION:Khaled Almaeena\, Editor-in-Chief of Arab News\, was invited to give a CIRS Focused Discussion on the topic of “New Geo-Political Realities of the Gulf” on March 22\, 2011. Almaeena explained the relationship between the Gulf states and America and how each conducts its foreign policies. “The main thrust of the Gulf’s American relations\,” he said\, “is based on Saudi-American relations\, which are now like a dysfunctional marriage” insofar as the two countries get along\, but still do not see eye to eye when it comes to certain issues\, such as the situation in Palestine. \n\nRecalling the history of “Saudi-American relations” specifically\, Almaeena explained that this alliance “initially started on an economic footing with the advent of the oil industry\,” and then grew into a relationship based on military and security issues over the decades. By and large\, this relationship was stable up until the events of September 11\, 2001\, after which the nature of the relationship was radically altered\, both on the political and social fronts. Almaeen argued that “the media played a role that swayed people totally against Saudi Arabia” and created a division between America the Muslim world. In fact\, he said\, the situation was so bad that\, as editor of Arab News\, his office received a multitude of hate-mail from readers in the west accusing Saudi Arabia of involvement in the atrocities. \n\nOut of all of the Gulf states\, Saudi Arabia has one of the closest relationships with the United States. Although this relationship has meant that Saudi Arabia enjoys a strong regional and international political standing\, for the very same reason\, it reason it has suffered ridicule from other countries in the Arab world that see this relationship as a negative progression and a conflict of interest. Regardless\, the Saudis understand that the main concern is to have and maintain a mutually beneficial relationship with as many countries as possible. This\, however\, is not always possible\, as Almaeena argued\, “We [Saudi Arabia] were being goaded by the United States to take a very negative and even a hostile stance against Iran.” \n\nIn conclusion\, Almaeena said that change in Saudi Arabia’s relationship with the United States is inevitable. “For the Saudis and for the Gulf states\, to go ahead with American policy dictates is detrimental\,” he said. Although the relationship has been a rocky one in recent years\, Almaeena did not give up hope on a future based on transparency and mutual respect. He explained that “an Arab-American rapprochement would be a great boon and benefit for the world.” This is especially important given the seismic political changes currently taking place all over the Middle East. The power of public and civil movements\, he said\, is teaching regional and international governments to reassess their foreign policies by first of all looking inwards and realizing the aspirations of their people. \n\nKhaled Almaeena has held a broad range of positions in Saudi Media including CEO of a Public Relations firm\, Saudi Television news anchor\, talk show host\, radio announcer and journalist. As the Editor-in-Chief of Arab News\, the largest English-language newspaper in the Middle East\, Almaeena steered the paper through the Gulf Crisis and pioneered bringing newspapers back to a liberated Kuwait.  \n\nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/new-geo-political-realities-gulf/
CATEGORIES:American Studies,Dialogue Series,Environmental Studies,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_22096_19976_1414919858-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110313T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110313T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20140915T060300Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105356Z
UID:10000895-1300003200-1300039200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Karen Armstrong on the Core of Our Religious Traditions
DESCRIPTION:In a joint CIRS and Georgetown faculty Distinguished Lecture\, Karen Armstrong was invited to share her thoughts on “The Core of our Religious Traditions” on March 13\, 2011. Armstrong is a former Roman Catholic nun who left a British convent to pursue a degree in modern literature at Oxford\, a best-selling author\, and UN Ambassador for the Alliance of Civilizations. \n \n \nArmstrong began by defining the contradictory role of religion in today’s globalized world by saying that although it contributes towards the building of a global community and teaches tolerance among disparate people\, it is also regarded as the main cause of global violence and conflict. “I’m convinced\,” she said\, “that religion has a major contribution to make to one of the chief tasks of our time\, which must surely be to build a global community where people of all persuasions can live together in harmony and respect.” However\, Armstrong noted\, it is important to point out that “In fact\, the cause of war is usually ambition\, hatred\, and greed\, but\, often\, these self-serving emotions are given an idealistic or a religious coloration in order to sanitize them.” Although she acknowledged the history of international conflict based upon religion\, she argued that their specific motivations usually stem from the more individualistic concerns of a selfish few. \n \n \nSpeaking of the Axial Age between 900-200 BCE\, Armstrong noted that this was a moment of history which was the center of humankind’s spiritual experience when all the major world religions had their origins. In China\, during this time\, Confucianism and Daoism were born; in India\, Hinduism and Buddhism blossomed; in the Middle East sprung up the roots of monotheism\, which would guide the teachings of Judaism\, Christianity\, and Islam; and in Greece\, philosophical rationalism gave rise to Western philosophy\, which became a religious movement in its own way. Armstrong explained that although these ancient traditions are distinct from each other\, they share certain values that have shaped our current understandings of existence and have much to say to us in our modern world. Although these traditions have helped explain existentialism\, Armstrong warned of the impossibility of fully knowing the unknown and said that “One of the things that has gone wrong in the modern age\, and it is certainly true that religious people can be opinionated\, exclusive\, and intolerant\, is that they insisted that when we speak of the ultimate reality\, which has been called God\, Nirvana\, Brahman\, and Dao\, we think we know what we are talking about” and can define it implicitly. However\, she argued\, as in the Muslim belief that “God is greater\,” the divine is always beyond the limit of what our language and thoughts permit. \n \n \nAs part of her scholarly inquiries into the history of religion\, Armstrong said that within the English language\, the word “belief” has changed its meaning over the centuries. Up until the seventeenth century\, the word was pronounced differently in Middle English and came from the German “to love” and “to commit oneself” as well as the Latin root of “desire\,” or “libido.” The word “belief” did not have the same connotations of “blind faith” and acceptance of doctrine that it does today. Armstrong said that\, ultimately\, “religion\, of course\, is not about thinking things or believing things\, but about doing things. What is the Qur’an but a call to action? When the Qur’an talks of faith it doesn’t mean that we have to accept a whole lot of ideas\, but it follows it up always with its performing the works of mercy\, or the salihat\,” wherein the Qur’an asks people to do good and look after the poor and the vulnerable\, to free slaves\, and care for orphans and widows. \n \n \nConcluding the lecture Armstrong explained that every world religion has at its core the ethical principle of compassion. She said “It now seems to me quite clear that unless as a species we learn to treat all peoples as we would wish to be treated ourselves whoever they are and whatever their beliefs\, we are not going to have a viable world to hand on to the next generation and that any ideology that breeds or encourages hatred and contempt is failing the test of our time and failing humanity.” \n \n \nArmstrong’s books have been translated into forty-five languages. In addition to teaching\, she regularly comments on religious affairs in England and the United States and is a columnist for the Guardian newspaper.  In 2007 she was awarded a medal for Arts and Sciences by the Egyptian government for her services to Islam\, the first foreigner to have been awarded this decoration. She is a recipient of the TED prize. \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, Publications Coordinator 
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/karen-armstrong-core-our-religious-traditions/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/09/events_15681_9126_1411059367-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110308T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110308T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141023T115525Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105403Z
UID:10000820-1299571200-1299607200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Rabbi Harold White on the Allure of Mysticism
DESCRIPTION:Rabbi Harold White\, Georgetown University’s Senior Jewish Chaplain and Lecturer in Theology\, delivered a CIRS Monthly Dialogue lecture on “The Allure of Mysticism: Kabbalah as Pop-religious Culture or Serious Religious Practice?” on March 8\, 2011. \n \n \nWhite relayed his experience during his seminary schooling and said that it was not common at the time to be taught anything other than traditional religious thought. It was only later that he took a keen interest in the study of Jewish mysticism or Kabbalah. In Hebrew scripture\, he said\, the existence of divinity is presented as an existential reality and not something that should be proved through theoretical ponderings. Kabbalah is derived from Hebrew meaning “to receive\,” the Rabbi said\, and is the act of emptying oneself of narcissistic tendencies and opening oneself up to the divine. \n \n \nThe Rabbi discussed the ways in which Kabbalah has recently entered into the public vernacular. It is currently being popularized and embraced by a variety of public figures and celebrities\, including Madonna and Britney Spears who\, he said\, engage with the teachings on a superficial level. This popularization of Kabbalah has occured through marketing of the teachings in commercial merchandise and simple sound-bites. The Rabbi argued that this has trivialized the mysticism because to truly engage in Kabbalah one must be a scholar of scripture and familiar with the history and traditions of religious practice. \n \n \nIn conclusion\, Rabbi White argued that even though we are products of the modern world\, religion allows us to live a life that is still filled with mystery and Kabbalah in particular is a celebration and enjoyment of that mystery. He ended the lecture by saying that “The world may not be comprehensible\, but it is embraceable.” \n \n \nThe Rabbi was also invited to give a lunch lecture to Georgetown faculty\, staff\, and students on the history and ethos of Georgetown’s diversity programs. \n \n \nRabbi Harold S. White has been associated with Georgetown University for 43 years. He currently holds the position of Senior Advisor to the Program of Jewish Civilization at Georgetown University. He has occupied rabbinic pulpits at Temple Sinai in Washington and Temple B’nai Israel in Easton\, Maryland. He serves as the Co-Spiritual Director for the Interfaith Family Project in Takoma Park\, Maryland.  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/rabbi-harold-white-allure-mysticism/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_21876_16711_1414680547-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110223T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110223T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141026T130321Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105412Z
UID:10000983-1298448000-1298484000@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:His Holiness Aram I Lectures on Interfaith Dialogue
DESCRIPTION:In collaboration with Georgetown University in Qatar’s Student Affairs department\, CIRS organized a lecture on February 23\, 2011\, by His Holiness Aram I\, Head of the Armenian Church in Lebanon on the subject of “Interfaith Dialogue.” \n \n \nIntroducing the themes of the discussion\, His Holiness Aram I highlighted the increasing importance of religion in today’s world. He argued that “Religion has become a major public player in the world today. Religion has become an integral and inseparable part of international and inter-community relations.” Globalization and its ensuing pluralism have\, in fact\, increased the importance of religious participation\, rather than decrease it. Religion is part of the geopolitics of every region\, therefore\, “inter-religious dialogue today has become a necessity […] Inter-religious dialogue is no more a question of options; it is a must\,” he said. The question is not whether we should engage ourselves in dialogue\, but how to go about doing this. \n \n \nAs with many countries in the world\, Lebanon unifies various religious communities and confessional identities within the borders of a single nation. In order to understand the relationship between religion and everyday lived experience in the Middle East and elsewhere\, His Holiness argued that inter-religious dialogue need not be a discussion based on intense metaphysical\, theological\, and scriptural issues\, but\, rather\, should be a conversation that highlights the practicalities of religious worship and co-existence in the modern age. He argued that “diversity is a source of enrichment that should not polarize us.” \n \n \nWhen people are faced with tremendous and radical change\, they need to keep pace with changing realities. There are times\, he noted\, when religion is hijacked by political agendas; “the role of religion\,” he said\, “has sometimes been as a stabilizer and reconciler\, and sometimes\, it has been a destabilizer.” For this reason\, His Holiness argued that “I warmly welcome the initiatives in inter-religious dialogue taken by Qatar.” \n \n \nIn conclusion\, his Holiness said that “In this world\, we need to talk to each other and to dialogue with each other\, instead of talking about each other and against each other.” \n \n \nHis Holiness Aram I was elected Catholicos (the Head of the Armenian Church) in 1995. Called to serve as Primate of the Armenian Community of Lebanon during the Lebanese Civil War\, His Holiness is a strong supporter of inter-religious relations\, dialogue and co-operation. In addition to his numerous articles and reviews in Armenian\, English\, and French\, His Holiness has authored over 15 books.   \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/his-holiness-aram-i-lectures-interfaith-dialogue/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Distingushed Lectures,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_20846_19981_1414328601-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110210T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110210T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141026T130606Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105422Z
UID:10000986-1297324800-1297360800@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:The Euro's Future in the Balance
DESCRIPTION:Ibrahim Oweiss\, Professor Emeritus of Economics at Georgetown University\, delivered a lunch time lecture on February 10\, 2011 on the subject of “The Euro’s Future in the Balance.” Oweiss was one of the founding members of Georgetown University Center for Contemporary Arab Studies\, and also spent four years on the faculty of the School of Foreign Service in Qatar. \n \n \nBasing his lecture on the question “what are the possible scenarios for the Euro’s future?” Oweiss explored the ways in which the Euro has shaped and will continue to shape the economies of the European Union countries. Although the Eurozone is a significant economic region of the world and has a combined population that exceeds that of the United States\, the recent bailouts of Ireland and Greece by Germany have indicated a serious weakness in the zone’s strategy. “The future of the European unification project is on life support\, while Germany’s fingers are on the power switch\,” he said. Indeed\, because “Germany has the only healthy economy in Europe\,” Oweiss argued\, “either all of the sovereign debts of Europe become German public debt or the Euro will collapse.” \n \n \nMany of the Eurozone countries have adopted the Euro as their sole legal tender\, while others\, such as the UK\, are members of the European Union\, but have opted out of the Euro. “The Monetary policy of the Eurozone is the responsibility of the European Central Bank\, though there is no common representation\, governors\, or fiscal policy for the currency union.” There needs to be cooperation between these elements “in order to help smooth fluctuations in the business cycle” and so this is represents a major weakness related to the Euro. “There is\,” however\, “some cooperation which takes place through the Euro Group\, which makes political decisions regarding the Eurozone and the Euro.” \n \n \nBefore taking questions from the audience\, Oweiss concluded that regardless of the negative of the economies of the Eurozone\, the Euro will remain one of the world’s key currencies. When asked whether or not Eurozone countries could opt out of the Euro and return to their former currencies\, Oweiss argued that although it was possible\, it is unlikely. Finally\, he argued that he does not expect the Euro to collapse as long as Germany holds onto the Euro and doesn’t return to the Deutsch mark. \n \n \nAs an international economic advisor\, Oweiss worked for several governments and multinational corporations. He has authored over fifty scholarly publications including:Petrodollar Surpluses\, Arab Civilization\, and The Political Economy of Contemporary Egypt.  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/euros-future-balance/
CATEGORIES:American Studies,Dialogue Series,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_22091_19986_1414919736-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110208T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110208T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141026T130833Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105425Z
UID:10000987-1297152000-1297188000@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Popular Uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt
DESCRIPTION:Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar held an open discussion on Tuesday\, February 8\, 2011\, to discuss the recent political upheavals in Tunisia and Egypt and their implications on the Arab world. The discussion\, organized by Professor Karine Walther and the Center for International and Regional Studies\, featured four experts from Georgetown’s Qatar campus. \n \n \nThe roundtable discussion titled\, “Popular Uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt: The Jasmine Revolution and Its Aftermath\,” allowed members of the Georgetown community the opportunity to ask questions and discuss the events unfolding in Tunisia and Egypt. The speakers included Abdullah Al-Arian\, a doctoral candidate in Georgetown’s History department; Sharif Elmusa\, Visiting Associate Professor in the Political Science department; Daniel Stoll\, Senior Assistant Dean of Academic Affairs; and Mohamed Zayani\, Visiting Associate Professor of Critical Theory. \n \n \nThe first question posed by a member of the audience related to the role played by the Egyptian constitution in the event of a government transition. Commenting on the inherent problems with using Egypt’s current constitution to foster change\, Al-Arian argued that in its present form\, the constitution is an ineffective document. “The way that the constitution is structured is that it puts so much power in the president’s hands that it’s basically impossible to get anything accomplished without President Hosni Mubarak\,” said Al-Arian. \n \n \nElmusa echoed Al-Arian’s statement saying\, “The regime has rewritten the constitution in such a way as to make it impossible for anyone else but the regime and the ruling party [NDP] to participate.” \n \n \nIn addressing how the constitution could prove useful\, Stoll argued that the document provided a framework that could be used to implement change. “It’s a flawed document\, but it’s a starting point\,” said Stoll. Al-Arian agreed\, adding that perhaps earlier versions of the constitution that vested less power in the Mubarak regime’s hands could be used as a “common frame of reference” to advance change. \n \n \nIn response to a question asking why the U.S. government had been slow to react and offer support to pro-democracy protesters in Tunisia and Egypt\, Stoll answered that the Obama administration was perhaps acting cautiously. “It’s a political tightrope as to how a response is structured\,” he remarked. Stoll explained that in the Egyptian case\, the U.S. government was likely uncertain about whom to support since the Mubarak regime had successfully suppressed the emergence of a viable opposition leader. \n \n \nElmusa asserted that the U.S. government could perhaps do more by suspending the billions in aid it sends to the Egyptian military “without looking like they’re intervening.” In addition\, he argued\, this would allow the armed forces in Egypt to play a neutral role\, rather than continue to act at the Mubarak regime’s behest. \n \n \nAsked about the impact of the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt\, Zayani cautioned against two looming threats for the region. “One is that countries will try to preempt this rather than engage in real change.” He continued\, “The other thing that happens\, and there are signs starting to come out of this in Tunisia\, is that real demand for real political and institutional change is being hijacked by more social demands.” \n \n \nSpeaking to the question of the reasons that led to pro-democracy protests in Egypt\, Al-Arian responded that economic disenfranchisement due to decades of government corruption was largely at fault. “Imagine if you could get rid of all that [corruption]. So in terms of development\, things can only look up\,” concluded Al-Arian.  \n \n \nArticle by Jennifer Ponard\, Media Writer 
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/popular-uprisings-tunisia-and-egypt/
CATEGORIES:American Studies,Dialogue Series,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_22086_19991_1414919675-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110201T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110201T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141023T115744Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105456Z
UID:10000821-1296547200-1296583200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Mohamed Zayani Lectures on Transnational Arab Media
DESCRIPTION:Mohamed Zayani\, Professor of Critical Theory at Georgetown University in Qatar\, delivered a CIRS Monthly Dialogue lecture entitled “Transnational Arab Media\, Regional Politics and State Security: Saudi Arabia between Tradition and Modernity” on February 1\, 2011. \n \n \nOffering “a social sciences perspective which places the development of media within a broad\, historical\, cultural and socio-political context\,” Zayani delved into the intricacies of the Saudi media systems\, exploring how the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia came to be an important media player. “Although lacking the historical depth which characterizes other prominent media traditions in the region\,” Zayani noted\, “the rise of Saudi media is remarkable.” \n \n \nWithin the span of a few decades\, Zayani explained\, “the Saudis managed to develop a decentralized media empire which encompasses a plethora of media conglomerates\, transnational foreign-based networks\, pan-Arab satellite channels\, influential newspapers\, and regional publications.” Prominent Saudi media ventures include pan-Arab newspapers like Al Hayat and Al Sharq Al Awsat and television networks like MBC\, Orbit\, ART and Rotana. Interestingly\, most of these ventures\, which are in private Saudi hands\, tend to be entertainment oriented. \n \n \nDriving the Saudi interest in media\, Zayani noted\, is “what maybe loosely described as a security imperative.” The Saudi interest in media goes back to the 1960s\, when the kingdom found itself confronted with “a number of cultural and political challenges.” The development of Saudi media is tightly connected to “internal dynamics” which are social\, cultural and political in nature\, and “external dynamics” which are related to geopolitical considerations\, and historical regional rivalries. \n \n \nWhile designing a “circumscribed domestic media system” which protects its social values\, limits the influence of Western culture\, and enhances its national identity\, Zayani noted\, “Saudi Arabia invested in a transnational\, foreign-based media system which helped safeguard its interests in the face of hostile regimes in the region\, promote its foreign policy and exert regional political influence.” Contributing to the rise of Saudi media is oil wealth\, the establishment of a regional infrastructure of satellite technology and the receding role of traditional media players in the region. \n \n \nFor Zayani what is interesting to note is “not only how and why Saudi Arabia came to be an important media player\, but also what kind of contradictions\, disjunctions\, and unintended consequences the Saudi investment in media created\, and to what effect.” According to Zayani\, “the liberalization\, expansion and deterritorialization of Saudi media brought about a number of challenges and conflictual dynamics which cannot be easily managed\, let alone reconciled.” The most important disjunctions point to an uneasy relationship between tradition and modernity\, between a protectionist drive and a liberalizing impetus\, between national identity markers and market imperatives\, and between depoliticization and repoliticization. \n \n \nIn a fast changing Middle East\, these disjunctions are potentially consequential. For Zayani\, “tremendous wealth\, business imperatives\, strategic allies\, and political clout have positioned the Kingdom well and helped it play an important media role in the region. However\, these assets are no longer sufficient to claim influence in an increasingly entangled and congested Arab mediascape” \n \n \nPointing to the rise of competing media ventures like the heavy weight Al Jazeera and the wide adoption of new and social media\, Zayani concluded that “the unfolding of the political reality of the Middle East will be deeply intertwined with the reconfiguration of the media dynamics in the region.” \n \n \nMohamed Zayani’s works include Reading the Symptom (1999)\, Arab Satellite Television and Politics in the Middle East (2004)\, The Al Jazeera Phenomenon: Critical Perspectives on New Arab Media (2005) and The Culture of Al Jazeera: Inside an Arab Media Giant(2007).  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/mohamed-zayani-lectures-transnational-arab-media/
CATEGORIES:CIRS Faculty Lectures,Dialogue Series,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_21881_16716_1414680612-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110125T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110125T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141026T131128Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105504Z
UID:10000988-1295942400-1295978400@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Wikileaks and Intelligence Reform
DESCRIPTION:Carl Ford was Assistant Secretary of State and head of the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research under President George W. Bush. He gave a lecture at Georgetown’s Qatar campus on the topic\, “Wikileaks and Intelligence Reform” on January 25\, 2011. Ford is a Professorial Lecturer with Georgetown University’s Master of Science in Foreign Service (MSFS) program. \n \n \nFord began the discussion by saying that Wikileaks’ “basic assumption is that transparency should be complete and that every citizen should know everything that goes on in the government.” With such resounding ideals\, “it’s hard to argue against the people’s right to know\,” but the freedom of speech principles that Wikileaks is purporting to promote are naive and impractical in the current political climate. Ford argued that “complete transparency” is an idealistic principle that is sound in theory\, but cannot be sustained in practice. There are many incidences where secrecy can and should be used as leverage in political negotiations that serve the national interest. “The fact is\,” he said\, “there are things that have to remain secret – not because we want to hide it from people\, but because it is a practical matter\, for national security interests.” \n \n \nThe Wikileaks saga has brought into public debate a variety of core questions about the relationship between societies and governments. Ford said that “this is an issue that is extremely important and extremely complex. There are major principles at stake: freedom of speech\, press freedoms\, and the ability for people to know what their government is doing.” These issues are fundamental to democracy and remain the tenets of any liberal state\, but\, Ford said\, Wikileaks has hijacked and capitalized upon them as an excuse for testing the U.S. democratic system to its limit and doing untold damage to methods of information gathering and sharing. \n \n \nFord argued that although Wikileaks may have had good intentions when it exposed private and classified documents\, its plan has backfired. Ford said that “Wikileaks is going to have the opposite effect of what the people who support it want.” As such\, Wikileaks is self-destructive\, counterproductive\, and a short-term phenomenon that will have negative effects on transparency. \n \n \n“I guarantee you\,” Ford said\, “that Wikileaks has already had a major impact on tightening down of security procedures and the flow of information\, not only with our policy-makers\, but within the intelligence community.” This means that the United States as well as other countries will necessarily become even less transparent than they were in the past. In future\, reporters will find it hard to find sources and those who do leak sensitive material will face criminal charges. \n \n \nIn conclusion\, any idea of future intelligence reform has been dealt a major set-back. “The knowledge of the U.S. intelligence community and the quality of our analysis will suffer because of Wikileaks. The information itself was not very important\, but the damage it did to the process was what concerned most people in the intelligence community.”   \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/wikileaks-and-intelligence-reform/
CATEGORIES:American Studies,Dialogue Series,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_22081_19996_1414919603-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110117T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110117T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141022T131829Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105507Z
UID:10000809-1295251200-1295287200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Seymour Hersh on the Obama and Bush Foreign Policies
DESCRIPTION:Seymour Hersh is a Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist and author on national security issues for the New Yorker magazine. On January 17\, 2011\, he gave a CIRS Distinguished Lecture titled “The Obama/Bush Foreign Policies: Why Can’t America Change?” before an audience of 800 members of the community in Doha. \n \n \nHersh has covered everything from Vietnam to Iraq to Iran to the whole of the Middle East\, and he regularly analyzes current U.S. foreign policy and issues pertaining to military intelligence\, national security and the press. His bestselling books include\, The Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House\, The Dark Side of Camelot\, and\, most recently\, Chain of Command: The Road from 9/11 to Abu Ghraib. \n \n \nCurrently\, Hersh is at work on a new book in which he argues that the heightened sentiments of fear and reprisal after September 11\, 2001\, paved the way for a handful of neo-conservatives to take control of the White House with anti-Islam ideologies and policies. According to Hersh\, the U.S. invasion of Iraq was presented to the public\, both locally and internationally\, as a crusade. The Cheney/Bush administration assumed that most people would back their actions because of the supposed nobility of the cause. “There is a tremendous amount of anti-Muslim feeling in the military community\,” Hersh argued. “It is a crusade\, literally.” What alarmed him most\, Hersh explained\, was not the drastic policy\, but how easy it was to implement. None of the necessary checks and balances was put into place as the public acquiesced and the press became complicit and signed on to the narrative of the “global war on terror” without questioning the underlying motives. \n \n \nThe Obama administration has not made any significant improvements to how the U.S. is handling the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan\, Hersh claimed. Since 2003\, the war in Iraq has been a losing battle and has resulted in a “war of attrition.” Similarly\, the war in Afghanistan is as unsuccessful now for the Americans as it was unwinnable for the Russians in the 1980s. “I truly don’t know any serious officer or special operator or civilian who has been in the war who has any confidence about it. We are not going to prevail in Afghanistan\,” he said. \n \n \nAlthough Obama’s rhetoric is very different from Bush’s\, their policies remain very much aligned\, according to Hersh. Unmanned drones continue to bomb targets in Afghanistan and continue to kill both legitimate targets and noncombatants indiscriminately. Obama is fully aware of the damage being done and yet has not tampered with the existing system nor done anything to stop it. \n \n \nWhen it comes to American citizens being held in countries like Iran\, “we complain bitterly in America about the lack of jurisprudence and the lack of a good legal system and\, yet\, how many people now are still in Guantanamo\, suffering away?” Such double-standards continue to operate and are thoroughly counterproductive. “The truth is\,” Hersh said “if they weren’t Al Qaeda when we captured them\, and most of them were not\, as many of you probably understand\, they are now after seven\, eight\, nine years of being incarcerated without any hearings or any rights.” The insurgency is spreading and is becoming much more violent. Opportunism and morally questionable acts\, Hersh argued\, have been features of American governance for a long time. He said that “After WWII\, we had a secret program of bringing and ‘de-Nazifying’ some of the German scientists who were valuable to our own energy and missile program.” \n \n \nThere was hope that much of the damage done during the Bush era would be fixed when the new administration was sworn in\, but\, Hersh argued\, not much has changed in U.S. foreign policy since Obama took office. Many morally questionable acts like torture\, the use of secret prisons\, assassinations\, and extraordinary renditions have continued unabated. \n \n \nHersh expressed his disappointment in Obama’s inability to learn from the mistakes of the Bush administration. He argued that\, in America\, “We are anti-history […] Why else would we make the same mistake we always make?” Hersh concluded by saying\, “I am stunned and appalled that this president did not do what he said he was going to do.” \n \n \nEarlier in the day\, Hersh was invited to the Georgetown’s Qatar campus and spoke informally to faculty and students. \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator. 
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/seymour-hersh-obama-and-bush-foreign-policies/
CATEGORIES:American Studies,Dialogue Series,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_20391_16541_1413983909-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110111T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110111T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141026T131515Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105520Z
UID:10000989-1294732800-1294768800@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Conspiracy Theories in the Arab World
DESCRIPTION:Matthew Gray\, Senior Lecturer at the Center for Arab and Islamic Studies\, Australian National University in Canberra\, lectured on “Explaining Conspiracy Theories in the Arab World” on January 11\, 2011. \n \n \nGray’s lecture was based on work conducted for his recent book on this topic\, Conspiracy Theories in the Middle East: Sources and Politics (Routledge\, 2010). He argued that because “conspiracy theories are real political language\,” they are worthy of serious study. Although the proliferation of unverified stories is a social phenomenon that can easily fall into the delusional and exaggerated\, they are nonetheless important indicators of social fears and apprehensions and can reveal underlying ideas often ignored by mainstream discourse. \n \n \nThe first daunting task of studying the phenomenon\, Gray said\, is to define what a conspiracy theory is. This is difficult because such theories sometimes turn out to be true or are widely believed to be true. In general terms\, “a conspiracy theory almost always involves absolute secrecy and it nearly always is negative and disadvantages people. It often sounds like it is using a rational argument\, but once you scratch beneath the surface\, there is either a flaw of logic or a factual error.” As such\, conspiracy theories flourish because they tend not to be falsifiable. \n \n \nThere are three main areas that enhance the conditions in which conspiracy theories flourish; these are historical\, ideological\, and state-society drivers. Gray argued that agreement on certain historical narratives can build a support network between the conspiracy theorist and the receiver. “History is important for laying the foundations of a conspiracy theory” and allows for a reappraisal of historical values and impacts and thus is a means of political engagement. \n \n \nIdeology is a second main driver for conspiracy theories in Gray’s view. He explained that ideologies such as state-led development\, Arab socialism\, Arab nationalism\, democracy\, and Islamism\, have failed to capture the imagination of the majority of people and\, so\, in the absence of a compelling ideology\, conspiracy theories are rife. \n \n \nThe third factor revolves around problems in the state-society relationship in the Arab World. Gray described the Middle East as a place where opaque governing structures operate at the elite level of politics. It is an area where complicated bureaucratic networks and repressive state institutions often thrive. Under these conditions\, Gray noted that “societies have trouble understanding how people in power operate” and this fosters the perfect environment for conspiracy theories to emerge. \n \n \nSometimes the reverse is true and conspiracy theories can suit those in positions of power. Indeed\, “the state and the political elite can actually be the narrators of conspiracy theories\,” he said. State-endorsed conspiracy theories can divert attention from other explanations or other pressing issues. “Conspiracy theories can help in the construction of a counter fact to confuse or disorient people. People get bombarded not just with factual information\, but with bias\, with conspiracy theories\, and after a while\, especially in a strict authoritarian context\, it becomes difficult to know what the truth is\, what is safe to say and not say\,” explained Gray. \n \n \nConcluding the lecture\, Gray explained that conspiracy theories will continue to flourish in the wake of global television stations\, new media\, and communication technologies. “The paradox of communications technology is that just as you can spread fact and education very easily over satellite TV and the internet\, you also get a fragmentation of knowledge and authority and it becomes very difficult for a lay listener or viewer to differentiate between someone speaking with formal\, traditional authority and someone merely claiming to have authority\,” he said.  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/conspiracy-theories-arab-world/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_22076_20001_1414919516-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110110T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110110T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141023T145859Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210902T085827Z
UID:10000823-1294646400-1294682400@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:A Changing Kingdom: Saudi Arabia in 2030
DESCRIPTION:Thomas W. Lippman\, former Middle East bureau chief of The Washington Post and adjunct senior fellow of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Middle East Institute\, was invited to Doha as part of the CIRS “Nuclear Question in the Middle East” working group meeting. In conjunction with the meeting\, Lippman delivered a CIRS Monthly Dialogue on January 10\, 2011. on the topic “A Changing Kingdom: Saudi Arabia in 2030.” \n \n \nThe subject of Lippman’s lecture revolved around likely future shifts in the religious\, strategic\, and economic principles of Saudi Arabia. There has been much literature written on the kingdom\, especially since September 11\, 2001\, but\, he argued\, most of these are exaggerated accounts of radical Islam and extremism. In his new book\, Saudi Arabia on the Edge: The Perilous Future of an American Ally\, Lippman advocates a more sober approach to the country’s future\, rather than dwelling on events of the past. Over the next two decades\, Lippman argued\, there will be seismic demographic and economic shifts that will affect all aspects of life in the kingdom. “Saudi Arabia has to make some very difficult and very expensive decisions in order to sustain economic growth and to maintain a basic standard of life for the population\,” he said. \n \n \nListing some of the demographic and economic trends that are likely to occur\, Lippman noted that “the population will grow probably by 70%\, but it will grow at a slower rate than in the past.” The reason for this\, he said\, was because “women are collectively better educated than any previous generation and in Saudi Arabia\, as anywhere in the developing world\, better educate women marry later and have fewer children.” Because more women will enter the workforce\, working women need a certain degree of personal mobility and will need to be able to drive legally. In the long run\, he said\, “Saudi Arabia cannot afford to educate all those women as it is doing\, at great cost\, and not recoup any of the economic output from that investment.” \n \n \nFurther\, the current cost of living in Saudi Arabia is already extremely high and will only increase over the next few years. As such\, it will become increasingly difficult to sustain large families in such an inflationary environment. Although Saudi Arabia is traditionally oil-rich\, “the population has been growing faster than the GDP\,” and so\, Lippman argued\, “the country will face the beginnings of what will be a difficult and expensive struggle to provide the population with basic necessities such as food\, water\, housing\, and electricity.” A major consequence of the housing shortage is that the entire traditional way of life in Saudi Arabia\, which is “based on living in the family compound\, or in the village\,” is going to change and we will see more people living in high rise apartment buildings in urban areas. \n \n \nLippman predicted that on the basis of the trends he discussed\, “Saudi Arabia in twenty years\, or at least by mid century\, will inevitably be a more open\, moderate\, and educated country. It will be more like the rest of the developed world.” This is especially true since “the greatest test of the government and its ambitions was the Al Qaeda uprising” and its ultimate failure because of lack of popular support. \n \n \nIn conclusion\, Lippman cautioned that unless there are some serious changes made\, Saudi Arabia will be overwhelmed by its own demography\, economy\, and climate. These changes are not exactly a matter of choice; “the whole way of thinking about life and urban development is going to be inevitably transformed by the forces of demography and economics in Saudi Arabia.” \n \n \nLippman has been studying and writing about Middle East affairs for thirty five years. A frequent guest and commentator on television in the United States and in the Middle East\, he is the author of five books about the Arab world\, Islam and U.S. foreign policy and of several journal articles on related subjects. \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/changing-kingdom-saudi-arabia-2030/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Race & Society
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_21966_16726_1414681814-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110109T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110110T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20140925T041051Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105604Z
UID:10000800-1294560000-1294682400@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:The Nuclear Question in the Middle East Working Group II
DESCRIPTION:On January 9–10\, 2011\, CIRS concluded the second meeting of its “Nuclear Question in the Middle East” working group. The working group participants were invited back to Doha to deliver their chapter submissions and to critique each others’ findings and conclusions. The papers will be collected by CIRS in an edited volume titled\, The Nuclear Question in the Middle East (Oxford University Press/Hurst\, 2012). Seven international experts on the field discussed a variety of topics related to the study. \n\nThe participants stated that nuclear energy will always be considered of dual character and although many countries claim that they will establish a peaceful civilian program\, there always remains suspicion that the program can be used for purposes of proliferation. Because a civilian nuclear program can be modified into a military one regardless of the original intention\, there are a number of strict international nonproliferation laws and treaties that countries must adhere to in order to allay international suspicions. \n\nDeliberating different models of regime survival strategies\, the participants indicated that these have a bearing on why some countries have nuclear programs\, while others steer clear of such projects. According to such “nuclear logics\,” countries that wish to internationalize and integrate into the global economy by attracting foreign investment tend to avoid acquiring nuclear capabilities. Inward looking models\, however\, tend to want to acquire nuclear programs as they are less dependent on the global economy and as such do not adhere to international treaties. Further to macro level analysis of states’ nuclear ambitions\, the participants also discussed the more detailed minutiae of such projects. As part of this analysis\, the participants spotlighted the social psychology and the role of individual leaders in nuclear decision-making. Thus the group concluded that personal characteristics of decision-makers are key variables in understanding why and when states pursue nuclear power. \n\nThe nuclear programs of many countries of the Middle East were presented as case studies\, including Israel\, Egypt\, Libya\, Turkey\, Iran\, and the UAE. Countries such as the UAE\, for example\, cannot rely on their own oil supplies for their high energy intensive petro chemical and water desalinization industries. The energy and electricity demands in these countries are extremely high. Many argue that these countries must pursue a combination of hydrocarbon\, renewable energy sources such as hydro and solar\, as well as nuclear energy in order to meet their needs. In order to be in full transparency\, the Abu Dhabi nuclear power program has been established in accordance with international treaties and protocols and by openly inviting foreign know-how and observers. \n\nConcluding the second day\, the participants discussed some overall themes that emerged from the meeting and a general theoretical overview of the nuclear issue in the Middle East. As an overarching framework\, the chapters will address the issue of Middle East proliferation/nuclearization within the scope of the Iranian and Israeli shadows as well as the opaque relationship between civilian and security programs.  \n\nParticipants and Discussants:\n\nZahra Babar\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarAvner Cohen\, Woodrow Wilson International Center for ScholarsJohn T. Crist\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarMehran Kamrava\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarMustafa Kibaroglu\, Bilkent UniversityThomas W. Lippman\, Council on Foreign Relations and Middle East InstituteGiacomo Luciani\, Gulf Research CenterMari Luomi\, Finnish Institute of International AffairsSuzi Mirgani\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarMaria Rost Rublee\, University of AucklandDebra Shushan\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarEtel Solingen\, University of California\, Irvine \n\nClick here for the working group’s agendaRead more about the research initiative \n\nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/nuclear-question-middle-east-working-group-ii/
CATEGORIES:Environmental Studies,Focused Discussions,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/09/events_16656_11221_1411618251-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20101213T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20101213T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20141022T132742Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210902T085846Z
UID:10000915-1292227200-1292263200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Zalmay Khalilzad on America and the Middle East: Future Challenges and Opportunities
DESCRIPTION:Zalmay Khalilzad was invited to deliver a CIRS Distinguished Lecture on the topic\, “America and the Middle East: Future Challenges and Opportunities” on December 13\, 2010\, in Doha\, Qatar. Khalilzad served as U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations (2007-2009)\, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq (2005-2007)\, and U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan (2003-2005). \n \n \nThe Ambassador spoke about the relationship between the United States and the Middle East within two different contexts. The first\, he said\, “is the framework of thinking about the Middle East after 9/11\, which was a decisive moment in American history in terms of its approach to this part of the world” and the second is the “transition to a new approach\, which I think is in formation.” The word “transition\,” he said\, “implies continuity and change” of current policies as the United States adjusts to shifts in the global order. \n \n \nKhalilzad defined the broader Middle East as stretching from Pakistan in the east to Morocco in the west and argued that in order to understand the relationship between the United States and the Middle East\, it was first necessary to begin with observations regarding the impact of the events of September 11\, 2001. Although the Ambassador pointed out that America is a heterogeneous country that is made up of a multitude of ideologies and schools of thought\, he noted that “9/11 had a big impact on American thinking – on official American thinking.” \n \n \nOne significant change\, Khalilzad argued\, was that “9/11 made the United States think of this broad region geopolitically\,” and as having real and lasting impacts on national and international security. The challenges of this region\, he said\, have the ability to reverberate around the world. In today’s integrated world\, regional problems have great consequences for the entire international community. “In the post 9/11 environment\,” Khalilzad said\, “working towards a region that would be more at peace with itself and with the world became a strong tendency orientation in the U.S. foreign policy debate discussion and doctrines.” \n \n \nIt was within this framework that Khalilzad said the United States ventured into Iraq. “I believe Iraq\, although it still remains in a difficult transition\, is in an improved situation than it was at times in its recent past.” This is because the United States worked to “encourage a process of democratization and a belief that democratization through elections and support of civil society organizations was going to lead to a decrease in the unhappiness of the people” which produces extremism\, he argued. \n \n \nOther issues that impact the stability of the Middle East region’s development\, the Ambassador said\, is the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict; the problems in Afghanistan that transpired to be far more complex than the United States originally thought; and the lingering threat of Iran. \n \n \nTaking all of these regional conflicts into account\, Khalilzad spoke of how the United States has modified its approach to the Middle East. He argued that the Iraqi challenge is currently less than it was in the past\, but the challenge of Iran and Afghanistan are becoming increasingly prominent. The challenge of terrorism and extremism has lessened in some areas\, but\, he warned\, has spread and became stronger in other parts of the world. Other than these issues\, East Asia has become an area of increasing geopolitical importance with the rise of China and India\, and the challenges imposed by North Korea. The Ambassador said that “as a result of the shifts in the geopolitical issues in the world\, there is going to be a greater focus on the issues of East Asia both in terms of diplomacy and in terms of military strategy for the longer term to adjust to the balance of power changes that are taking place.” \n \n \nLooking to which issues will become important in the future\, Khalilzad argued that “although political challenges remain\, it is the future of the economy – particularly the US economy – that has gained in relative importance.” He continued by saying that “the U.S. position in the world ultimately rests on its economic and military power\, and its military power cannot be sustained without its economic power being such to be able to afford the kind of capabilities that its global role so far has required.” \n \n \nConcluding the lecture\, the Ambassador said that these political and economic problems will necessarily result in adjustments in future U.S. policy. These adjustments will include “a greater emphasis on stability in order not to produce more demands on resources and effort on the part of the United States\,” he said.  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/zalmay-khalilzad-america-and-middle-east-future-challenges-and-opportunities/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_20396_16546_1413984462-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20101211T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20101212T180000
DTSTAMP:20260405T002114
CREATED:20140925T043010Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T105615Z
UID:10000802-1292054400-1292176800@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Political Economy of the Gulf Working Group II
DESCRIPTION:On December 11–12\, 2010\, CIRS concluded the second session of its “Political Economy of the Gulf” research initiative with a two-day working group meeting that took place at Georgetown University in Qatar. Several experts on the political economy of the Gulf were invited back to Doha to present their chapter submissions and to discuss their original research during the two-day meeting. In the coming months\, CIRS will gather the chapters in order to submit them for publication as an edited volume titled\, The Political Economy of the Persian Gulf (Oxford University Press/Hurst\, 2012). \n \n \nThe meeting was divided into several sections\, including discussion on the demographic aspects of the GCC; the GCC monetary union; the “Dubai Model” of economic diversification; attempts at establishing knowledge-based economies in the GCC; the effects of rentierism on state autonomy; sovereign wealth funds; and Islamic banking models across the GCC. \n \n \nThe working group members discussed all of these issues within the overarching framework of rentierism and the relationships of mutual interdependence that become established between states and societies. Mutually beneficial rentier arrangements have guided the means in which the GCC countries have formed their oil-based economies and labor relations. \n \n \nThe working group participants examined the fact that over the past few years\, the GCC states have become increasingly powerful actors on the global scene\, and have become important markets for foreign investment. In order to adapt to changes within the global order\, the concept of knowledge-based economies has become integral to the GCC states’ ambitious economic diversification attempts. In each GCC state\, huge budgets have been allocated to programs that concentrate on issues of education\, scientific research\, increased flow of information\, and investment in human capital. \n \n \nThe transition from oil-based economies to knowledge-based has had different levels of success in the various GCC states. The failure of the “Dubai Model” of economic development has meant that Dubai’s financial strategies\, which were once seen as leading examples of economic progress in the region\, are now being organized along more cautious and less ambitious investment plans. The GCC states’ various diversification plans\, whether successful or not\, have signaled official acknowledgment of the necessity of investing in a future of well-educated and qualified workforces that are able to compete in internationally. \n \n \nMuch of the budgets allocated to these diversification projects are funded by the GCC states’ sovereign wealth funds (SWF)\, which also came under examination by the working group members. Sovereign wealth funds are often constituted of staggering amounts of money that are used to sponsor large-scale projects in the interest of a country’s long-term development. \n \n \nThe participants discussed further financial considerations regarding “Islamic banking\,” which was reported to be more developed in the Gulf region than anywhere else in the world. The participants examined Islamic banking methods across the various GCC states and compared them with those operating across Iran. \n \n \nMembers of the working group also looked at the political and economic possibilities of the GCC states forming a monetary union and how moving away from the U.S. dollar peg may or may not result in global imbalances in the value of the dollar. The participants concluded that many of the economic and political efforts currently underway in the GCC fall under a larger plan to establish the Gulf states as leading international powers. The GCC states have attempted to enhance their political stability both regionally and internationally and to increase their international bargaining power. \n \n \n\nRead more about this research initiative\n\n \n  \n \n \nParticipants and Discussants: \n \n \nAlexis Antoniades\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarZahra Babar\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarJohn T. Crist\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarChristopher Davidson\, Durham UniversityNada Eissa\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarSteffen Hertog\, London School of EconomicsMehran Kamrava\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarFred Lawson\, Mills CollegeSuzi Mirgani\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarDjavad Salehi-Isfahani\, Virginia Tech UniversityJean-François Seznec\, Georgetown UniversityNadia Talpur\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarKristian Coates Ulrichsen\, London School of EconomicsRodney Wilson\, Durham UniversityMohamed Zayani\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/political-economy-gulf-working-group-ii/
CATEGORIES:Focused Discussions,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/09/events_124686_11231_1493112856-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR