BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Center for International and Regional Studies - ECPv6.15.15//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Center for International and Regional Studies
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/Moscow
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0300
TZOFFSETTO:+0400
TZNAME:MSD
DTSTART:20080329T230000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0400
TZOFFSETTO:+0300
TZNAME:MSK
DTSTART:20081025T230000
END:STANDARD
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
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20091005T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20091005T180000
DTSTAMP:20260413T052252
CREATED:20141023T162104Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T114917Z
UID:10000955-1254729600-1254765600@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Robert Wirsing on the Af-Pak Misadventure
DESCRIPTION:Robert Wirsing\, Visiting Professor of International Relations at the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\, delivered the October CIRS Monthly Dialogue on the topic of “The Af-Pak Misadventure: Where is America’s ‘Long War’ Heading?…And Why?” \n \n \nIntroducing the issues\, Wirsing noted that he did not necessarily approve of the designation “Af-Pak” but drew attention to its formal use by the United States government as part of its wider international relations terminology. \n \n \nThe lecture was premised on four main questions related to the current situations in Afghanistan and Pakistan: 1) What is the war in Afghanistan all about? 2) What are the five obstacles confronting the Obama administration in the “Af-Pak” war? 3) What are Obama’s fundamental options in this war? and; 4) What should the Obama administration do to bring this war to a conclusion?  \n \n \nView the presentation from lecture below: \n \nThe Af-Pak Misadventure: Where is America’s ‘Long War’ Heading?…And Why?  from Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar  \nIn order to introduce a general background of the current military operations taking place in the region\, Wirsing gave some figures related to the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan\, which is made-up of United States\, NATO\, and other allies. “The U.S. currently has approximately 68\,000 troops either deployed or on route to Afghanistan” and “NATO has about 38\,000 troops” so “there is a total of 106\,000 troops of the ISAF forces in Afghanistan.” He noted that it was more difficult to record the exact number of Taliban insurgents\, but “back in 2007\, the New York Times estimate was 10\,000 fighters\, but only 3\,000 full-time\, which is not very much in a country the size of Afghanistan. The government in Kabul more recently\, in February 2009\, gave a figure of 10-15\,000.” Nonetheless\, Wirsing noted that “no estimate suggests that this is a vast insurgency.” \n \n \nWirsing also stated the costs of fighting the war in Afghanistan by saying that “the United States and NATO together\, essentially the Bush administration\, from November 2001 to December 2008\, had spent overtly 281 billion dollars on the war in Afghanistan. Covert expenditures would enlarge that substantially.” \n \n \nIn order to answer the question “What is the war in Afghanistan all about?” Wirsing noted that he had to clarify what was driving the insurgency as well as U.S. policy in the region. “A very common explanation is Islamic extremism” and Islamic madrassa indoctrinated fanaticism. But Wirsing argued that “religious extremism is not the sole or even most important driver” of the war and would go so far as “to dismiss religion and religious extremism almost entirely.” He argued that “the madrassa issue is a red herring and always has been a distraction from what is really going on in this region.” Other reasons for the war that have been proposed are factional tribal identities\, the rise of mercenary insurgents fighting the war for a wage\, revenge and hatred of America\, and a traditional aversion to occupying forces. \n \n \nInsofar as the main drivers of American policy are concerned\, Wirsing argued that “America has a much broader agenda in Central Asia than chasing Al Qaeda; its agenda has a lot to do with geography.” As such\, he introduced into the discussion “the enormous importance of energy security\, energy resources\, oil\, and gas.” These issues\, he said\, were the primary reasons for American presence in Afghanistan. Wirsing argued that Afghanistan’s strategic position\, bordering a number of energy producing countries\, means that it is a potentially important conduit between South and Central Asia. These resources could be exploited and transported rather than being contained\, as they currently are\, between the two giants of China and Russia. Wirsing quoted from U.S. legislation regarding the region\, entitled the Silk Road Strategy Act\, which details United States significant long-term interests in the region from security to energy and economic development. This Act outlines American policy regarding development of infrastructure in Central Asia\, such as pipelines\, transportation routes\, and export opportunities for otherwise landlocked nations. Wirsing argued that “it is odd that much of the debate that goes on in North America generally\, so often omits mention of energy\, oil\, and gas\, which I regard as hugely important.” He pointed out the many tactics in place for “ensuring American and Western access to these tremendous resources\, the potential of which could be vast\,” possibly up to $15 trillion in petroleum and natural gas resources in the Caspian region alone. Wirsing emphasized that “Afghanistan’s strategic importance goes way beyond containment of a terrorist threat and it also implies a prolonged Western presence.” \n \n \nIn describing the “the five obstacles confronting the Obama administration in the Af-Pak war\,” Wirsing listed them as a) Waning public\, congressional\, and Democratic Party support in America b) Disenchantment with the Afghan government in Kabul magnified by election fraud and its undermined legitimacy c) Pakistan’s less than perfect fit as America’s ally in the “war on terrorism” d) The impracticality of Obama’s promise of greater regional collaboration and finally\, e) The need for Obama to avoid the appearance of weakness and indecisiveness. “If Obama chooses to do nothing or chooses to exit or reduce American forces\, it might appear as a failure of political will in America’s Af-Pak policy.” \n \n \nWirsing outlined the options open to the Obama administration\, including the most viable in his opinion which is to escalate by adding more troops. He argued that the only option he believes to be viable is to back a troop surge in Afghanistan and put an end to an already lengthy war. \n \n \nAccording to Wirsing\, the short-term solutions open to the Obama administration include an immediate troop surge; a shift from offensive to defensive counter-insurgency by withdrawing troops from exposed areas to selected urban centers to provide security for as much of Afghan population as possible; prioritizing a major reduction in civilian casualties by suspending unmanned drone attacks; fully implementing the Congressionally endorsed increase in aid to Pakistan; and\, finally\, encouraging Pakistani cooperation in Afghanistan. \n \n \nThe long-term initiatives that the Obama administration could implement range from pursuing opportunities for talks with the Taliban elements over power-sharing to endorsing the Iran\, Pakistan\, India (IPI) gas pipeline\, and urging consideration of a civilian nuclear agreement with Pakistan akin to that reached with India. \n \n \nDr. Wirsing is Visiting Professor at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service at Qatar. A specialist on South Asian politics and international relations\, he has made over forty research trips to the South Asian region since 1965. His publications include:Pakistan’s Security Under Zia\, 1977-1988 (St. Martin’s Press\, 1991); India\, Pakistan\, and the Kashmir Dispute (St. Martin’s Press\, 1994); Kashmir in the Shadow of War (M. E. Sharpe\, 2002); Religious Radicalism & Security in South Asia\, co-editor (Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies\, 2004); Ethnic Diasporas & Great Power Strategies in Asia\, co-editor (India Research Press\, 2007); and Baloch Nationalism and the Geopolitics of Energy Resources: The Changing Context of Separatism in Pakistan (Carlisle: Strategic Studies Institute\, U.S. Army War College\, April 2008). His recent research focuses primarily on the politics and diplomacy of natural resources (water and energy) in South Asia. \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani. Suzi is CIRS Publications Coordinator.
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/robert-wirsing-af-pak-misadventure/
CATEGORIES:American Studies,Dialogue Series,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_20691_19786_1414081264-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20091011T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20091014T180000
DTSTAMP:20260413T052252
CREATED:20141027T092544Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210902T103657Z
UID:10000878-1255248000-1255543200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:CIRS and GRC Al-Jisr Project
DESCRIPTION:On October 11–14\, 2009\, the Al-Jisr working group participants were invited to Doha by CIRS and the Gulf Research Center (GRC) to conduct the project’s second meeting. Supported by the European Commission\, Al-Jisr is a two-year project on “Public Diplomacy and Outreach devoted to the European Union and EU-GCC Relations.” The initiative aims to enhance public as well as professional knowledge and understanding of the European Union and its policies and institutions among GCC citizens.  \n \n \nOver the course of two years\, the Al-Jisr working group participants are to conduct research on a multitude of issues related to the EU and GCC ranging from higher education analysis to political reform and trade relations between the two entities.  \n \n \nDuring the Doha meeting\, Al-Jisr project leaders Christian Koch and Giacomo Luciani gave an overview of the meeting’s main aims and objectives\, citing it to be comprehensive research and the results of which will be invaluable to EU and GCC policy toward each other.  \n \n \nMost of the topics under discussion were focused on outlining the economic status of GCC countries and in-depth analysis of particular economic enterprises ranging from oil and gas production and exports to exchange rate policies and joint venture formations between the EU and GCC countries. In addition\, a wide range of related subjects such as economic diversification into alternative and nuclear energies\, tourism\, and other socio-economic initiatives were also discussed. At the project’s conclusion\, all the chapters will be published as an edited volume which will be instrumental in guiding future EU-GCC policies.  \n \n \n  \n \n \nParticipants and Discussants include: \n \n \nChristian Koch\, GRCF\, GenevaGiacomo Luciani\, GRC Al-Jisr ProjectZahra Babar\, CIRS\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarSelen Guerin\, The Centre for European Policy Studies\, BrusselsJohn Sasuya\, GRCJoerg Beutel\, Konstanz University of Applied SciencesAli Aissaoui\, APICORPHans-Georg Müller\, GTZ\, DamascusMehran Kamrava\, CIRS\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar Carol Lancaser\, Georgetown UniversityEckart Wörtz\, GRC\, Dubai Attiya Ahmad\, Duke Islamic Studies CenterJocelyn Mitchell\, Georgetown UniversityNate Hodson\, Princeton UniversityRachida Amsaghrou\, GRCF\, GenevaAna Echagüe\, FRIDE\, MadridRaja Alkami\, Asian Studies CenterShannon McNulty\, Texas A&M University at QatarKenneth Wilson\, National Research Foundation\, UAESteffen Hertog\, Sciences Po\, ParisKhalid Almezaini\, University of ExeterEdward Burke\, FRIDE\, MadridAbdelkader Latrèche\, Government of Planning\, QatarNatalia Alshakhanbeh\, World Trade Organization\, GenevaSuzi Mirgani\, CIRS\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in QatarAbdullah Baabood\, GRC Cambridge Radhika Kanchana\, Sciences Po\, Paris \n \n \n  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, CIRS Publications Coordinator
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/cirs-and-grc-al-jisr-project/
CATEGORIES:Focused Discussions,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_20971_20176_1414401944-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20091012T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20091012T180000
DTSTAMP:20260413T052252
CREATED:20141022T145049Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T114906Z
UID:10000926-1255334400-1255370400@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Carol Lancaster on Wealth and Power in the New International Order
DESCRIPTION:Carol Lancaster\, Interim Dean of the Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University in Washington\, DC\, was invited to Doha to give a CIRS Distinguished Lecture on the topic of “Wealth and Power in the ‘New International Order.’” Lancaster was introduced by Lamia Adi\, a sophomore GU-Q student and President of the DC-Qatar Forum\, which fosters inter-cultural dialogue between students on the DC and the Qatar campuses. \n \n \nIn addition to an extensive career in government\, Lancaster has been a consultant for the United Nations\, the World Bank\, and numerous other organizations. She serves on the board of the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy\, Vital Voices\, the Society for International Development\, and the advisory board for Center for Global Development. \n \n \nBeginning the evening’s lecture\, Lancaster said that the “basic message today is that we are living in a slow-moving and fundamental transition in wealth and power in the world\, involving changes in the distribution of wealth\, a redefinition of power\, and challenges to world order.”  \n \n \nIt was necessary\, Lancaster argued\, to answer three broad questions in order to elaborate upon the reasons for these paradigmatic shifts\, including: 1) What was the nature of the “old world order”? 2) What changes have occurred that have contributed to a different world today? and 3) What are the consequences for international balances of power\, wealth\, and order? \n \n \nThe “old world order\,” Lancaster noted\, was largely defined as being state-centric; states were the major actors\, and had the ability to use their power to effective ends. The two “super powers” of the United States and the Soviet Union that dominated the international scene for many decades of the twentieth century were prime examples. As such\, Lancaster argued that one of the markers for the end of the “old world order” could be defined as the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. She added that\, to a certain extent\, we miss “the certainties and the clarity that made the old world order\, if not bearable\, at least\, understandable and often predictable.” In the “new world order\,” Lancaster argued\, “the state has not ended and is not going to end. States are still the major actors in the world but military force\, as the United States has demonstrated in the last four or five years\, is not enough to control events.” \n \n \nFurther\, in the “old world order\,” wealth across the globe\, Lancaster said\, was concentrated and imbalanced and still is\, to a certain degree\, but not as sharply as it was in the past. The hemispheric divides that were characterized by a rich North and a poor South are now being blurred as there has been tremendous economic and social progress in many of the countries that were once considered “Third World” and under-developed. Lancaster argued that “not only has there been progress\, but that progress has been enough in some parts of the world so that the old names of ‘the rich North’ and ‘the poor South’ are no longer relevant\, and we have a much more diverse world” as a result. This\, she maintained\, has lead to increasing international economic inter-dependence between nations\, which is mostly beneficial\, but is also a key factor in the current global economic recessions. \n \n \nView the presentation from lecture below: \n \nWealth and Power in the New World Order  from Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar \nAdumbrating the causes that have lead to these changes\, Lancaster said that the most important factors were related to revolutionary advancements in technology; achievements in global education and access to knowledge along with an increase in life expectancy; developments in a country’s capacity that makes full use of its human and natural resources; and growing prosperity that can be considered both an effect and a cause of these factors. Although we think we are living in a time that is marked by various global conflicts\, Lancaster said “the data show that the number of conflicts – civil conflicts in particular – have declined since the early 90s” and so the new world order can be largely characterized by relative political stability. \n \n \nAnother major change that will define the “new world order\,” Lancaster noted\, is related to demography and the changing nature of the world’s population. Current prosperous nations have largely ageing populations\, whilst developing countries have youthful populations\, which will necessarily shift the entire international economic and social patterns of the future. With an estimated world population of 9 billion in 2050\, this will have dramatic effect on resources and climate. \n \n \nConcluding the lecture\, Lancaster argued that globalization in the form of international social and economic integration has been vital to the de-concentration and distribution of wealth and the redefinition and decentralization of power. As a result\, we have seen the dynamic emergence and influence of non-state actors\, including international organizations – both benevolent and malevolent\, informal networks\, and individuals connecting with one another across boundaries. There is strength and yet\, at the same time\, great vulnerability in such an interdependent world. \n \n \nDr. Lancaster is Interim Dean of the School of Foreign Service in Washington\, DC. She is also a Professor of Politics in the School of Foreign Service with a joint appointment in the Department of Government. \n \n \nShe has been a Carnegie Fellow and a recipient of a fellowship from the American Council of Learned Societies. She has also been a Congressional Fellow\, a Fulbright Fellow and a visiting fellow at the Institute for International Economics and (currently) the Center for Global Development. \n \n \nDr. Lancaster has also had an extensive career in government. She was the Deputy Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development from 1993 to 1996. She worked at the U.S. State Department as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs from 1980-81 and for the Policy Planning Staff from 1977-80. In addition\, she has been a Congressional Fellow and worked for the Office of Management and Budget. \n \n \nShe has been a consultant for the United Nations\, the World Bank and numerous other organizations. She serves on the board of the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy\, Vital Voices\, the Society for International Development and the advisory board for Center for Global Development. \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani. Suzi is CIRS Publications Coordinator.
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/carol-lancaster-wealth-and-power-new-international-order/
CATEGORIES:American Studies,Dialogue Series,Distingushed Lectures,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/10/events_20431_16576_1413989449-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20091025T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20091025T180000
DTSTAMP:20260413T052252
CREATED:20141026T140758Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T114900Z
UID:10001001-1256457600-1256493600@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Mehran Kamrava Lectures to HEC School of Management\, Paris
DESCRIPTION:Mehran Kamrava\, CIRS Director and Interim Dean of the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\, lectured to a group of French scholars from the HEC on the Geopolitics of the Gulf. Kamrava gave a broad overview of the relationships between the Gulf states and how these associations are shaped by the geopolitics of the region. \n \n \nThrough a series of topographic and geopolitical maps\, Kamrava looked at how the Gulf region has progressed into a series of nation states in the post-Ottoman period. Many of these countries were voluntarily under the tutelage of British protection as a means to safeguard their interests against Iran. He argued that the Gulf states gained their independence at various periods in the twentieth century\, the oldest being the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia\, which was established in the 1930s. The UAE\, Qatar\, and Bahrain all gained their independence in the 1970s\, after Britain vacated the areas east of the Suez Canal.  \n \n \nView the presentation from lecture below: \n \nGeopolitics of the Gulf  from Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar \nAs such\, most of the Gulf states came into existence relatively recently\, although the tribes and peoples that inhabit these areas are ancient groupings who have lived for centuries in sporadic fishing and pearling villages. In the past\, there were no major urban centers but merely villages where wealthy families were later to emerge as the merchant classes and became the rulers of their regions. Kamrava maintained that “the national youth of these countries has significant consequences regarding economic development\, the patterns of state-society relationships\, and how political leaders assert their rule over their societies and the kinds of vision that they are able to articulate. These are recent political entities with very recent political histories.” \n \n \nBy the 1950s\, the Gulf states become tremendously resource-wealthy\, with an abundance of exploitable natural resources. Therefore\, Kamrava argued\, rentierism\, or “the rent and the interest that they accrued from the sale of oil\, become their economic mainstay.” As such\, “the state-building in these countries is consistent with economic penetration of the West. If you look at the modern map of the region\, particularly in places like Saudi Arabia\, you see that state-building is simultaneous with massive amounts of wealth being pumped into the economy.” \n \n \nIn terms of existing boundaries\, there are still several border disputes between many of the Gulf states. One major dispute\, Kamrava noted\, exists between Kuwait\, Iraq\, and Saudi Arabia. Although in recent years these border disputes have not erupted into open warfare\, this was precisely the reason for Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990. \n \n \nTurning to economic issues\, Kamrava called attention to the increasing projected demand for oil in the coming decades\, with the estimated 21.7 million bbl/d (barrels a day) that was being produced in the Gulf region in 2000 rising to 30.7 million bbl/d by 2010 and 42.9 million bbl/d by 2020. The Gulf’s share of world production is estimated to rise from 28 percent in 2000 to 35 percent in 2020. Not surprisingly\, with very small population sizes\, in recent decades\, the Gulf states have registered some of the highest GNP & GDP average annual growth rates in the world. \n \n \nMassive economic wealth has not made these states immune to the global economic downturn. In fact\, according to Kamrava\, the GCC state’s exposure to the global financial crisis has hit six areas particularly hard: \n \n \n\nDirect banking sector exposure to toxic assets;\nSudden stop/reversal in foreign capital inflows;\nWeaker non-commodity export growth;\nPlunge in commodity prices\, most notably crude oil; and\,\nFaltering demand for energy-intensive industrial and building materials.\n\n \nKamrava noted that there has been a 60 percent fall in GCC hydrocarbons revenue in 2009\, to around $200 billion. This\, he argued\, has had five notable consequences. It has\, first and foremost\, led to a sharp decline in liquidity and assets that fueled the 2002-2009 business growth spurt. Second\, there has been a steady growth deceleration in all economic sectors. Third\, there has also been a steady decline in inflation\, especially in real estate and other consumer indices\, leading to a fourth consequence\, namely a wave of consolidation across several sectors\, particularly among small and medium-size enterprises. Fifth and last\, built-in structural resilience and growth momentum will make Qatar less susceptible to downturn\, followed by Abu Dhabi\, and Saudi Arabia.  \n \n \nSummary by Suzi Mirgani. Suzi is CIRS Publications Coordinator.
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/mehran-kamrava-lectures-hec-school-management-paris/
CATEGORIES:CIRS Faculty Lectures,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_20871_20056_1414332478-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR