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: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:20110109T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110110T180000
DTSTAMP:20260410T030416
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:20110110T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110110T180000
DTSTAMP:20260410T030416
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:20110111T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110111T180000
DTSTAMP:20260410T030416
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:20110117T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110117T180000
DTSTAMP:20260410T030416
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:20110125T080000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20110125T180000
DTSTAMP:20260410T030416
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
END:VCALENDAR