BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Center for International and Regional Studies - ECPv6.16.2//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:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0400
TZOFFSETTO:+0300
TZNAME:MSK
DTSTART:20141025T220000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20141116T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20141116T170000
DTSTAMP:20260611T123151
CREATED:20141130T133720Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210829T124401Z
UID:10001030-1416128400-1416157200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Ian Almond Faculty Research Workshop
DESCRIPTION:Ian Almond\, Professor of World Literature at the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\, headed a CIRS Faculty Research Workshop on “Dissecting the Native Informant: A Case Study of Nirad C. Chaudhuri” on November 16\, 2014. The workshop was held to discuss his latest work examining the related ideas of melancholy\, political conservatism\, and native informancy. It takes the figure of a twentieth century Indian thinker\, Nirad C. Chaudhuri\, and considers his oeuvre under the changing optics of a number of different topics—all in an attempt to understand how an Indian intellectual such as Chaudhuri was able to defend passionately the legacy of the British Empire\, and even slander the culture and mentality of his fellow Indians. Almond also extended this to present-day “native informants” such as Fareed Zakaria\, Fouad Ajami\, and Enrique Krauze. \n\nAlmond’s book initially began as a straightforward monograph on the Indian writer Nirad C. Chaudhuri (1897-1999)\, but soon developed—over the four years it took to write it—into a much more nuanced project: the study of how conservative\, pro-Western intellectuals are formed in postcolonial environments. What started out as just another book on an infamously Anglophile Bengali writer began to reveal implications for the whole type of the “native informant.” Under the rubric of four different approaches—Islam\, the archive\, melancholy\, and Empire—he not only enters into the intricacies of Chaudhuri’s intellectual constitution\, but also develops insights into the internalization and reproduction of ideology. Each chapter tries to articulate the Indian context of the investigation—what Chaudhuri’s peers in the Bengali and wider Indian tradition had to say about Muslims\, or sadness\, or libraries—but also brings in a strong comparative dimension. In one chapter\, for example\, the book considers the year 1947 in three different cities—Calcutta\, Mexico City\, and Istanbul—and examines three melancholy texts that were being written in those cities that year (Autobiography of an Unknown Indian\,  El Laberinto de la Soledad\, and the Turkish novel Huzur). \n\nAlmond tries to show how Chaudhuri’s views on Islam—on its cultures\, followers\, and faith—reveal a jumbled bag of different voices in Chaudhuri\, each of which belonged to a different vocabulary\, and drew on a different constellation of beliefs. As a consequence\, he takes a look at how Chaudhuri made use of the archive—of libraries\, galleries\, and museums—which not only throws light on the origin of some of these vocabularies\, but also illuminates the process of self-alienation which his extensive reading accentuated. It was a process which fissured and undermined Chaudhuri’s notion of Indianness\, dethroning it from the center of his persona and opening him up to a wide variety of foreign registers; amongst the many consequences of this alternative intellectual development was an increasing disdain for the culture of his own community\, and a growing empathy for the perspective of the Empire which ruled over it. In the penultimate chapter of Almond’s book\, the melancholy which arose from this situation is shown to compose of a number of different elements—not just the inevitable tristesse which accompanies all processes of alienation\, but also a sense of loss at the withdrawal of the imperial entity whose presence had taken on such a metaphysically central place in his life. In the final chapter\, he considers Chaudhuri’s relationship to empire in the context of similar intellectuals from very different regions—the right-wing Mexican intellectual Enrique Krauze\, the Arab journalist Fouad Ajami\, and the U.S. educated Indian writer Fareed Zakaria. \n\nThe participants who came to speak on Almond’s book were based at universities from a variety of different regions. Mahmut Mutman spoke of the relationship between Empire and Literature\, and the way imperialist sensibilities were able to foster (in positive as well as negative ways) literary creation; Kathleen Hewett-Smith saw Chaudhuri as someone who seemed to seek in Empire a form of codified knowledge\, and compared Chaudhuri’s love of the library to the Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk’s own interest in the archival. Tariq Mehmood spoke of the need for greater historical context in understanding figures such as Chaudhuri\, whilst Sibel Irzik spoke on the Freudian distinction between melancholy and mourning\, and asked why some losses for Chaudhuri were necessarily more melancholic than others. “Chaudhuri”\, she said\, “lost an empire he never had.” Sheetal Majithia alluded briefly to the way World Literature has been promoted as an effort to limit postcolonial studies\, and spoke of the ways Chaudhuri could be useful to schools of analysis such as Affect Theory.  \n\nIan Almond received his PhD in English Literature from Edinburgh University in 2000. He is the author of four books\, most recently Two Faiths\, One Banner (Harvard University Press\, 2009) and History of Islam in German Thought (Routledge\, 2010)\, and over forty articles in a variety of journals including PMLA\, Radical Philosophy\, ELH\, and New Literary History. He specializes in comparative world literature\, with a tri-continental emphasis on Mexico\, Bengal and Turkey. His books have been translated into eight languages\, including Arabic\, Russian\, Turkish\, Korean\, Serbo-Croat\, Persian and Indonesian. He is currently working on a history of Islam in Latin America. \n\n\n\n\n\nCIRS supported Ian Almond’s book\, The Thought of Nirad C. Chaudhuri: Islam\, Empire and Loss (Cambridge University Press\, 2015)\, by hosting a research workshop in which selected scholars were invited to the Georgetown University-Qatar campus to discuss the manuscript and to give critical feedback on the book chapters ahead of publication. \n\nRead biographies of the participantsSee the workshop agenda\n\n 
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/ian-almond-faculty-research-workshop/
CATEGORIES:CIRS Faculty Research Workshops
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/11/ianalmondfacultyresearchworkshopnovember162014web-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20141117T180000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20141117T200000
DTSTAMP:20260611T123151
CREATED:20141120T102022Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T103600Z
UID:10001025-1416247200-1416254400@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Buthaina Al Ansari on Female Leaders in Qatar
DESCRIPTION:Buthaina Al Ansari\, founder and Chairperson of Qatariat T&D Holding Company and Senior Human Resources Director at Ooredoo\, delivered a CIRS Monthly Dialogue on the topic of “Sheroes—How Female Leaders are Changing Qatar” on November 17\, 2014. Al Ansari introduced the talk\, which focused on the status of female leadership in Qatar\, by explaining that it is largely males who are recognized for their endeavors and achievements\, while women are rarely celebrated to the same degree. “There are male and female achievers\, but there are only ‘heroes\,’ and I do believe there should be ‘sheroes\,’” she said. \n \n \nAl Ansari is a member of the MENA Business Women’s Networks\, an ambassador for Women Leading Change Qatar\, a board member of Qatar Business Women’s Association\, and a Mentor at the Qatar Professional Women’s Network Circle. She shared her insights on what makes a successful businesswoman\, with a particular focus on how Qatari women can achieve a more competitive position within the local and international market. Al Ansari divulged her recipe for success\, including the most important ingredients required in any business venture. The first element of success is to have a supportive family structure. She argued that in the Arab World\, it is especially important for women to have a family that understands the imperatives of any business endeavor\, and the necessities of splitting time and resources equally between the needs of the home and those of the business operation. Once one has the backing and support of one’s family\, the second element of success that Al Ansari advocated was a solid foundation in the form of education. She noted that “in Qatar\, we have a strong system of education”—especially for women—which should be capitalized upon. \n \n \nThe third element of success\, as suggested by Al Ansari\, is to take risks\, and to not be afraid of challenging the norm. This\, she said\, is the defining characteristic of any entrepreneur. Al Ansari explained that she had to take personal risks in order to further her business career. She had begun her studies as a biomedical science student\, but was always aware that this vocational path was pre-determined by her family’s definition of success. Al Ansari decided to take the risk of changing her degree to business administration in order to fulfill her personal objectives. “I took risks in my thoughts\, I took risks in my decisions\, and I took risks in my plans\, and that has opened a lot of doors and opportunities for me\,” she explained. However\, Al Ansari did acknowledge that such freedom of choice and deciding for oneself were not necessarily options that were open to all Qatari females. \n \n \nOnce an educated risk-taker has completed the first crucial steps towards achieving a successful business career\, Al Ansari’s final piece of advice was to differentiate oneself from the surrounding competition. She argued that it was of vital importance to “market yourself\, position yourself\, and brand yourself\,” and focus on a particular segment of the market. “I chose the women’s segment in Qatar. I want to empower them\, I want to guide them\, and I want to enable them\,” she said. Qatari males represent 68 percent of the Qatari labor force\, while Qatari women represent only 32 percent. Thus\, Al Ansari argued that it was important for women to work harder and to take on more active roles in order to balance the labor market. \n \n \nGender imbalance aside\, Al Ansari concluded by saying that “in Qatar\, we are at the development phase. Whether you are a mother\, a wife\, a student\, an employee\, or a business owner\, we have to contribute together to invent the economic scene in Qatar [by] investment in economic capital\, education\, environment\, and health.” \n \n \nButhaina Al Ansari holds a Master’s Degree in Business Management & HR Strategic Planning from Qatar University\, and a Master’s Degree in Human Resource Management from the American University of Cairo. As an entrepreneur and Chairperson of Qatariat T&D\, she collaborates with innovative and best-in-class organizations to raise the benchmark and quality of expertise in Qatar. Qatariat services include—Training & Leadership\, Media & Publishing and Business Consulting. In 2012\, she received the L’Officiel Qatar’s Most Inspirational Arab Woman of the Year Award. She has been voted by CommsMEA as one the Top 50 Female Telecoms Executives\, and for the past several years she has been named by ArabianBusiness.com as one of the 100 Most Powerful Arab Women. \n \n \n  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, Manager and Editor for CIRS Publications
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/buthaina-al-ansari-female-leaders-qatar/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Distingushed Lectures,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/11/buthainaalansarimonthlydialoguenovember172014print_0-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20141120T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20141121T170000
DTSTAMP:20260611T123151
CREATED:20141208T125659Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T103552Z
UID:10001032-1416474000-1416589200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Youth in the Middle East\, Working Group I
DESCRIPTION:On November 20-21\, 2014\, in partnership with the youth-oriented social initiative organization\, Silatech\, CIRS launched the “Youth in the Middle East” research initiative with a two day working group meeting. The meeting was hosted by the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies (CCAS) at the Georgetown University campus in Washington\, DC\, where participants gathered from various countries of the world and from a multitude of disciplinary backgrounds. \n \n \nThe participants discussed the need for greater definition of the factors that constitute “youth” as a distinct subset of society. Although they agreed that age and maturation were the common determining characteristics of youth\, there was less consensus about the specific age ranges within which youth should be bracketed as a unit of analysis. Problematizing this further\, they discussed how “youth” as a formative stage of life can differ dramatically depending on particular cultural contexts. In some cases\, and especially for those with low or no income or those who inhabit conflict zones\, young people are often prematurely obliged to take on adult roles and responsibilities\, thus curtailing the notion of “youth” as experienced by their cohorts in other parts of the world. Rather than quantifying youth according to age brackets\, the participants argued that the notion of youth could be considered as a fluid and inconsistent network of social relations. The participants highlighted the fact that youth cannot be analyzed as a homogenous category\, but must be thought of as having a multitude of variants. \n \n \nAlthough the topic of Middle Eastern youth was discussed from different theoretical and practical lenses\, some key central themes emerged\, including the fact that\, in many instances\, youth in the Middle East tend to face tough political and economic conditions. Local national youth in the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council do not necessarily share the same economic hardships as the young economic South Asian migrants in the GCC\, but they do share similar forms of political exclusion as experienced by their counterparts in other areas of the Arab world.  \n \n \nSince many countries of the Middle East are experiencing a demographic “youth bulge\,” unprecedented numbers of young people are all vying for what little resources and opportunities exist. Broader economic structural issues were discussed in relation to the sustainability of the Arab development model and its failures. Many countries of the Middle East are rentier economies that exacerbate ongoing forms of political quiescence. The events of the Arab uprisings did much to highlight the faults associated with autocratic governance\, but have not led to any major changes\, leaving young people more aware of the problems that plague their nations\, and\, thus\, ever more frustrated. \n \n \nAccess to the economic and political normative activities of society is denied to many in places where the social contract has been poorly adhered to\, if at all. Exclusion\, however\, is context dependent\, and each society fashions its own definitions of exclusion. In impoverished neighborhoods that are lacking in infrastructure and opportunities\, Middle East youth groups actively create their own forms of distinct social networks that are\, in many ways\, more intimate and reliable than those of more affluent areas. Thus\, such informal youth associations and marginal forms of participation mean that youth are not necessarily socially excluded from their immediate surroundings\, but are more likely to be economically and politically excluded from the more “formal” social structures. Such class dimensions play a role in how youth experience their lives and their aspirations for the future\, with many young people active in both formal and informal means of participation. \n \n \nWhether in the public or private sectors\, access to the privileges of the formal market is hindered crony capitalism and unfair political concessions\, giving rise to increased informal practices among many Arab youths. Autocratic leaders have been benefitting from deregulation\, even as they impose restrictions on local markets. The explosive mix of neoliberal policies and simultaneous authoritarian ones has resulted in an anti-competitive environment with little room for small and medium enterprises. This is why there are very few start-ups or entrepreneurial endeavors since there is little encouragement of creative business\, skill development\, or mobilization of human capital. Neoliberal reforms have benefitted only a small elite group of people\, and has done little to improve the lives of the majority. \n \n \nBecause the informal sector operates largely outside of the formal economy\, and is mostly extra-legal or illegal\, there has been little research conducted into these ventures\, including the gender dimension and how women fare in such environments. For the most part\, in the academic and popular literature\, youth issues tend to be viewed from the perspective of young males\, concentrating on the condition of their welfare\, education\, and employment\, with little attention directed at females and the challenges they face. \n \n \nIncreasingly\, the vacuum left by failed state structures has been steadily filled by Islamic movements in many countries of the Middle East. These mostly grassroots institutions are becoming increasingly intertwined in youth’s daily lives\, and have powerful influences on youth behavior. In order for young people to be directed towards formal channels of economic activity\, the participants explained that there needs to be more effort made by the government\, as well as businesses and the private sector\, to invest in job creation and vocational training\, especially for those with low levels of education. The participants advised\, however\, that there needs to be a fine balance between the valorization of manual labor and the encouragement of schooling and education. \n \n \nThe failed education model in many Arab states is a symptom of the failed state economic model\, and often produces a vicious circle. The participants further discussed means of educational reform and how the Arab state promises employment as a reward for education. This often only leads to further frustration when educated youths come up against a variety of entry barriers to the labor market. There are few effective transitions from school to employment\, and a severe lack of skills and behavioral competencies development. Further compounding this is the crisis of the social sciences; the Arab educational system rewards technical and technocratic career paths\, with little encouragement of alternative careers in the humanities\, arts\, and cultural avenues. These disciplines are far from institutionalized at the school level\, and even less so in the labor market\, making the humanities unappealing and often gendered. \n \n \nOther issues under discussion included Arab refugees and forced migration; nationalization policies across the GCC; and youth voices in public spaces as well online through a variety of information communication technologies and social media channels. In conclusion\, the participants encouraged further investigation into broader theoretical questions involving the future of political Islam and democratization efforts. The participants offered a series of policy recommendations that could be implemented across the Middle East and North Africa\, and ways of promoting resilience rather than violence through a variety of avenues\, including cultural and educational activities\, as well as means of removing entry barriers to the market by encouraging grassroots business opportunities and networks.  ‎ \n \n \n\nSee the Meeting Agenda\nRead Participants Biographies\nRead more about this Research Initiative \n\n \nParticipants and Discussants: \n \n \n\nOsama Abi-Mershed\, Center for Contemporary Arab Studies\,Georgetown University\nZahra Babar\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nDavid Beck\, Silatech\nDawn Chatty\, University of Oxford\nRaj Desai\, Georgetown University\nKristin Smith Diwan\, American University School of International Service\nPaul Dyer\, Silatech\nSherine El Taraboulsi\, University of Oxford\nNader Kabbani\, Silatech\nMehran Kamrava\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nSamer Kherfi\, University of Sharjah\nAdeel Malik\, University of Oxford\nDionysis Markakis\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nJennifer Olmsted\, Drew University\nAnders Olofsgard\, Stockholm School of Economics\nOmar Razzaz\, King Abdullah II Fund for Development of the Jordan Strategy Forum\nNatasha Ridge\, Sheikh Saud bin Saqr Al Qasimi Foundation\nMichael Robbins\, Princeton University\nDjavad Salehi-Isfahani\, Virginia Tech\nEdward Sayre\, University of Southern Mississippi\nEmad Shahin\, Georgetown University\nHilary Silver\, Brown University\nElizabeth Wanucha\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nTarik Yousef\, Silatech\n\n \n  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, Manager and Editor for CIRS Publications
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/youth-middle-east-working-group-i/
CATEGORIES:Focused Discussions,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/12/youthinthemiddleeastwginovember20-212014web-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR