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:20150308T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20150308T170000
DTSTAMP:20260611T123157
CREATED:20150323T115052Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210901T115614Z
UID:10001046-1425805200-1425834000@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Jeremy Koons CIRS Faculty Research Workshop
DESCRIPTION:The research of Jeremy Koons\, associate professor of philosophy at Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar (GU-Q)\, was featured recently in a CIRS Faculty Research Workshop about his co-authored book manuscript Unity Without Uniformity: A Synoptic Vision of the Normative and the Natural. The full day event\, held March 8\, 2015\, included 11 participants from Europe and the greater Middle East region. \n\nThe manuscript\, co-authored by Koons and Michael P. Wolf\, associate professor at Washington and Jefferson College\, draws on the pragmatist tradition of philosophers Wittgenstein and Sellars to defend an alternative conception of normative discourse. It also draws on other elements of the pragmatist tradition\, stretching from philosophers Peirce to Brandom\, to show how normative claims are constrained and how this constraint\, combined with the way in which normative claims are accountable to reason and argumentation\, prevents any fall into relativism. \n\nThe CIRS Faculty Research Workshop is a closed-door\, one-day seminar that brings together select renowned scholars for a focused discussion on a GU-Q faculty member’s book manuscript that is in its final stages of development.  All participants receive the entire manuscript in advance of the meeting and each scholar leads a focused group discussion on an assigned chapter. \n\nThis research workshop featured a talented group of esteemed philosophers who specialize in Sellarsian and pragmatist philosophy. Participants engaged in a series of structured brainstorming sessions that led to a critical and thorough discussion of the book manuscript.  \n\nParticipant Niklas Möller\, associate professor in philosophy at the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Stockholm\, Sweden\, said “ever since I first read [Brandom’s book] Making It Explicit\, I have felt the need for a serious attempt at addressing moral normativity from a socio-pragmatist perspective.  And now you are doing exactly that (and more)\, which I find to be a very exciting project indeed.  I think you are doing something very important and impressive\, and I am happy to have been invited to engage with the text.” \n\nAttendees included Bana Bashour and Ray Brassier\, American University of Beirut; Erhan Demircioglu\, Middle East Technical University in Ankara\, Turkey; Anjana Jacob\, GU-Q; Daniele Mezzadri\, United Arab Emirates University; Niklas Moller\, The Royal Institute of Technology in Sweden; Jim O’Shea\, University College of Dublin; John Ryder\, American University in Ras Al Khaimah\, United Arab Emirates; Matthew Silverstein\, New York University in Abu Dhabi\, UAE; Lucas Thorpe\, Boğaziçi University\, Istanbul; and Jack Woods\, Bilkent University\, Turkey. \n\nKoons received his Ph.D. in Philosophy from Georgetown University in 1998. He teaches a wide variety of philosophy courses on ethics (theoretical and applied)\, social and political philosophy\, epistemology\, philosophy of mind and language\, metaphysics\, and philosophy of religion. He publishes articles on ethics\, epistemology\, metaphysics\, and philosophy of religion. His book\, Pragmatic Reasons: A Defense of Morality and Epistemology\, was published by Palgrave in 2009. \n\nSee the workshop agendaRead participant biographies\n\n  \n\nUnity Without Uniformity: A Synoptic Vision of the Normative and the Natural \n\nAbstract \n\nOur lives ineliminably involve the normative.  We make moral judgments.  Scientists and laymen alike make epistemic and methodological judgments (judging a theory as rational\, a method as biased\, and so on).  We make prudential judgments.  But we have to make the normative fit within our dominant\, naturalist view of the world: in some sense\, science offers a privileged account of what there is\, and other disciplines cannot make claims incompatible with our scientific world-view.  A longstanding challenge for philosophers has been to fit the normative within this naturalistic picture of the world. \n\nDominant naturalist approaches to this challenge try to fit normativity into our scientific world-view by showing how normative claims describe some aspect of physical reality.  We argue that this approach is fundamentally misguided\, and fails to do justice to the prescriptive (‘ought-to-be’ or ‘ought-to-do’) element of normative discourse.  \n\nDrawing on the pragmatist tradition of Wittgenstein and Sellars\, we defend an alternative conception of normative discourse.  On this conception\, to make a normative claim (“You shouldn’t have done that”; “The study results were biased”; “Eating a ghost pepper is foolish”) is not to state a fact\, not to make a descriptive claim\, at all.  Rather\, such discourse serves a fundamentally action-guiding role: it prescribes behavior (or proscribes it)\, or recommends a course of action (or recommends against it)\, and so on.  \n\nEven though normative claims are not descriptive claims\, such claims can be true\, and indeed non-relatively true.  Drawing on other elements of the pragmatist tradition\, stretching from Peirce to Brandom\, we show how normative claims are constrained by how the world is even though they are not in the business of describing this world.  This constraint\, combined with the way in which normative claims are accountable to reason and argumentation\, prevents any fall into relativism. \n\nOf course\, once normative facts drop out of the picture\, there is nothing left to offend against a scientific world-view.  Thus\, we defend not only the objectivity of norms\, but also a robust version of naturalism which accords science privilege in describing how the world is and what it contains. \n\nFinally\, we show the various ways in which descriptive discourses—such as scientific and social-scientific discourses—and normative discourses mutually contribute to each other in fruitful ways.  The result is a picture of normativity that is robust and truth-apt\, sewn into a new take on the naturalist tradition. 
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/jeremy-koons-cirs-faculty-research-workshop/
CATEGORIES:CIRS Faculty Research Workshops
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2015/03/jeremykoons11-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20150310T123000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20150310T133000
DTSTAMP:20260611T123157
CREATED:20150317T081213Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T103356Z
UID:10001044-1425990600-1425994200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:Victimization or Empowerment? The Case of Saudi Literature
DESCRIPTION:Amira El-Zein\, Associate Professor at the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar and the 2014-2015 CIRS SFS-Q Faculty Fellow\, delivered a CIRS Focused Discussion on “Victimization or Empowerment? The Case of Saudi Literature” on March 10\, 2015. The lecture focused on several works authored by Saudi female novelists published outside of Saudi Arabia in places like Beirut\, Casablanca\, and Cairo. El-Zein examined works including Al-Firdaws Al Yabaab (The Barren Paradise) by Leila al-Juhni; Jahiliyyah (Ignorance) and Hind Wa L-Askar (Hind and the Soldiers) by Badriyyah al-Bishr; and Tawq Al Hamam (The Dove’s Collar) by Raja Alem. \n \n \nIn recent years\, Saudi Arabia has experienced an increase in female-authored literary fiction\, despite the odds. These writings are significant\, El-Zein explained\, in their facility to carve a space\, and indeed flourish\, within highly restrictive cultural settings\, or\, what she calls\, a “fundamentalist milieu.” Regardless of the fictive nature of the writing\, these works can be considered contemporary cultural documents that question the rigid patriarchal system of knowledge upon which modern Saudi Arabia is founded. \n \n \nDespite women’s general experiences of powerlessness within the institutional framework of modern Saudi Arabia\, discourses about women take a paradoxically central role among the most powerful religious and political entities that all compete to be ordained as “the best supervisor of the moral order in the public sphere\,” El-Zein said. In order to highlight these alternative literary testaments of Saudi Arabian life\, she notes: “I analyze this conservative perspective through novels\, as I consider them important accounts of the Saudi individual’s predicament in both the public and the domestic spheres.” \n \n \nThrough the intertextual juxtaposition of past and present\, authors such as Raja Alem and Leila al Juhni situate modern Saudi Arabia within a historical continuum. The significance of this literary strategy alludes to the idea that seemingly entrenched contemporary ideologies have not always held sway\, and that existing social\, political\, and religious infrastructures can be considered unstable and fleeting. In her work\, “Alem’s message is that there have been periods of time when women in the kingdom were relatively better off than today\, and when segregation between sexes wasn’t enforced as it is today\,” El-Zein explained. By grounding contemporary political and religious infrastructures within a historical perspective\, the authors reveal them to be brief moments in the long history of the civilization. Through such an empowering writing technique\, the authors manage to destabilize contemporary power relations by suggesting that change is not only possible\, but inevitable. El-Zein proposes that “through intertextuality\, Alem and al-Juhni reclaim history and religion rather than attack them. They look at them\, not as ideologies\, but rather as emblematic institutions that have been manipulated as ideologies in order to maintain the existing powers.” \n \n \nIn conclusion\, El-Zein illustrated how these texts are intricate and complicated\, and proposed paying close attention to the novels in order to detect their many defiant qualities that are not immediately apparent. “A first reading of the texts\,” she said\, “unveils Saudi women as helpless and subdued\, and concludes that these texts are victimization texts. A second close reading\, however\, that is more inquisitive and probing uncovers a different image\, that of empowered women.” \n \n \nAmira El-Zein is author of Islam\, Arabs\, and the Intelligent World of the Jinn and co-editor of Culture\, Creativity and Exile. She translated several French authors into Arabic such as J.M.G Le Clézio\, André Malraux\, and Antonin Artaud. Her translation of the Palestinian poet\, Mahmud Darwish\, was nominated for the Pen International Prize of translation. Her poetry was chosen to be included in the United Nations’ Book of Poetry for 2015.  \n \n \nDuring her fellowship\, El-Zein is working on a project titled\, “Contemporary Saudi Literature: The Grueling Adaption to Modernity.” The research argues that contemporary Saudi literature conveys the dilemma of Saudi society torn between fascination with everything Western and obligations to unbending traditions. The question of tradition in its extremely arduous adaptation to rapid changes has led to a profound malaise\, loss of identity\, and confusion\, which are characteristic of neocolonialism. The research will interpret several novels and poems that mirror the ordeals Saudi people experience when they challenge the harsh rules of the establishment. Comparisons will be made between Saudi literature and that written by other authors in the Gulf. \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, Manager and Editor for CIRS Publications
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/victimization-or-empowerment-case-saudi-literature/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2015/03/amirael-zeinfocuseddiscussionmarch102015print_0-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20150314T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20150315T170000
DTSTAMP:20260611T123157
CREATED:20150330T084808Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T095356Z
UID:10001048-1426323600-1426438800@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:The Gulf Family: Working Group I
DESCRIPTION:On March 14-15\, 2015\, CIRS held its first working group on “The Gulf Family” where scholars convened to discuss both historical and current issues that affect the Gulf family structure. In contrast to the literature on the family in the greater Middle East\, significant gaps in scholarship still exist in relation to the dynamics of the Arab Gulf family. Five grant proposals were awarded to various scholars to conduct fieldwork and original research on topics related to the Gulf family. In conjunction to the grant awards\, CIRS held a two-day working group to discuss issues such as tribalism\, mixed marriages\, and the effects of religious education on family dynamics amongst other topics. Alongside the five grant awardees who presented their research proposals and preliminary findings\, working group participants discussed issues currently facing the region. \n \n \nThe Gulf family has witnessed an immense amount of change over the past sixty years. In understanding the historical importance of the Gulf family one has to structure a comprehensive narrative that includes the different tribes and ethnicities which have resided in the region. By challenging the idea that the Gulf family is contingent on consanguinity for its existence\, modern discursive narratives can be further disseminated. This illustrates the various historical constructions around nationalism\, modernization and class. Housing and rent were examined in an effort to understand how space related to the family in the past and how physical change impacts the structure of the family living within households. \n \n \nUnderlying the presence of the Gulf family lie the notions of tribalism and asabiyya (tribal solidarity). In the Gulf\, tribalism is a central feature in understanding the social dynamics prevalent in the region. The functional logic of the system uses kinship to explain solidarity through practice\, which can be seen in expressions of tribal unity through literary\, legal\, political and media outlets. Discussants questioned to what extent was tribalism prevalent in family affairs and the significance of belonging to a tribe upon an individual’s identity. At present\, the modern tribal identity is rarely expressed through the nomadic lifestyle it was once associated with\, instead permeating societal sentiments and intellectual thought. However\, in the case of Yemen\, the impact of political and economic instability of the state has pressed citizens to rely upon their respective tribes to provide necessary services such as electricity and water. Rising prices of fuel and declining subsidies offered by the Yemeni government meant that citizens’ access to education and healthcare ultimately deteriorated. The permanence of the tribal order and solidarity in Yemen\, amidst the state of political chaos\, has helped maintain a sense order and organization within the country. Discussants later questioned the impact of tribalism on the nuclear family and the repercussions of re-tribalizing urban areas within the cities. \n \n \nTribalism has also had deeper ramifications on societal issues such as marriage. Amongst the local population\, tribal inter-marriages are generally the norm. In the absence of a class system amongst locals in the Gulf\, tribal lineage determines the social hierarchy present. In an effort to understand societal forces affecting the institution of marriage in the Gulf\, discussants recognized the intensive structural transformations that the Gulf region has been undergoing in the past twenty years. As a result\, consanguineous marriage has been undergoing changes\, whereby data on Qatar shows mixed marriages are on the rise for men but on the decline for women. Previously\, the rate of divorce amongst mixed marriage couples was much higher from 1985-2000 as compared to non-mixed marriages. However\, in 2010-2013 the gap between mixed marriages and non-mixed marriages began to diminish. Discussants questioned the reversal of trend in divorce amongst the two groups of marriages hypothesizing the reasons to be increasing globalization\, education and transnational flows. \n \n \nGiven the rising statistics on divorce in the Gulf\, the legal systems’ negligence towards reforming child custody law has become increasingly problematic. Family law reforms have traditionally focused on the relationship between spouses\, often neglecting the parent-child relationship that determines custody and guardianship. Case studies on Qatar\, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates have shown that further development on the concept of “best interest of the child” is in order. More specifically\, Qatar has made efforts to promote the concept of “best interest” as a tool to reform custody determination whereas Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates chose to formulate guidelines for judges to follow in cases of custody determination. \n \n \nWhile transitions within Gulf society have been taking place over the past decades\, the impact of modernization efforts can be witnessed in the religious\, linguistic\, and educational aspects of family life. The formation of family life in the Gulf in itself is a religious act\, encouraged by sunnah and hadith\, which is often embraced by couples as a fundamental element to the marital relationship and their childrearing ways. Previous scholarship has explored the role religious education plays in women’s positioning within society. Theoretically\, the rise of modern education was seen by scholars as a way to empower women into assuming roles within the public sphere. Yet\, case studies have shown that the quality of education women were receiving tended to reproduce the traditional system and enforce gender segregation. Discussants also emphasized the rise of religious education within the household\, whereby female Islamic preachers would conduct house visits in segregated spaces in an effort to educate women on relevant Islamic values to the home. \n \n \nIslamic values within Gulf households have also hindered channels of communication between parent and child on more sensitive issues such as sexual and reproductive health education. As the median age of marriage is increasing\, youth are increasingly confronted with their sexuality prior to marriage. The cultivation of shame rather than genuine guilt\, especially within the family\, is a byproduct of religious and tribal sentiments that dictate social relations in Gulf states. As a result\, youth are expected to source their own information on sexual issues often resorting to the internet as an impartial source of education. However\, the lack of sexual and reproductive health education amongst Gulf families raises youth’s vulnerabilities when confronted with issues such as rape\, sexual harassment\, and transmitted diseases. Parents often struggle with establishing open and honest channels of communication with their children\, partially due to the linguistic barriers that bi-lingual families face and stigma attached with this sensitive topic. Discussants argued that religious teachings in fact encourage open discussion on such issues\, within the scope of legally sanctioned marriage whereas\, social pressure and familial inexperience constitute the biggest obstacles in the face of sexual health education.  \n \n \n\nSee the working group agenda\nRead the participants’ biographies\nRead more about this research initiative \n\n \nParticipants and Discussants: \n \n \n\nRogaia Abusharaf\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nNadwa Al Dawsari\, Sheba Center for International Development\nSanaa Al Harahsheh\, Doha International Family Institute\nHaya Al Noaimi\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nZahra Babar\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nBarb Gillis\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nMehran Kamrava\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nSebastian Maisel\, Grand Valley State University\nDionysis Markakis\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nSuzi Mirgani\, CIRS – Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nMohamed Mohieddin\, Doha International Family Institute\nLena-Maria Möller\, Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law\nSophia Pandya\, California State University at Long Beach\nJihan Safar\, College de France\, Sciences-Po\nLaura Sjoberg\, University of Florida\nAmira Sonbol\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\nAli Kemal Tekin\, Sultan Qaboos University\nValbona Zenku\, Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar\n\n \nArticle by Haya Al-Noaimi\, Research Analyst at CIRS
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/gulf-family-working-group-i/
CATEGORIES:Focused Discussions,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2015/03/thegulffamilyworkinggroupimarch14-152015print_1-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20150323T180000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20150323T200000
DTSTAMP:20260611T123157
CREATED:20150316T075517Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T095345Z
UID:10001042-1427133600-1427140800@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:The Politics of National Narratives: The Evolution of 'Revolution' in Egypt
DESCRIPTION:Laurie Brand\, the Robert Grandford Wright Professor of International Relations and Middle East Studies at the University of Southern California\, delivered a CIRS Monthly Dialogue on “The Politics of National Narratives: The Evolution of ‘Revolution’ in Egypt” on March 23\, 2015. The talk reflected some of the main themes presented in her recent book\, Official Stories: Politics and National Narratives in Egypt and Algeria\, including how ruling elites actively construct a national narrative for political purposes. \n \n \nBrand described national narratives as collective stories\, whether official or popular\, that seek to define a country’s identity\, history\, and mission using particular historical events and heroes\, and including purported collective cultural\, linguistic\, religious\, or ethnic markers. As part of a broader study\, Brand’s research examines the legitimizing role that national narratives play in regime maintenance\, and questions how and why they may change. “I chose to look only at manifestations of an ‘official’ narrative. But even there\, a narrative is multi-stranded\, and can be quite complex because it includes not just the state’s version of national history\, but also a range of values\, aspirations\, and identity elements\,” she said. \n \n \n \n\n\n\n\n\n \n \n \nIn order to understand how national narratives are mobilized by state authorities\, Brand explained that they are often employed as a relegitimizing force during times of contested succession or political rupture. National narratives involve “the creation of a ‘usable’ past; that is\, the construction of a national history that can be mobilized\, that can be channeled\, and that can be used by a leadership for a demand\, need\, or a crisis in the present\,” she argued. These narratives can be read in a variety of official and unofficial political\, social\, and cultural texts\, whether through state proclamations\, cultural texts the media\, or the educational system\, among many other outlets for imparting some form of collective instruction. \n \n \nIn particular\, Brand analyzed traits of the official story of “revolution” in the case of Egypt\, and noted that\, since January 2011\, many associate the concept of revolution with contemporary Egyptian events. However\, the very concept of revolution has been integral to the Egyptian national narrative for well over a century\, and\, indeed\, makes up the founding story of the Egyptian nation state as it emerged after July 1952. The language of revolution has been used throughout Egyptian political history as part of a legitimation strategy\, especially during regime changes\, whether through anti-colonial struggles\, the Free Officers’ 1952 overthrow of King Faruq\, or Anwar Sadat’s struggle to consolidate his rule after he succeeded Gamal Abd Al-Nasir. Even during the Mubarak era\, fidelity to the 1952 revolution was regularly invoked during ceremonial speeches\, but its importance began to wane as the regime moved farther and farther away from the 1952 revolution’s emphasis on economic and social justice to the implementation of neo-liberal economic policies.   \n \n \nIn conclusion\, Brand returned to the most recent invocations of the revolutionary narrative\, and the struggles surrounding it. “The meaning of the term ‘revolution’ was constructed and re-constructed over time in Egypt\,” and has evolved over the course of Egyptian history to take on different meanings\, demonstrating that even if critical elements of such narratives are rescripted\, the elements themselves remain central to the legitimation formulas of successive regimes or leaderships. With the overthrow of Mubarak and Morsi\, and the coming to power of Abd al-Fattah al-Sisi\, the Egyptian people have been confronted with several overlapping and conflicting narratives of revolution or political change—January 25 and/or June 30—through which they must navigate. “These issues are not simply of academic interest\, but are very real battles that are very much a part of ongoing struggles today in Egypt and in other parts of the Middle East over the future of the political system\,” she concluded. \n \n \nLaurie A. Brand directed the University of Southern California’s Center for International Studies from 1997 to 2000\, the School of International Relations from 2006 to 2009\, and is currently the director of its Middle East Studies Program. Brand served as president of the Middle East Studies Association in 2004\, and she has chaired its Committee on Academic Freedom since 2006. A four-time Fulbright scholar to the Middle East and North Africa\, a Carnegie scholar 2008 to 2010\, and a Rockefeller Bellagio writing residency fellow in fall 2012\, she is the author of Palestinians in the Arab World (Columbia University Press\, 1988)\, Jordan’s Inter-Arab Relations (Columbia University Press\, 1994)\, Women\, the State and Political Liberalization (Columbia University Press\, 1998)\, Citizens Abroad: States and Emigration in the Middle East and North Africa (Cambridge University Press\, 2006)\, and Official Stories: Politics and National Narratives in Egypt and Algeria (Stanford University Press\, 2014). \n \n \n  \n \n \nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, Manager and Editor for CIRS Publications
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/politics-national-narratives-evolution-revolution-egypt/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Race & Society,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2015/03/2t5a9367-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20150325T123000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20150325T133000
DTSTAMP:20260611T123157
CREATED:20150330T104444Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240314T095322Z
UID:10001050-1427286600-1427290200@cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu
SUMMARY:The Future of Nile Cooperation
DESCRIPTION:Bart Hilhorst\, a water resources specialist and former Chief Technical Advisor for the FAO project on the Nile basin\, delivered a CIRS Focused Discussion on “The Future of Nile Cooperation” on March 25\, 2015. The lecture centered on the complexities of water cooperation\, with a focus on the Nile Basin. Hilhorst introduced the audience to these intricate issues by explaining that “water resources management is not a technical issue. Rather\, quintessentially\, it is a political issue. It determines who gets what and when.” \n\nSince competition over scarce water resources is increasing at local\, national\, and regional levels\, Hilhorst argued that “we need better tools to deal with these difficult\, complex\, and emotive issues of water resources management.” One of the tools he recommended was the “scenario approach\,” which is a methodology that develops internally consistent and equally plausible stories that describe how the future might unfold. Hilhorst explained that “scenario thinking” is not to predict or to forecast. Rather\, by examining the main driving forces in the external environment\, there is a gradual understanding of what is driving the “system” and the underlying structural relations. This understanding is critical for making informed decisions.  Importantly\, scenario thinking takes a “big picture” approach to water resources management by encompassing the various stakeholders and their needs. Since regional water management often results in polarized perspectives\, this approach helps to achieve an alignment of views between the various stakeholders\, and to establish a common ground from which negotiations can emerge. \n\nHilhorst elaborated upon the application of scenario thinking to Nile cooperation among the eleven countries that share this valuable\, yet somewhat scarce\, water resource. “The Nile is a big name\, and a long river\, but it is a small river in terms of volume of runoff relative to the size of its basin\,” he said. The countries through which the Nile flows have a number of developmental issues\, including high demographic growth rates\, poor infrastructure\, and dependency on the Nile waters for most of their water and agricultural needs. Without effective north-south transport connections\, there is little that links the eleven states as a group other than the Nile itself. Hence\, direct common interests among the riparians are limited. \n\nIn order to address some of these overarching development issues\, concerted efforts are ongoing to strengthen cooperation among the Nile riparians\, including the “Nile Basin Initiative” that was established in 1999.  At this point in time\, however\, the shape and dynamics of Nile cooperation are subject to a number of uncertainties. Will the international donor community continue its current level of support to the regional Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) centers?  Can financing be mobilized for the large infrastructure investment projects that will increase the benefits accrued from the Nile waters? When can the NBI centers advance from transitional to permanent status? Will Egypt re-engage in the Nile discussions? It is especially within such dynamic and uncertain environments that scenario thinking thrives in its offering of possible solutions for plausible outcomes. In September of 2014\, Hilhorst conducted a scenario exercise with a committee made up of key stakeholders including members of the Nile Technical Advisory Committee as well as representatives from both government and civil society groups. \n\nHilhorst concluded by highlighting the increasing man-made influences upon the Nile. He explained that\, currently\, “the Nile is transferring from a natural to a regulated river\,” where various water management infrastructures and dams are being established along the length of the river in national attempts to benefit from its flow. Most of these projects are aligned to national development programs\, and do not necessarily take into account the regional perspective. Yet\, because many of these projects have increased the flood control\, hydropower\, and irrigation optionality of Nile resource management\, they have created a situation wherein “the potential benefits of cooperation has increased dramatically\,” for the entire Nile Basin. This\, in turn\, has sparked the need for increased regional cooperation\, and so is a positive drive towards future integration between the nations of the Nile. \n\nBart Hilhorst has over twenty-five years of experience in land and water resources management\, with a focus on transboundary rivers and forward thinking in natural resources development and use. He has extensive field experience in complex transboundary water projects in Africa and Asia\, and served as a Chief Technical Advisor for FAO project “Information Products for Nile Basin Water Resources Management.” Hilhorst has particular knowledge of using scenario thinking to support strategy formulation for natural resources management\, and to facilitate dialogue processes regarding complex water allocation challenges. He recently facilitated a comprehensive multi-stakeholder scenario process that investigated the complex water-agriculture-energy sector in the Aral Sea basin\, and is currently involved in a scenario project on the ‘future of Nile cooperation’ for the Nile Basin Initiative. In February 2015 Bart Hilhorst completed a study on the status of GCC agro-investments in sub-Saharan Africa. \n\n  \n\nArticle by Suzi Mirgani\, Manager and Editor for CIRS Publications
URL:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/event/future-nile-cooperation/
CATEGORIES:Dialogue Series,Environmental Studies,Regional Studies
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://cirs.qatar.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2015/03/barthilhorstfocuseddiscussionmarch252015print-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR