Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Atlantic Community is one of the most lively and interesting websites dealing with transatlantic and security issues. Recently, it has published a very interesting policy memo made of the five best submissions for Atlantic-community.org’s “Your Ideas, Your NATO” policy workshop competition. The papers were written by Alexander Corbeil, Geoffrey Levin, Vivien Pertusot, Josiah Surface and my valuable MEMS PhD colleague Gillian Kennedy.

To read the full paper, click here. Below you can find the introduction to the memo.

INTRODUCTION

Partners in Democracy, Partners in Security: NATO and the Arab Spring, MEMO 39, Atlantic Community.
The Arab Spring has created significant challenges and unprecedented opportunities for NATO and its partners in the Mediterranean region. New security issues have emerged alongside new regimes and regional instability looms. State failure, civil conflict, and institutional collapse could present a number of major security threats, among them the creation of a refugee crisis affecting NATO members, increased illegal arms trafficking, and a breeding ground for militant groups in a Somali-like setting near European shores.

These threats highlight the need for NATO to set up a plan for fostering regional stability and developing good relations with new and emerging leaders. The changing nature of regional security and Arab governance demands a multi-faceted approach which requires NATO to draw on expertise beyond its own, especially in empowering civil society and youth groups that are the cornerstone of sustainable democracy.

Such new challenges require new partnerships and this memo intends to convey two core recommendations: restructure the Mediterranean Dialogue (MD) to allow for a more incentivized and effective partnership, and partner with other institutional actors to enable NATO to offer a more comprehensive assistance package. NATO should play to its strengths while working with organizations that specialize in other tasks that are necessary to meet these goals. Only robust partnerships will allow NATO to meet these security needs in a time of greater fiscal austerity.

 

Caught in the “crossfire” of PhD thesis writing (the hardest task is to start writing after doing researches for years but when you start, then you can’t get enough) and several different projects ranging from academic stuff to policy oriented works, time is running fast. Between April and May, I will publish several articles concerning security developments in North Africa and the Mediterranean. The first two were released recently.

One, for the Jamestown Foundation, deals with the emergence of MOJWA in West Africa.

Marking a clear dividing line between conjecture and factual evidence is always particularly troublesome when dealing with the jihadist phenomenon in this region. According to the claim made by MOJWA, it differs from AQIM in strategic priorities, internal organization and ideological foundations. The attack in Tamanrasset and the non-Algerian leadership are consistent with this claim. The real question is whether this group has truly severed itself from AQIM, representing a potential regional competitor in both in the jihadist domain and more mundane smuggling activities, or is it simply another sub-group of the already internally fragmented AQIM, working more specifically in the territories of western Africa?

The second one was published last week by the Global Governance Institute and was written with my valuable colleagues Joy Alemazung and Dustin Dehez. The topic is a very “hot one” in my opinion, as it deals with the partial failures and problems the EU is experiencing in the Sahelian region, above all in the wake of Mali’s coup.

The next steps forward: a series of articles dealing with: Libya; AQIM (with a specific focus on maritime issues); EU in the Mediterranean, Sahelian and Maghrebi security. Stay tuned.

A collection of links on the major developments in North Africa (3-10 March 2012)

I should post a bit more often, I am aware of that. I always promise to myself to be more present on my blog but normally I  have some time left only at this time of the day (about 1 a.m. CET)… However, let’s stop with my “self-absolution” and let’s talk about a very interesting piece I have seen today (yesterday, as now it ‘s Saturday already).

I have found this post on FP Cable reporting the rather frank speech of Polish FA Minister Radoslaw Sikorski on the “possibility” that Germany will play, in the near future, the same role played by the U.S. in Europe after WWII. A few excerpts:

So you will not be a benign hegemon in Europe and you shouldn’t even try….The position of benign hegemon for Germany is not attainable, and therefore I would propose your actual position in the EU, which is a very honorable one, is the position of the largest shareholder

Sikorski said these words during the first panel of the first day of the 2012 Munich Security Conference. The context makes these words even more salient and, in a way, braver. I have always claimed that, in my opinion, the true problem with Europe (the EU) is the lack of “geopolitical solidarity”: common institutions without a common perceptions of its internal and external geopolitical space and the related interests to pursue and prioritise (the rather divided agendas of all the bigger EU countries on Libya were a clear example of that). Somehow, these words confirm the existence, and the salience, of this problem. The road ahead to “forget” the old geopolitical, national perceptions and re-think the European space is still very much troubled and long. A post-Westphalian Europe is not a reality yet. It is only one options among others. The words of Sikorski were, in a way, the effect of the ongoing European crisis, which is very much awakening some very deep-rooted national perceptions, and narratives, of the “European others”. The more the crisis will advance, the more the EU construction will suffer.

 

Call for Papers (Conferences)


Call for Papers (Academic and Policy Journals/Books)


Jobs & Fellowships

2012 is going to be a rather important year for global politics, as there will be: presidential elections in the U.S., Russia and France; a leadership transition in China; the evolution/involution of the Arab Spring; the challenges faced by the Euro Zone and much more (North Korea, Afghanistan, etc etc). It is always interesting, at the beginning of every new year, to read and listen what experts say on the major challenges of the coming year and that what I usually do (at least since I have started dealing with this field….). Following, a list of articles and ideas on what we should watch out in 2012:

The Eurasia Group Top Risks 2012 Report and the take of Ian Bremmer:

The 2012 Perspectives of RUSI, with a video by Professor Michael Clarke, RUSI Director General:

An interview with Nader Mousavizadeh, CEO of Oxford Analytica, and his take in a video by Reuters:

The point of Fareed Zakaria, one of current leading American thinkers (and in my opinion also one of the most brilliant: his “The Future of Freedom” is one of those books that every political scientist should read at least once in his life);

and, last but not least, the map from the Political Risk Atlas of Maplecroft.

Published a few days ago, my assessment on the threats from Al Qaeda against Algeria and the Algerian resilience to the Arab Spring for the Jamestown Foundation.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 86 other followers