Welcome news, apparently, in Obama's announcement today to postpone his decision about how to respond to the chemical attack in Damascus. Because there is no sense in firing a barrage of missiles as a response to the use of chemicals. Perhaps Obama's reason was his not wanting to be in Russia next week during or just after a US-led attack on Russia's ally. Perhaps he was given pause by the UK Commons vote on Friday. Or perhaps he is not so stupid after all, and has listened to wise counsel.
The prospect of military action against the Assad regime by western powers has become increasingly real. Soon it may be all but inevitable. But what kind of action, for what purpose, in the service of what larger strategy? All this remains obscure.
EU High Representative and EC Vice-President Catherine Ashton steps down from leading the European External Action Service (EEAS) in late 2014. She has presented her review of the organisation and how to make it more efficient.
When the European External Action Service (EEAS) was formally set up in July 2010, it was agreed that the High Representative Catherine Ashton should present a review of it this summer.
I was giving evidence to a UK House of Lords select committee on aid as an instrument of soft power yesterday (watch the meeting here), so spent a bit of time researching what “soft power” actually means.
Baroness Ashton will step down as High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security, and First Vice President of the Council – effectively the closest the EU has to a minister of foreign affairs, at the end of 2014.
International Alert convenes an expert roundtable, Building resilience – building peace, in Kathmandu on Monday 8 July. It’s the culmination of two and half years of research on the impact of climate change on local communities in Bangladesh, India, Nepal and Pakistan. I can’t be there, so we recorded four minutes to camera as my contribution to the day's events.
For a developing country facing high poverty levels, a growing population with high expectations despite a poor revenue base and weak institutions, but with an abundance of natural resources, exploiting them looks like the path to glory. Experience from a range of countries shows that, to put it mildly, it's not so straightforward.
In conversations last week about youth and peacebuilding, it occurred to me again that we too easily fudge things by referring to "youth". Unless we qualify "youth" with a narrower description, we risk being vague and patronising; and by our imprecision to lose the meaning of what we intend to say. Especially given that more than half the world's population probably fit the category, one way or another.
Mon, 17/06/2013
The UN High Level Panel (HLP) on the Post-2015 Development Agenda has reported.
The argument about whether overseas aid money can be spent on the military seems to be kicking off again. Indeed, it seems not only to have started up but to be institutionalised in negotiations between the UK Ministry of Defence and the Department for International Development.
In an earlier post I wrote about how mining companies have evolved to take into account the needs of their host communities.
In both low and middle income countries, well established arguments and solid evidence confirm that there is no real development without peace and only the peace of the graveyard without development. These conclusions have shifted the fulcrum of discussion about development over the past several years. But they have not yet added up to telling anybody how to do it.