Case File
efta-efta02034309DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceEFTA Document EFTA02034309
Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 10
Reference
efta-efta02034309
Pages
0
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available
Loading PDF viewer...
Extracted Text (OCR)
EFTA DisclosureText extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
To:
[email protected]]
From:
Office of Terje Rod-Larsen
Sent:
Fri 11/16/2012 8:30:22 PM
Subject:
November 15 update
15 November, 2012
Article 1.
The New York Times
Another Israel-Gaza War?
Editorial
Article 2.
Foreign Policy
Operation Cast Lead 2.0
Hussein Ibish
Article 3.
Foreign Policy
Islamist-In-Chief
Mohanad Hage Ali
Article 4.
Al-Shabaka Policy Brief
Palestinians Imposing Agenda on Abbas
Leila Farsakh
Article 5.
The Daily Beast
Riots Erupt in Jordan: The End of Absolute
Monarchy
EFTA_R1_00545979
EFTA02034309
Christopher Dickey
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Pharaoh Reloaded?
Article 6
Michael Meyer-Resende and Vitalino Canas
Los Angeles Times
Egypt — Turkey: a new regional order?
Article 7.
Jeffrey Fleishman
Project Syndicate
The Emerging World's Education Imperative
Article 8.
Shashi Tharoor
Article I.
The New York Times
Another Israel-Gaza War?
Editorial
November 15, 2012 -- No country should have to endure the
rocket attacks that Israel has endured from militants in Gaza,
EFTA_R1_00545980
EFTA02034310
most recently over the past four days. The question is how to
stop them permanently.
On Wednesday, Israel launched one of the most ferocious
assaults on Gaza since its invasion four years ago. At least 20
targets were struck and a Hamas military commander, Ahmed al-
Jabari, was killed. Israeli leaders also threatened another ground
war.
llamas has controlled Gaza since Israel withdrew in 2007. The
group has mostly adhered to an informal cease-fire with Israel
after the war there in the winter of 2008-09. But, in recent
months, Hamas has claimed responsibility for participating in
rocket firings, and last week it took credit for detonating a
tunnel packed with explosives along the Israel-Gaza border
while Israeli soldiers were working nearby.
Israel has a right to defend itself, but it's hard to see how
Wednesday's operation could be the most effective way of
advancing its long-term interests. It has provoked new waves of
condemnation against Israel in Arab countries, including Egypt,
whose cooperation is needed to enforce the 1979 peace treaty
and support stability in Sinai.
The action also threatens to divert attention from what Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly described as
Israel's biggest security threat: Iran's nuclear program.
Engaging in a full-scale ground war is especially risky. Israel's
last major military campaign in Gaza was a three-week blitz in
2008-09 that killed as many as 1,400 Palestinians, and it was
widely condemned internationally. It did not solve the problem.
Hamas remains in control in Gaza and has amassed even more
EFTA_R1_00545981
EFTA02034311
missiles.
Some Israeli commentators have suggested that Mr. Netanyahu's
decision to order the operation is connected to elections in
January. But there are other options. Israel could have asked
Egypt, whose new Islamist-led government has close ties to
Hamas, to mediate a more permanent cease-fire. On Monday,
llamas hinted that it was open to that. Or Israel could have
responded as it usually has in recent years, avoiding high-profile
assassinations while attacking rocket-launching squads, empty
training sites and weapons manufacturing plants.
Hamas is a dangerous adversary that may never accept Israel's
right to exist. But it would be easier to win support for
retaliatory action if Israel was engaged in serious negotiations
with Hamas's rival, the Palestinian Authority, and working
toward a durable peace agreement.
Amick 2.
Foreign Policy
Operation Cast Lead 2.0
Hussein Ibish
November 14, 2012 -- Israel's assassination of Hamas military
commander Ahmed al-Jaabari in a missile attack has shattered
EFTA_R1_00545982
EFTA02034312
the short-lived and fragile calm in the Gaza Strip, and could be
another step in the transformation of the basic balance of power
within Hamas -- and even the broader Palestinian national
movement. The attack is the most significant escalation since
Operation Cast Lead, the offensive Israel launched in Gaza in
December 2008, and which cost an estimated 1,400 Palestinian
and 13 Israeli lives.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) announced that Jaabari's killing
was the first strike in "a widespread campaign" to "protect Israeli
civilians and to cripple the terrorist infrastructure" -- and indeed,
the IDF hit a number of targets across Gaza in the hours that
followed, killing at least eight Palestinians. It's possible that
these developments are laying prelude to another Israeli ground
intervention in Gaza. On Nov. 11, Israel's Home Front Defense
Minister Avi Dichter declared "Israel must perform a
reformatting of Gaza, and rearrange it" -- but gave no indication
of what that dire-sounding phrase might mean in practice.
It is impossible to know how the conflict will unfold in the days
ahead, but what is clear is that the outbreak of violence is the
result of a swirl of events that are reshaping power structures
within Hamas and its relationships with regional forces,
including with Israel and the Palestinian Authority in the West
Bank.
During most of the period since Cast Lead, the Hamas rulers in
Gaza have refrained from attacks against Israel and tried to
prevent other militant groups from launching attacks as well.
But as 2012 has progressed, that policy has changed -- largely
due to internal transformations within the group itself.
EFTA_R1_00545983
EFTA02034313
The internal dynamic of Hamas has traditionally been that
leaders in its Politburo, which is based almost entirely in
neighboring Arab countries, were more militant than their
compatriots inside Gaza. It was the leaders in exile who
maintained close relations with the radical regimes in Iran and
Syria, while the Hamas government in Gaza was more restrained
because it had more to lose from violence with Israel.
That calculation has been inverted in recent months as Hamas's
foreign alliances have undergone a dramatic transformation and
its domestic wing has made a bold attempt to assert its primacy.
Hamas's relationship with Damascus completely collapsed when
the group came out in opposition to President Bashar al-Assad's
regime. The Politburo had to abandon its Damascus
headquarters, and is now scattered in capitals throughout the
Arab world. This has also created enormous strains with Iran,
which is apparently supplying much less funding and material to
llamas than before.
llamas leaders in Gaza, meanwhile, have increasingly been
making the case that the Politburo does not represent the
organization's paramount leadership -- but rather its diplomatic
wing, whose main role is to secure aid and support from foreign
governments. It is the Hamas government and paramilitary force
in Gaza, they argue, that are in the driver's seat, because they are
actually involved in fighting Israel.
The desire to be the tip of the spear against Israel explains why
Hamas involved itself in rocket attacks against Israel earlier this
year, and has done much less to prevent other groups from
launching attacks in recent weeks. The attacks are part of the
case for the transfer of paramount leadership away from the
EFTA_R1_00545984
EFTA02034314
exiles and to the Hamas political and military leadership in
Gaza, which portrays itself as doing the ruling and the fighting.
This internal struggle has been given renewed urgency by the
September announcement from the group's current head, Khaled
Meshaal, that he would step down. The two contenders for the
top spot are Hamas's de facto leader in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh,
and the present Politburo number two, the Cairo-based Musa
Abu Marzook. A Haniyeh victory would cement the transfer of
power within llamas to Gaza, while Abu Marzook represents
continued hopes that Hamas's fortunes hinge on benefiting from
the region-wide "Islamic Awakening" -- the group's
interpretation of what others call the Arab Spring.
These rocket attacks don't just come at a time of intense internal
wrangling within Hamas, but also Israel's upcoming election in
January. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his
government have been under enormous pressure to forcefully
respond to the continued rocket fire -- more than 800 rockets so
far this year, according to Israeli officials -- and Jaabari's
assassination sends the most powerful of messages. Netanyahu
has made his political career on security issues, but even if he
hopes to limit the conflagration, it could spiral out of everyone's
control.
The third vital context for Wednesday's offensive is the
upcoming initiative by the Palestine Liberation Organization to
formally request an upgrade at the U.N. General Assembly to
"non-member observer state status." Israel is vehemently
opposed to this resolution, which is certain to win a majority if it
is submitted. Jerusalem has reacted with a series of dire threats --
including cutting off the tax revenues it collects on behalf of the
EFTA_R1_00545985
EFTA02034315
Palestinian Authority, declaring the Oslo Agreements "null and
void," overthrowing Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas,
greatly expanding settlement activity, or even unilaterally
annexing parts of the occupied West Bank.
Israel has also been marshaling U.S. and European opposition to
the PLO's statehood bid, apparently with a great deal of success.
Together, they have been able to paint the move as "unilateral"
and provocative, setting the stage for retaliatory measures. But
the Israelis must be aware that any further financial, diplomatic,
or political blows to the badly ailing Palestinian Authority --
which is currently unable to meet the public employee payroll,
on which the majority of Palestinians in both the West Bank and
Gaza depend -- can only strengthen llamas.
During last year's PLO initiative at the United Nations, Hamas
was in such disarray from its growing crisis with Syria and Iran
that it was in no condition to exploit Israeli "punishment" of the
PLO. This time, however, llamas is in an entirely different
position: It appears to be on the brink of achieving considerable
regional and international legitimacy. The emir of Qatar recently
visited Gaza, becoming the first head of state to do so, and
promised $400 million in reconstruction aid to the de facto
l-lamas government there. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan is also reportedly considering a formal visit to Gaza.
Egypt, too, is vying for Hamas's affections, although President
Mohammed Morsy's government has done little to practically
help the group.
Hamas can claim, for the first time in many years, to have a
vision for the future, reliable patrons, and regional momentum
as the primary beneficiaries of a wave of Islamist political
EFTA_R1_00545986
EFTA02034316
victories across the Middle East. The PLO, Hamas can argue,
has no money, no friends, no vision, and no future.
If the PLO goes forward with its initiative at the United Nations
and Israel and the West react with significant punitive measures,
Hamas is better positioned than ever to be the direct political
beneficiary. Indeed, it will never have been closer to its
cherished aim of seizing control of the Palestinian national
movement -- and possibly even the PLO itself -- from its secular
nationalist rivals.
The people of Israel will not find peace and security through
endless wars with an ever-evolving array of Palestinian militants --
the inevitable consequence of the lack of a peace agreement. For
all its death and destruction, Operation Cast Lead failed to solve
any of Israel's security issues and did nothing to weaken
Hamas's grip on power in Gaza. But it did expose Israel to
unprecedented international condemnation regarding its
targeting of civilian and non-military targets, alleged war crimes,
and excessive use of force. Those who fire rockets from Gaza, or
countenance such attacks must also be held responsible for what
they know full well will be the Israeli response -- the price of
which will, as always, be primarily paid by ordinary, innocent
Palestinians.
Make no mistake: Jaabari's assassination is a major blow to
Hamas's military wing, which lost its long-standing leader. And
even if this is the beginning of a "reformatting" of Gaza, Israel
could once again end up winning the battle but losing the war: If
it is not careful, developments on the Gaza battlefield could end
up strengthening rather than weakening Hamas. Worse still, it
could empower extreme, new Palestinian jihadist organizations
EFTA_R1_00545987
EFTA02034317
that have begun to crop up in Gaza. The potential for
miscalculation on all sides -- bringing another round of mayhem
that only makes matters worse for everyone -- is grave.
Hussein Ibish is a senior fellow at the American Task Force on
Palestine.
Article 3.
Foreign Policy
Islamist-In-Chief
Mohanad Hage Ali
November 14, 2012 -- Even as opponents of President Bashar al-
Assad have gained ground inside Syria, the political opposition
in exile has remained famously divided. The Syrian National
Council, a body formed more than a year ago with the goal of
uniting all opposition groups, was the poster child for these
failures: Many of its most prominent members resigned in anger
over the Muslim Brotherhood's domination of its top ranks and
the council's detachment from groups inside the country.
However, recent developments have prompted a burst of
optimism about the state of Syria's opposition. On Nov. 11, anti-
Assad groups met in Doha, Qatar, where they hashed out an
agreement, under U.S. and Qatari auspices, to form the National
EFTA_R1_00545988
EFTA02034318
Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces. The
new rebel coalition was hailed as the first truly representative
opposition body -- and its new leader, Sheikh Ahmed Moaz al-
Khatib, was widely praised as the perfect figure to represent the
opposition to the world.
Syria's opposition received an immediate diplomatic boost after
the formation of the new coalition. France recognized it as the
sole legitimate representative of the Syrian people, and pledged
to reexamine the possibility of shipping arms to the rebels. The
Arab League also recognized the body, with Secretary General
Nabil al-Araby hailing it as a "glimmer of hope." By dispelling
Western fears of growing jihadist influence within the Free
Syrian Army, the rebels hope, the new coalition can open the
door to increased financial and military assistance from the
international community.
The election of the Cairo-based Ithatib, a former imam of
Damascus's historic Umayyad Mosque who was imprisoned
under Assad, is a crucial part of this strategy. Western media
outlets such as the BBC were quick to declare him "a respected
figure within Syria" who holds "moderate" political views, citing
his trips to Britain and the United States, as well as his teaching
experience at the Dutch Institute in Damascus, as evidence.
However, public statements posted on the clergyman's website,
darbuna.net, paint a different picture.
Khatib's website features numerous instances of anti-Semitic
rhetoric. In one of his own articles, he writes that one of Iraqi
dictator Saddam Hussein's positive legacies was "terrifying the
Jews." He has also published others' anti-Semitic observations
on his site: In one article, written by Abdul Salam Basiouni,
EFTA_R1_00545989
EFTA02034319
Jews are described as "gold worshipers." Finally, in an obituary
of a Gaza sheikh copied from IslamSyria, Jews are dubbed "the
enemies of God."
While Khatib used his post-election speech to call for equal
rights for "all parts of the harmonious Syrian people," his
previous rhetoric toward his country's minorities has been
nothing short of virulent. One of his articles describes Shiite
using the slur rawafid, or "rejectionists"; he even goes further,
criticizing Shiites' ability to "establish lies and follow them."
Such language, needless to say, will hardly reassure the
country's Alawite community, a Shiite offshoot to which Assad
belongs.
Khatib's animosity toward the West is similarly evident in his
writing. In one article, written in 2011, the new coalition leader
speaks of "stupid American, cunning British, and malignant
French diplomacy." He also accuses Western powers of
propping up the old Egyptian regime and working to weaken the
country for their own ends. "The collapse of the Egyptian regime
is the beginning of the international regional system's descent,"
he writes. "The collapse of Egypt itself is an enormous Israeli
desire [emanating] from its frightening project to split the region
into repugnant sectarian entities."
The new Syrian opposition leader doesn't hesitate to stoke
Muslims' fears of persecution at the hands of the West. He
nosted on his website a flamboyant Dutch Radio report on the
imminent ethnic cleansing of Europe's Muslim minorities, based
on statements by right-wing European figures and Rached
Ghannouchi, the leader of the Tunisia's Islamist Al-Nanda party,
which is now a major partner in the country's coalition
EFTA_R1_00545990
EFTA02034320
government.
Khatib is also a fan of Qatar-based Egyptian televangelist cleric
Yusuf al-Qaradawi. His website places Qaradawi on equal
footing with Tunisia's Mohamed Bouazizi, whose self-
immolation set off the Arab revolutions, and praised the
Egyptian preacher as "our great Imam." Qaradawi is a
controversial figure who has been denied entry to France and
Britain for his support of suicide bombings -- he has described
such attacks, when used against Israel civilians, as "evidence of
God's justice." Given Qaradawi's Qatari connections, Khatib's
praise of the cleric may be an indication of where his loyalties
lie.
In certain instances, Khatib's conspiratorial language even
mimics the regime's own rhetoric. In an article titled "Facebook,
is it an American-Israeli intelligence website?" he claims that
users of the social networking website involuntarily become
Israeli or American spies through information-sharing. Khatib
warns against the potential use of exchanges of a sexual nature
on Facebook, which he says could be "weak spots" used to
recruit spies. The Assad regime previously used the same logic
when it banned Facebook, arguing that the site allowed Israel to
make contact with Syrian youth.
Taken as a whole, these statements raise disturbing questions
about whether Syria's new opposition leader is truly as
"moderate" as he has been described in the press. His religious
and political views appear divisive and at odds with the
reassuring image Syria's opposition is trying to present -- both
domestically and on the international front. Rather than a
positive step forward, Khatib's leadership suggests that Syria's
EFTA_R1_00545991
EFTA02034321
opposition is poised to repeat the same mistakes that have
bedeviled it since the beginning of the revolt.
Mohanad Hage Ali is a Ph.D. candidate at the London School
of Economics and Political Science.
Artielc 4
Al-Shabaka Policy Brief
Palestinians Imposing Agenda on
Abbas
I.eila Farsakh
14 November 2012 -- Palestinian demonstrators at home and
initiatives by Palestinians worldwide have imposed a different
discourse on the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and
Palestinian Authority (PA), as revealed by the evolution of PLO
Chairman Mahmoud Abbas' speeches to the United Nations
General Assembly between 2011 and 2012. With Abbas heading
back to the UN to seek Observer State status for Palestine this
month, Al-Shabaka Policy Advisor Leila Farsakh analyzes the
evolution of Palestinian civil society demands and the attempts
by the PA to accommodate their political message while keeping
control of the content of the Palestinian political project and the
future of the Palestinian political struggle.
EFTA_R1_00545992
EFTA02034322
Palestinian Civil Society's Agenda
The Arab uprisings emboldened a new language of politics in
the Middle East, one that prioritizes the rights of citizens to
freedom and dignity. Although the power of this language has
been diluted with the violence in Libya and then Syria, it is still
strong among activists determined to defend their right to hold
their governments accountable. Among Palestinians living under
Israel's prolonged and brutal occupation, the Arab uprisings
sparked an ongoing struggle between the youth and other sectors
of the population on the one hand and the political leadership
and elites on the other. Each side is seeking to define the
parameters of what constitutes "rights" in the Palestinian context
and how best to protect them.
Palestinians living in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT)
went to the streets as early as February 2011 in support of the
Egyptian revolution. What soon became known as the March 15
movement included youth groups, independent politicians, and
numerous non-governmental organizations (NGOs.) At that time
their main demand was an end to the division between Fatah and
Hamas that has since 2007 kept the former in control of the
West Bank and the latter of Gaza. Yet the various reconciliation
agreements signed by Fatah and Hamas failed to produce
national unity and each party continued to consolidate its turf
while further alienating the population.
Palestinians in the OPT continued to go to the streets,
reinvigorating and giving greater visibility to a growing non-
violent protest movement based on the work of various civil
society groups such as Stop the Wall Campaign, the Boycott,
Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, human rights
EFTA_R1_00545993
EFTA02034323
NGOs, women's associations, and prisoner support groups as
well as trade unions, independent politicians and parties.
Whether demonstrating at Al-Muqata'a (the seat of the PA,)
marching towards Kalandia, campaigning on social media, or
striking against increases in food prices, Palestinian protestors
have since May 2011 focused on three key issues they want the
Palestinian leadership to address.
First, they are calling for the protection of Palestinian national
rights. These, in their view, do not simply include the right to a
state but above all the right of return, freedom, and equality.
This was most evident during the anniversary of the Nakba
(catastrophe) marking Israel's creation on 15 May 2011 when
Palestinian youth together with Stop the Wall Campaign, the
Palestinian NGO network (PNGO) and the popular committees
in various West Bank villages organized demonstrations along
major checkpoints and along Israel's Separation Wall to reaffirm
the Palestinian right of return. They also coordinated with
Palestinians inside Israel, who staged remembrance days in a
number of the 1948 destroyed villages. In a non-hierarchical
fashion, and through the use of social media, they joined forces
with youth groups in Syria, Jordan and Lebanon seeking to enter
Israel through the borders of those countries to affirm their right
of return and assert the centrality of the right of return in popular
activism.
The second demand is a call for new elections and resumption of
the democratic process in the Palestinian polity at large. Indeed,
this demand is not confined to new elections for the PA
presidency or the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) in the
West Bank and Gaza. Al Herak al Shababi (youth movement,)
Palestinians for Dignity, Gaza Youth, and other youth groups,
EFTA_R1_00545994
EFTA02034324
have specifically called for new elections to the Palestinian
National Council (PNC) of the PLO, which represents
Palestinians in the OPT and the diaspora as well as the
Palestinian citizens of Israel. Since 1988, when it formally
adopted the two-state program, the PNC has been politically
marginalized by the Oslo peace process.
The demand by the youth movement in the OPT for the
reinvigoration of the PNC joins that made by various Palestinian
groups in the Diaspora over the years, which have been working
on creating cross-border coalitions in an attempt to reunify the
Palestinian body politic that the Oslo peace process fragmented.
It is also an attempt to reactivate the democratic processes from
the bottom up and give voice to the various Palestinian
constituencies that Oslo silenced.
The third demand of Palestinian activists in the OPT is an end to
the Oslo peace process and to cooperation with Israel.
Palestinian youth from Al Herak and Palestinians for dignity,
among others, demonstrated against the indirect talks between
Israeli and Palestinian officials in Amman in early 2012 (see Al
Herak al Shababi's Facebook page.) They also staged protests
against a joint meeting of Israeli-Palestinian peace activists in
Jerusalem and Ramallah in January 2012, and called for
resistance to normalization efforts until Palestinian rights were
secured. Many activists and intellectuals went so far as to call
for the PA to be dismantled given Oslo's failure to bring about
independence and the futility of reaching an agreement with an
Israeli government focused on colonization and dispossession.
Since the summer of 2012, Palestinians have demonstrated
against the PA's austerity measures and against Oslo's Paris
Protocol.
EFTA_R1_00545995
EFTA02034325
In the Palestinian context, thus, the Arab uprisings, while not
leading to the toppling of the PA, have emboldened popular
demand to end the Oslo peace process and with it the two-state
solution. Palestinian activists are emphasizing the rights-based
discourse of the BDS Campaign launched by over 170 civil
society organizations in 2005, which spelled out fundamental
Palestinian rights as self-determination, an end to occupation,
the right of return and the right of the Palestinian citizens of
Israel to equality. In short, Palestinian activists today are
reframing the Palestinian struggle as one of fighting against an
apartheid Israeli regime and for inalienable Palestinian rights,
not for a state per se.
Abbas & the PA Respond
The PA's decision to seek UN membership for the Palestinian
State declared by the PNC in 1988 can be read as an attempt not
only to bypass the stalemate in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations
but also to meet the people's protests against the Oslo peace
agreements and dissatisfaction with Fatah's and Hamas' rule.
Comparing Abbas's 2012 speech to the UN General Assembly
with the one he presented in 2011 reveals the extent to which the
PA has been trying to accommodate the demonstrators'
language and demands while attempting to control the content of
the political protests as well as the terms of the debate about
what constitutes "rights" in the Palestinian context.
In 2011, the PLO submitted a request for full UN membership
for the State of Palestine to the Security Council, a strategy that
failed because the Palestinian request did not gather the nine
votes necessary due to active opposition by the United States. In
2012, Abbas is submitting a request for non-member Observer
EFTA_R1_00545996
EFTA02034326
State status to the General Assembly, which would upgrade the
PLO's present status of permanent observer and put it on a par
with the Vatican. Such an upgrade could allow the State of
Palestine to become member of the International Criminal
Court, potentially enabling the PLO to pursue claims of war
crimes and other violations against Israel. The new status would
not of course define the boundaries of the State of Palestine, its
relationship to the PLO, the means by which the occupation will
end, or the way the right of return would be realized.
In both of his UN speeches in 2011 and 2012, Abbas sought to
stamp the Palestinian "spring" with the quest for statehood and
independence and deflect the challenge to the PA and demands
for democracy. "At a time when the Arab people affirm their
quest for democracy — the Arab Spring — the time is now for the
Palestinian Spring, the time for Independence", he stated on
September 23, 2011. Abbas argued in both in 2011 and 2012
that an independent Palestinian state on 22% of historic
Palestine, with East Jerusalem as its capital, would provide
relative justice to the injustice created by the Nakba. It would be
the price Palestinians would pay to reach peace with Israel and
be in accordance with the international consensus, since UN
resolution 181, on the partition of Palestine.
He reminded his Palestinian listeners that this state was what the
PNC approved in its 1988 declaration of independence, thereby
seeking to reassert the national legitimacy of the Palestinian
State project. Abbas further affirmed the unity of the Palestinian
people that he represented as the head of the PLO, not simply
the PA, and emphasized that it was the PLO and not the PA
making the UN bid, thus addressing dissent about his
prerogative to speak in the name of all Palestinians. He
EFTA_R1_00545997
EFTA02034327
mentioned Palestinian refugees, those under occupation,
Palestinian citizens of Israel, and those in the Diaspora. He
asserted the right of return under UN resolution 194 as
forcefully as the right to equality and freedom, which a state
would be well placed to protect.
Both speeches also sought to engage the international
community by asking it to fulfill its responsibility towards the
Palestinian people. In fact, the innovative element in Abbas' UN
bid is his attempt to re-internationalize the conflict, by bringing
back the UN, and thereby shaking, if not ending, U.S. monopoly
of the peace process. As he put it in 2011: "We aspire for and
seek a greater and more effective role for the United Nations in
working to achieve a just and comprehensive peace in our region
that ensures the inalienable, legitimate national rights of the
Palestinian people." Abbas may thereby be signaling a decision
to rely on an international legal strategy to protect Palestinian
rights, perhaps not dissimilar from the one used with the
International Court of Justice in 2005 against Israel's building of
the separation wall inside the West Bank.
However, there is a difference in tone and attitude between the
2011 and 2012 speeches. In the 2012 UN speech, Abbas draws
more directly on the discourse used by Palestinian protestors. He
describes Israel not simply as "settler colonial" as in 2011, but
also as implementing "apartheid" policies and "ethnic
cleansing" in East Jerusalem and the rest of the occupied
territories, terms he had avoided using up until then. Whereas in
2011, Abbas was still trying to extend his "hand to the Israeli
government and the Israeli people for peace making ...based on
parity and equity between two neighboring states - Palestine and
Israel," in 2012 he squarely puts the blame on the Israeli
EFTA_R1_00545998
EFTA02034328
government, which, in his words, "rejects the two states
solution" and is " emptying the Oslo accords of their meaning."
Israel, he adds, has weakened the PA and "is promising the
Palestinians a new catastrophe, a new Nakba."
By so doing, Abbas is responding to popular outrage at Oslo and
the futility of negotiating with Israel while the occupation
continues and settlements expand. His stronger tone in 2012
reflects also his frustration at Israel's intransigence during the
last round of informal negotiations under Jordan's sponsorship
in January 2012, in which the PLO participated despite the
continuation of settlement construction. At that time Israel
reiterated its refusal to share Jerusalem or cede control over the
Jordan Valley, while affirming its intention to annex all major
settlements block in the West Bank in any future agreement. The
final map and borders that Israel is offering the Palestinian,
Abbas informed the UN in 2012, is one of "enclaves ...subject
to full dominance of military colonial occupation only packaged
under new names, such as the unilateral plan for a so-called state
with provisional borders."
The 2012 Abbas UN speech also expressed anger towards the
international community. Unlike the 2011 speech where Abbas
invites the international community to play a role to reignite the
peace process, in 2012 he laments that it has allowed Israel to
continue "to be permitted to evade accountability and
punishment", providing Israel with a de facto "license for the
occupation to continue its policy of dispossession and...
entrench its system of apartheid against the Palestinian people."
He calls upon the international community to uphold its
responsibilities and apply UN resolutions to implement a
Palestinian state now that the World Bank and IMF have
EFTA_R1_00545999
EFTA02034329
testified to its institutional viability.
Moreover, Abbas mentions for the first time that the only way to
reach peace "must first and foremost be predicated on the
understanding that racial settler colonization must be
condemned, punished and boycotted in order for it to be
completely halted." In this respect, he appears to have heard the
Palestinian BDS Call, as this goes beyond his reiteration, in
2011, that Palestinians remain commitment to steadfastness and
non-violent resistance. It remains to be seen whether this new
stand will be translated into a PA strategy to engage the UN in
implementing an international boycott campaign against Israel.
Will Observer State Status Make a Difference?
There is skepticism that Abbas' new language can translate into
a new political agenda, and Palestinians worldwide greeted his
stronger tone with apathy. The recent municipal elections held
in the West Bank affirmed the PA's — and Fatah's — disarray and
the rejection of the status quo. And Abbas' recent remarks about
the right of return — in which he gave up his right to return to his
hometown of Safed — caused a furor.
The PLO is likely to secure Observer State membership at the
UN given the majority support it holds in the General Assembly.
The question remains as to how the PLO will use this new
status. Abbas could conceivably recover his capacity to set the
agenda if he takes two steps. First, if he and the PLO respond
creatively and forcefully to the expected backlash from the U.S.,
Israel and their allies to the PLO's upgraded status. And,
second, if the PLO does indeed use its enhanced status to follow
an effective legal strategy in international forums such as the
EFTA_R1_00546000
EFTA02034330
ICC. By so doing, Abbas would counter Palestinian skepticism
given the PLO's neglect of the powerful ICJ Advisory Opinion
in the legal arena, as well as its attempts to bury the Goldstone
Report,
In all cases, the Palestinian civil society drive for rights is likely
to strengthen, both within and outside the OPT, as is the global
BDS movement. Palestinians will find new ways to impose the
quest for rights on the political agenda. As the PLO sees it, the
UN observer state member bid is the last chance for the two-
state solution. It would be an ironic twist of fate if its efforts to
push for a state instead contribute to a rights-based discourse
that propels a movement for a single democratic state of
Israel/Palestine in all of mandate Palestine.
Leila Farsakh is associate professor in political science at the
University of Massachusetts Boston. She is the author of
Palestinian Labor Migration to Israel: Labor, Land and
Occupation, (Routledge, Fall 2005). Dr. Farsakh has since
2008 been a senior research fellow at the Center for
Development Studies at Birzeit University, in the West Bank. In
2001 she won the Peace and Justice Award from the Cambridge
Peace Commission, in Massachusetts, U.S.
Mick 5
The Daily Beast
EFTA_R1_00546001
EFTA02034331
Riots Erupt in Jordan: The End of
Absolute Monarchy
Christopher Dickey
Nov 14, 2012 -- The blue-eyed king and beautiful queen of
Jordan are facing the biggest crisis of their reign. On Tuesday
night, riots and protests broke out in many of the country's
cities. Some in the crowd shouted "the people want the fall of
the regime." Others burned the monarch's portrait. One longtime
supporter of the royals even suggested privately "it's not a
question of if but when" King Abdullah's rule will end. That
may well be an overstatement. The protests included only a few
thousand people all told. But the pressures for truly major
political reforms are mounting.
"I think this ushers in the beginning of the end of absolute
monarchy, not the monarchy," says Labib Kamhawi, 61, a
former political science professor at Jordan University who is
now a spokesman for an umbrella group of opposition parties
and movements. (Kamhawi is facing sedition charges from the
nervous regime for, as he puts it, "saying what I am saying to
you.")
Monarchies traditionally rely on a mystique that blends
bloodlines with patriotism, and throughout history the wisest
royals have been those who managed to remain above the fray of
day-to-day politics. The latest riots, which started over a hike in
fuel prices, show that the 50-year-old Abdullah is finding that
game increasingly hard to play.
EFTA_R1_00546002
EFTA02034332
One buffer after another between Abdullah and popular anger
has fallen away: he has named four prime ministers in the last
year alone. His powerful intelligence chiefs have toppled
repeatedly since he succeeded to the throne in 1999, as he first
relied on them for his survival, then fired them and threw them
in prison.
In the past, protests often focused on Queen Rania, a brilliant
and beautiful woman commonly seen as a power behind the
throne. Although Rania's humanitarian and educational work
was known and appreciated around the world, her frequent
appearances at fashion shows and in lavish photo spreads among
other celebrities in magazines like Hello! made her an easy
target for domestic resentments.
Rania is of Palestinian descent. Jordanians from traditional tribal
backgrounds, always uneasy about the growing power and
influence of the country's Palestinian population, fantasized that
she and the coterie of young businesspeople around her were
plotting somehow to turn the country into a Palestinian state.
(The king, who got his blue eyes from his British mother and
whose Arabic was not entirely native, also has suffered from the
impression that while he ruled over Jordan he was not entirely of
Jordan.)
After Rania's lavish celebrity-studded birthday party in 2010,
attacks on her status and her motives grew more pointed, with a
group of former generals publishing a letter that denounced her
influential role in the monarchy. Allegations of corruption
against her brother, always denied and never proved, grew so
intense that he eventually moved out of the country.
EFTA_R1_00546003
EFTA02034333
King Abdullah, having failed to defend his prime ministers and
turned on successive spymasters, did little to protect his wife's
reputation. But as she adopted a much lower profile, Abdullah's
prestige did not rise. Instead, discontent focused on the king.
Now the monarch himself is increasingly alone before the
people, and reliant more than ever before on foreign support.
The money Jordan's government once received from the Gulf
monarchies has grown increasingly scarce. Israeli Prime
Minister Benyamin Netanyahu has a long and problematic
record of tensions with the Jordanian monarchy, which is one of
only two Arab governments to have signed an unpopular peace
treaty with Israel. So American support for the Hashemite
monarch is more important than ever.
Abdullah has promised political reforms, not least to shore up
support in Washington. But the new electoral law was written in
such a way that even after parliamentary elections scheduled for
January, there will be no chance for the opposition to form a
government without the king's active approval. As a result, this
cosmetic liberalization has done little or nothing to stem
protests.
In Jordan, as in Egypt and many other Arab countries, the
Muslim Brotherhood is a strong political force, and its members
may be encouraging the current unrest. But the bedrock problem
is economic. The financial demands on Jordan just keep
growing. To maintain a vital agreement for support from the
International Monetary Fund, Jordan must pare back its hugely
expensive government subsidies for basic goods. But those make
the difference for many Jordanians between hovering above the
poverty line and sinking below it.
EFTA_R1_00548004
EFTA02034334
"There is a consensus that people are suffering already without
having to bear added hardships," says opposition leader
Kamhawi. As in many other Arab countries, young people find
it almost impossible to find good jobs. "They look at their future
as being devastated by such measures while the government
does nothing about corruption."
In one of those twists that is typical of the Middle East and
common in Jordan's history, the fact that a horrendous civil war
is going on next door in Syria may actually work to Abdullah's
benefit in the short term. To be sure, some 200,000 refugees
have flooded into the country of 6 million people. But the threat
to regional stability is such that no Western government or Arab
power wants to see the Hashemite monarchy go down right now.
"The Syrian situation is most important for the outside world,"
says Kamhawi, suggesting that fact may have led the king to
believe he has more room to maneuver politically and
economically.
But the fates of other leaders who thought they were
indispensable to Washington provide several cautionary
examples, among them the fallen dictators of Tunisia, Yemen,
and Egypt.
Christopher Dickey is the Paris bureau chief and Middle East
editor for Newsweek and The Daily Beast. He is the author of
six books, including Summer of Deliverance and, most recently,
Securing the City: Inside America's Best Counterterror
Force the NYPD.
EFTA R1_00548005
EFTA02034335
ArOde 6.
Carnegie Endowment
Pharaoh Reloaded?
Michael Meyer-Resende and Vitalino Canas
November 8, 2012 -- The Constituent Assembly of Egypt, after a
tortuous process, released its first complete draft of the new
constitution on 14 October. The chapters on the system of
government have drawn the attention of analysts eager to assess
the level of power the presidency would retain. At first glance,
the draft establishes a system that has been described by
assembly members and legal scholars as semi-presidential. This,
however, is a misrepresentation: the semi-presidential system
can create an extremely powerful president if the role of the
prime minister is weak or ill-defined, and if the president is
afforded broad powers. This is the case of Egypt's draft
constitution.
According to the draft, the directly elected president heads the
executive and the state, serves as the supreme commander of the
armed forces and names high-ranking officials. He has the
power to call parliament into session, veto legislation, propose
laws, dissolve the House of Representatives, and appoint up to
EFTA_R1_00548006
EFTA02034336
one-fifth of the members of the Senate, the upper house of the
bicameral parliament with equal legislative power as the lower
house. The president names the prime minister and chairs
cabinet meetings. He also appoints the heads of independent
institutions and chairs the National Defense Council, which
reviews the military budget without significant parliamentary
oversight.
The president, under this draft, enjoys significant powers vis-à-
vis all other actors: parliament is not autonomous because the
president calls its sessions and proposes bills. Parliament's
accountability to the electorate is weakened by the fact that the
president appoints a part of the senate. The president can also
call binding referenda on issues related to "supreme interests of
the state" without any restrictions. Furthermore, the draft is
vague about whether the constitution could be amended through
such referenda, giving the president a potential weapon to
change the rules of the game.
The Egyptian draft seems to be based on the French model, a
regime with one of the most powerful presidents in the
democratic world, but in fact gives even more power to the
president. The most conspicuous hole in the political system is
the vague role afforded to the prime minister. In France, the
requirement of countersignature—presidential decisions need to
be co-signed by the prime minister to be valid—establishes a
check on presidential power. The Egyptian draft contains no
such requirement. Reportedly, the role and status of the prime
minister, who is accountable to the president and parliament, is
being intensively discussed in the Constituent Assembly.
Past authoritarian presidencies in the region selectively picked
EFTA_R1_00546007
EFTA02034337
elements of presidentialism and semi-presidentialism that
enabled them to consolidate their own power. Many of these
elements existed in one democracy or other, but combined, they
result in quasi-dictatorial rule. The Egyptian draft follows this
logic. It seems that Egypt's 1971 constitution also provided
inspiration for this new draft constitution. In fairness, the
Constituent Assembly, operating under the threat of dissolution
by court decision, has been in a hurry to complete its work.
Using historical precedent can be a way of narrowing the debate
and saving drafting time.
By combining the features of a presidential system with those of
a semi-presidential arbiter the constitution of Egypt would lead
to a concentration of legal and de facto power in the presidency,
in particular if the president hails from the majority party in
parliament. Almost paradoxically, the system could tilt from
power concentration to political gridlock if the president were
faced with a parliamentary majority of opposing political forces.
In such a case, the vagueness of the text would invite endless
political and judicial battles over issues such as the role and
accountability of the prime minister and the cabinet, the manner
of electing parliament, the right to schedule parliamentary
sessions, the review of the military budget, and presidential
referenda.
A system of government that is likely to tilt either to the
concentration of executive power or to intra-governmental
gridlock lacks the balance required for establishing sustainable
democracy. It is a poor choice for any country, and particularly
for Egypt, which has seen concentration of executive power
since Nasser and has been through an all-out battle between
institutions of government since Mubarak's demise.
EFTA_R1_00546008
EFTA02034338
Recalibrating this system to establish a stable balance of power
requires that the Constituent Assembly redefine the role of the
president as an active head of the executive or an arbiter
between political institutions, and that it clarify the role of the
prime minister to establish electoral accountability and
parliamentary autonomy. The text still being in flux and
negotiations in the Constituent Assembly underway, this can
still be addressed.
Michael Meyer-Resende is the executive director of the Berlin-
Based NGO Democracy Reporting International. Vitalino
Canas is a lecturer at the Law Faculty of the University of
Lisbon and an expert on systems of government.
Article 7.
Los Angeles Times
Growing ties between Egypt, Turkey
may signal new regional order
Jeffrey Fleishman
November 13, 2012 -- Cairo — Egypt and Turkey are forging an
alliance that showcases two Islamist leaders maneuvering to
reshape a Middle East gripped by political upheaval and
passionate battles over how deeply the Koran should penetrate
public life.
EFTA_R1_00546009
EFTA02034339
The relationship may foreshadow an emerging regional order in
which the sway of the United States gradually fades against
Islamist voices no longer contained by militaries and pro-
Western autocrats.
Each country has a distinct vision of political Islam, but Turkey,
which straddles Europe and Asia, and Egypt, the traditional
heart of the Arab world, complement each other for now.
Turkey's strong economy may help rescue Egypt from financial
crisis, while Cairo may further Ankara's ambition to rise as a
force among Islamic-backed governments.
What bonds and rivalries may ensue is unclear, but they are
likely to affect what rises from the bloodshed in Syria, the
influence of oil nations in the Persian Gulf, future policies
toward Israel and the volatile divide between moderate and
ultraconservative Islamists. The nations offer competing story
lines playing out between the traditional and the contemporary.
"Turkey has done a good job so far of balancing the relationship
between the religion and state. It is secular," said Ahmed Abou
Hussein, a Middle East affairs analyst in Cairo. "This is not the
case in Egypt. We haven't found the balance between religion
and state yet. We're all confused, not only the Islamists."
The two countries recently conducted naval exercises in the
Mediterranean Sea. Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi visited
Ankara in September and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan is expected to arrive in Cairo this month with promises
of closer cooperation and a financial aid package that may reach
$2 billion.
"Our history, hopes and goals bind us together to achieve the
EFTA_R1_00546010
EFTA02034340
freedom and justice that all nations are struggling for," Morsi
said on his trip.
The nations' deepening ties come amid international and
domestic pressure emanating from revolutions that are recasting
political rhythms in the Middle East and North Africa.
Erdogan is moving to fashion Turkey's democracy into a model
for Arab governments even as he has been criticized by human
rights groups for the arrest of thousands of Kurdish activists.
Morsi is seeking to restore Egypt's global stature after years of
diminishment under deposed leader Hosni Mubarak.
Turkey's diplomatic finesse and economic allure have allowed it
to deftly exert its regional influence. But the civil war in Syria
has shredded relations between Ankara and Damascus and left
Erdogan, who has threatened Syrian President Bashar Assad
with wider military action, searching for a plan to end the
conflict on his border.
Turkey has also drawn the ire of Iran, a Syrian ally, for signing
on to a U.S.-backed missile shield. And Iraqi Prime Minister
Noun Maliki this year called Turkey a "hostile state" and
accused it of agitating sectarian tension in his country.
Erdogan, who learned his wiles as a boy selling sesame buns on
the streets of Istanbul, is more flamboyant than Morsi, the son of
a peasant farmer. But Morsi has proved a canny politician: In a
visit to Tehran in August, he signaled a thaw in Egyptian-Iranian
relations while at the same time angering Iran by condemning
Assad's crackdown on dissent.
Egypt's deeper problems bristle on the home front, including
EFTA_R1_00546011
EFTA02034341
unemployment, poverty, crime and decrepit state institutions
that became more glaring after last year's overthrow of Mubarak.
Both Morsi and Erdogan, who rose to power nearly a decade
ago, curtailed the political influence of their nations' generals,
but each has been accused by secularists as having authoritarian
streaks tinged with Islam. The countries have a tendency to
harass and arrest dissidents and journalists.
A closer fusion of Cairo and Ankara stems in part from the
influence Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood had on Islamist
organizations across the region, including Erdogan's Justice and
Development Party. While the Brotherhood was being
persecuted by Mubarak, a brash Erdogan riveted the "Arab
street" with his populism and chiding of leaders, such as
Mubarak, for their compliance toward the West.
The question is, how will Erdogan and Morsi maneuver the
politics of a Middle East that both want to influence, and which
Egypt regards as its historic and strategic territory?
"I don't think Egypt even under the Muslim Brotherhood would
appreciate a Turkey that would nose around on Egypt's political
turf," said Kemal Kirisci, a professor of political science and
international relations at Bogazici University in Istanbul.
But Turkey offers Egypt a pragmatic — some analysts suggest
modern — approach to the West, the global economy and
stability. A member of NATO, Turkey is aspiring to join the
European Union. Its talks with the EU have been strained, but
the process forced economic and social reforms that have
benefited Erdogan as he increasingly looks to the Middle East
and North Africa to expand commercial interests. Arab news
EFTA_R1_00548012
EFTA02034342
media have reported that Turkey's trade with the Arab world is
targeted at $100 billion over next five years.
"What is interesting about Turkey's success is its commitment to
practical visions and plans," said Seif Allah el Khawanky, a
political analyst. "Morsi's administration doesn't have this."
Both countries are working toward new constitutions. Turkey's
politics spring from a secular democracy and a history of defined
political parties that have tempered the influence of Islam.
Turkish women who wear hijabs are banned from political
office. Egypt's Islamist-dominated government, however, is
pushing for a constitution firmly rooted in sharia, or Islamic law,
and there is little inclination among conservatives to import the
Turkish model.
That difference is partly defining the immediate aftermath of the
Arab Spring. Islamist groups long suppressed by Mubarak and
other autocrats are imposing their political and religious visions
on nations with underdeveloped or divided secular parties.
"The Islamist parties in Turkey are past implementing religious
ideologies. They're working more on economic policies and
reform," Hussein said. "The Muslim Brotherhood and Salafis
will have to change their rhetoric to fit the needs of Egypt and
the world.... The Turks refer to their example as the Turkish
experience. They are brilliantly trying to sell this so-called
experience in Syria, Egypt and other Arab countries."
Jeffrey Fleishman is the Cairo bureau chief for the Los Angeles
Times. He is a Pulitzer Prize finalist and a former Nieman
EFTA_R1_00546013
EFTA02034343
fellow at Harvard. He is author of "Promised Virgins: A Novel
of Jihad" and "Shadow Man," which will be published in 2012.
Ankle 8.
Project Syndicate
The Emerging World's Education
Imperative
Shashi Tharoor
14 November 2012 -- New Delhi — Official delegations from the
world's nine most populous developing countries just met in
New Delhi to discuss a subject vital for their countries' futures:
education. The meeting of ministers and others from
Bangladesh, Brazil, China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Mexico,
Nigeria and Pakistan, known as the E-9, is the latest in a series
of encounters held every two years to fulfill the pledge of
"education for all" by 2015.
The E-9 account for 54% of the world's population, 42.3% of
children not in school, 58% of young illiterates (aged 15-24),
and 67% of adult illiterates (two-thirds of whom are women). So
the challenges are enormous: children, from families too poor to
think about education, beyond the reach of schooling and too
malnourished to study; and too few schools, classrooms,
teaching resources, and adequately trained teachers. Rampant
illiteracy underpins other problems, including exploding
populations, gender imbalances, and widespread poverty.
India provides a good example of how these problems should be
EFTA_R1_00548014
EFTA02034344
addressed. A decade ago, 30 million Indian children were not in
school; today, the figure is three million. A far-reaching Right to
Education Act, obliging the state and central governments to
provide (as a constitutional right) eight years of free and
compulsory education to all children between six and 14, has
had a large impact. And free mid-day meals at school are a
powerful incentive to children from poor families to attend
school and stay there.
This does not mean that all enrolled students will emerge
prepared for the information age; but getting children into
school is a start. India also needs a relevant curriculum and
skilled teachers who can motivate students to learn it — in short,
an overdue emphasis on quality, in addition to officals'
understandable focus on access and inclusion.
There are 540 million Indians under the age of 25. The labor
force is expected to increase by 32% over the next 20 years,
whereas it will decline by 4% in industrialized countries and by
nearly 5% in China. India's favorable demographic profile can
add significantly to its economic-growth potential for the next
three decades, provided that its young people are educated and
trained properly.
Otherwise, the same young people will swell the ranks of the
frustrated and unemployed, with unimaginable consequences in
terms of social unrest and the risk of organized violence. Maoist
groups already target such people for recruitment. If India is to
avoid an apocalyptic fate, it must give them a better chance of
gainful employment through more and improved educational
opportunities.
EFTA_R1_00548015
EFTA02034345
India has one of the largest higher-education systems in the
world, and ranks second in terms of student enrollment. But,
while the country now has 621 universities and 33,500 colleges,
only a few are world-class institutions, including the Indian
Institutes of Technology (IIT) whose graduates have flourished
in America's Silicon Valley. But such institutions are still
islands in a sea of mediocrity.
India is entering the global employment marketplace with a self-
imposed handicap of which we are just beginning to become
aware. For far too long, we were complacent, having produced,
since the 1960's, the world's second largest pool of trained
scientists and engineers. They were more than our then-
protected economy could absorb, so many tens of thousands of
them left to make their fortunes elsewhere, founding companies
in Silicon Valley, inventing the Pentium chip, and even winning
a couple of Nobel Prizes.
Their success meant that IIT was soon mentioned alongside
MIT. But it also masked another reality — that there just are not
as many of them as there should be. Senior Indian executives
whose businesses require them to recruit competent scientists or
engineers complain that demand for such talent vastly exceeds
the supply. Once the elite institutions are accounted for, what
remains is decidedly uneven in quality.
A World Bank Survey in 2009 highlighted that 64% of
employers are "only somewhat satisfied," or worse, with the new
engineering graduates they hire. I have spoken to many CEOs
who tell me that many, if not most, of their new employees
require remedial training before they can begin work, in order to
compensate for the shortcomings of their university education.
EFTA_R1_00548016
EFTA02034346
Indeed, companies like Tata and Infosys are hiring people whom
they do not consider to be up to par — and spending 6-9 months,
sometimes longer, to educate them properly for their jobs.
The need for education reform has never been clearer, and Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh's government has recognized it.
Still, India's spends only 1.2% of its GDP on higher education,
compared to 3.1% in the US or, closer to home, 2.4% in South
Korea. The figure should be higher. So, too, is India's 3.3%
share of global output of academic research far too low for a
country with 17% of the world's brains.
Education is now recognized as a national priority. More
resources are being committed, the corporate sector is being
encouraged to get involved, and there is a welcome emphasis on
innovation. International cooperation, exemplified by the mutual
learning implicit in the E-9 exercise, is also being tapped.
The next ten years could witness a dramatic transformation of
education in India. But it will not happen without a huge
national effort. The rest of the E-9, engaged in similar
endeavors, will be watching.
Shashi Tharoor is India's Minister of State for Human Resource
Development. His most recent book is Pax Indica: India and the
World of the 21st Century.
EFTA_R1_00546017
EFTA02034347
Related Documents (6)
DOJ Data Set 8CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA00032518
0p
DOJ Data Set 10OtherUnknown
EFTA01658773
43p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA Document EFTA01658887
0p
Court UnsealedAug 5, 2011
Global Witness, China Congo Report
global witness global witness China and Congo : Friends in Need A report by Global Witness on the Democratic Republic of Congo, March 2011 Global Witness investigates and campaigns to prevent natural resource-related conflict and corruption and associated environmental and human rights abuses. Our investigations and lobbying have played a key role in the establishment of the major international initiatives addressing these issues, including the Kimberley Process and the Extractive Industries
44p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA Document EFTA01658773
0p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA Document EFTA01658979
0p
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.