The Afghan Peace Talks: Transforming Experience and Using Knowledge to Confront Future Crises—What Does the Afghanistan Experience Tell Us About the Future of Countering Violent Extremism?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad Shah Mohibi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil Wars ◽  
The United States ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Potential Threat ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
War And Conflict ◽  
United States Intervention

On September 12, 2020, the Afghan peace talks begin between the Taliban and the Afghan government in Doha-Qatar to end the 19 years of war. This significant diplomatic effort was only possible when in February 29, 2020, the United States and the Taliban reached an “historic agreement” in the presence of the international community in Doha-Qatar committing all U.S. troops to lave Afghanistan in 14 months in return the Taliban will cut ties with al-Qaida and make peace. [1, p. 1.]It was set to pave the way for intra-Afghan dialogues—a much needed move toward peace. Afghanistan has been entrenched in a 40-year civil war that has consequently created the conditions for the country to be considered a base for terrorist operations, ravaged by war and conflict for centuries by empires and militia groups in the name of power, religion and ideologies. It has seen foreign invasions, civil wars and has been turned into a theatre of conflict where the power struggle between hostile foreign countries transpired. It became the heart of the Mujahideen, the Taliban and the al-Qaeda’s operational bases and subsequently the United States intervention after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and has remained engaged in its longest war as part of the ongoing “War on Terror” [2, p. 1]. While the US is pulling troops out and the Afghans are making peace, there is a potential threat, the rise of the Islamic State of Khorasan IS-K in Afghanistan. It is at this point that overall lessons gained from ground and first-hand experience can be applied to addressing the security issues that plague Afghanistan. Overall, there is a strong drive for peace amongst contemporary Afghans. They believe that negotiations and political settlement are in the nation’s best interests.

scholarly journals Responsibility to Protect dalam Kasus Genosida oleh ISIL terhadap Yazidi-Irak melalui Intervensi Militer Amerika Serikat

Jurnal ICMES ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-63
Author(s):  
Dewi Agha Putri ◽  
Hasan Sidik
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Military Intervention ◽  
The United States ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
International Commission ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Media Reports ◽  
United States Intervention ◽  
The Military

Artikel ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan intervensi militer yang dilakukan oleh Amerika Serikat (AS) dalam menanggapi genosida yang dilakukan oleh Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) terhadap komunitas Yazidi di Irak. Peneliti menggunakan konsep Responsibility to Protect (R2P), yang merujuk pada laporan dari the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) u This article aims to explain the military intervention carried out by the United States in response to the genocide carried out by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) against Yazidi community in Iraq. The researchers use the concept of Responsibility to Protect (R2P), which refers to a report from the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty to see the procedure for procuring military intervention in the R2P framework in detail. This article found that besides several collateral damages, military intervention carried out by the United States was following the procedures set out by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. The United States’ intervention was done by the Iraqi government's approval, which had previously requested assistance from the United States. This intervention can be seen as Iraqi collective self-defense as stated in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations or intervention based on approval as stipulated in Article 20 of the Responsibility of States for International Wrongful Acts 2001. This research was conducted qualitatively using sources in the form of a variety of documents and mass media reports. ntuk melihat prosedur intervensi militer dalam kerangka kerja R2P secara terperinci. Artikel ini menemukan bahwa meskipun telah terjadi sejumlah dampak sampingan (collateral damages), intervensi militer yang dilakukan oleh AS mengikuti prosedur yang ditetapkan oleh ICISS, antara lain, dilakukan AS atas persetujuan pemerintah Irak yang sebelumnya meminta bantuan dari AS. Intervensi ini dapat dilihat sebagai pertahanan diri kolektif Irak sebagaimana tercantum dalam Piagam Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa Pasal 51 atau intervensi berdasarkan persetujuan sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 20 Responsibility of States for International Wrongful Acts tahun 2001. Penelitian ini dilakukan secara kualitatif dengan menggunakan sumber-sumber berupa berbagai dokumen dan laporan media massa.

scholarly journals Turkey’s dealing with the Syrian Kurds (Part I)

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-38
Author(s):  
Michael Gunter
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
North Atlantic ◽  
North Atlantic Treaty Organization ◽  
The United States ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Potential Threat ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Mediterranean

This wide-ranging survey of the Kurds in Syria will evaluate the mid-term fall-out of the suddenly announced US withdrawal on October 7, 2019. It concludes that  1. The US dishonorably deserted its Syrian Kurdish ally, 2. Alienated future allies who would no longer trust it, 3. Allowed some of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) prisoners incarcerated by YPG guards to escape and potentially revive the genocidal jihadist organization, 4. Rewarded Turkish aggression, 5. Handed the murderous, but badly taxed Assad regime new life, 6. Facilitated Iran’s drive to the Mediterranean and potential threat to Israel, and, maybe most of all, 7. Empowered Russia as the ultimate arbitrator of the Syrian imbroglio to the detriment of the United States and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

Turkey’s foreign policy priorities in the Middle East and Afghanistan

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (10-3) ◽  
pp. 228-237
Author(s):  
Marina Shpakovskaya ◽  
Oleg Barnashov ◽  
Arian Mohammad Hassan Shershah ◽  
Asadullah Noori ◽  
Mosa Ziauddin Ahmad
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Middle East ◽  
The United States ◽  
Turkish Foreign Policy ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
New Approaches ◽  
East Region ◽  
History Of ◽  
Middle East Region

The article discusses the features and main approaches of Turkish foreign policy in the Middle East. Particular attention is paid to the history of the development of Turkish-American relations. The causes of the contradictions between Turkey and the United States on the security issues of the Middle East region are analyzed. At the same time, the commonality of the approaches of both countries in countering radical terrorism in the territories adjacent to Turkey is noted. The article also discusses the priority areas of Turkish foreign policy, new approaches and technologies in the first decade of the XXI century.

Moderate Islam

2005 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 29-38
Author(s):  
Abid Ullah Jan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Muslim World ◽  
Dark Spot ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Central Authority ◽  
American Government ◽  
Track Record ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Part Time

The Debate Question 1: Various commentators have frequently invoked the importance of moderate Muslims and the role that they can play in fighting extremism in the Muslim world. But it is not clear who is a moderate Muslim. The recent cancellation of Tariq Ramadan’s visa to the United States, the raids on several American Muslim organizations, and the near marginalization of mainstream American Muslims in North America pose the following question: If moderate Muslims are critical to an American victory in the war on terror, then why does the American government frequently take steps that undermine moderate Muslims? Perhaps there is a lack of clarity about who the moderate Muslims are. In your view, who are these moderate Muslims and what are their beliefs and politics? AUJ: The promotion of “moderate” Muslims is part of an extremist tendency sweeping the United States, unlike the situation in the Muslim world. It is the result of a war between two Americas: the America of ideals (e.g., of equality and justice) and the America of extremism, which has succumbed to self-interest groups and individuals. For the America of ideals, the Tariq Ramadan episode is a dark spot, one among many such episodes in recent times. Periodic episodes of tragedy are the hallmark of the America that has shifted its priorities under the pressure and manipulation of the extremists. These forces use all expedient means to sacrifice the wellbeing of the United States for self-interest and promotion of the Zionist state. This extremism entails a morbid dread of Islam. It never regards any Muslim as moderate unless one publicly rejects the Qur’an as “the final manifesto of God,”1 considering this belief a “disturbing cornerstone of Islam,”2 and submitting to the rejection of key parts of the Qur’an.3 Unquestioning support for Israel, along with all other American-approved dictatorships, is the minimum criterion.4 All other factors are irrelevant. The fascistic American track record of accepting “moderates” and rejecting “radicals” is clear.5 The final distinction is not defined by their adherence to Islam, but by the assumed threat they pose to the interests of these extremists. For example, a devout man, fervent in all of his personal rituals but not participating in political affairs, would be a “moderate,” whereas a marginally practicing Muslim with the zeal to voice his opposition to the injustice perpetrated by the extremists’America is classified as a “radical.” In the current political context, a moderate is one who is passive like the devout man, or active like the extremist “moderates” – the Muslim neomods – who openly promote the extremist agenda using Islamic interpretations or “Project Ijthihad”6 as a cover. Hence, the distinction is not academic or religious, but political. Two opposing factors prove this point. First, there are clear commands for Muslims to be moderate by default.7 Moderateness is a prerequisite for all Muslims, not a label of identity for some. Accordingly, Muslims cannot be part-time or partial Muslims (Qur’an 2:208) or reject part of the Qur’an (Qur’an 2:85).8 Hence, such religious labelling is irrelevant. Second, the extremists insist that strong belief in the totality of the Qur’an makes Muslims “Islamists.”9 That is why they believe themselves to be “absolutely at war with the vision of life that is prescribed to all Muslims in the Koran.”10 It means that the standards of “moderateness,” as set by the American extremists, are directed at neutralizing a preconceived threat. Under these circumstances, mere claims of being a “moderate” do not make any difference at all, as long as a Muslim is presented as a threat, however baseless, to the interests of extremist America. Similarly, the so-called extremism in the Muslim world is not the result of Muslims’faith. Rather, it is a function of the perpetually colonized and oppressed people due to the lack of true independence and a central authority to control and productively channel their energies. It is naïve to suggest that a few ill-informed “moderate” individuals or puppet regimes can emulate the abilities of an entire central authority (i.e., the Islamic state) and effect progress and positive meaningful change.

ОСОБЕННОСТИ ПОДГОТОВКИ КАДРОВ ДЛЯ ПЕНИТЕНЦИАРНОЙ СИСТЕМЫ В США

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladimir Unterov ◽  
Elizaveta Eremeeva
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Training System ◽  
Modern World ◽  
Foreign Experience ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
Personal Qualities ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Prison Systems ◽  
Correction System

Статья посвящена изучению зарубежного опыта подготовки кадров для пенитенциарных систем. Его анализ и рассмотрение возможности внедрения отдельных элементов направлены на совершенствование системы подготовки сотрудников для уголовно-исполнительной системы России, повышение их профессионального уровня, что в конечном счете будет способствовать достижению главной цели УИС - исправлению осужденных. Авторы особое внимание уделяют изучению специально-профессиональных и личностных качеств, необходимых сотрудникам пенитенциарных учреждений. В статье рассматриваются особенности подготовки сотрудников пенитенциарной системы в Соединенных Штатах Америки. Важнейшей задачей образовательных учреждений и центров по подготовке кадров для пенитенциарной системы США является обеспечение будущих сотрудников знаниями, необходимыми для выполнения профессиональных обязанностей в рамках предстоящей деятельности. Также авторы подчеркивают важность развития при подготовке будущих сотрудников не только профессиональных, но и личностных качеств.The article is devoted to the study of foreign experience in order to improve the training system for the Russian penal correction system. In particular, the training of prison officials in the United States of America is considered as one of the most developed States in the modern world. The improvement of the training process for the Russian penal correction system implies the development of international cooperation with the prison systems of foreign countries. The study of foreign experience of penitentiary education contributes to the improvement of the professional level of the staff of the Penal Correction Service and, ultimately, to the achievement of the main goal - correction of convicts. The authors pay particular attention to the study of specific professional and personal qualities required by potential prison staff. Since there have been significant positive changes in the formation of professional qualities of the future employee of the Russian penal correction system over the past decade, the main focus of the work is on the formation of personal (universal) qualities of the employee of the Federal Penal Correction Service of the Russian Federation, for which the positive experience of the United States is analyzed.

The Study of International Relations in Great Britain: Further Connections

1986 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 626-645 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gene M. Lyons
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
World War I ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Studies ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
Political Experience

Aside from language, students of international relations in the United States and Great Britain have several things in common: parallel developments in the emergence of international relations as a field of study after World War I, and more recent efforts to broaden the field by drawing security issues and changes in the international political economy under the broad umbrella of “international studies.” But a review of four recent books edited by British scholars demonstrates that there is also a “distance” between British and American scholarship. Compared with dominant trends in the United States, the former, though hardly monolithic and producing a rich and varied literature, is still very much attached to historical analysis and the concept of an “international society” that derives from the period in modern history in which Britain played a more prominent role in international politics. Because trends in scholarship do, in fact, reflect national political experience, the need continues for transnational cooperation among scholars in the quest for strong theories in international relations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document