Starvation Alleviation Campaign: De Doorns, South Africa 2010

PASSOP, in collaboration with the South African National Civic Organization (SANCO), distributed maize meal, beans, oil, and salt to the most vulnerable Zimbabweans living in the De Doorns refugee camp and South Africans in the neighboring township. This is the first installment of what PASSOP hopes to be an ongoing project to fill the humanitarian need left by the government's inaction. If you would like to donate to future humanitarian aid distributions, please go to passop.co.za.

Background on the De Doorns refugee camp: In November 2009, more than 3,000 Zimbabweans were displaced from their homes in De Doorns by xenophobic violence. A safety site was set up on the local rugby field. Today, there are still more than 400 Zimbabweans living in the camp. The camp remains open because of the government's failure to fulfill its legal obligation to engage with the camp's elected representative committee about what the residents need in order to move out and on with their lives.

A Zimbabwe native helps refugees from her country in South Africa

Maclin, Beth. "A Zimbabwe native helps refugees from her country in South Africa." Christian Science Monitor, April 12, 2010.
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/2010/0412/A-Zimbabwe-native-helps-refugees-from-her-country-in-South-Africa

Holbrooke stresses international involvement in addressing the AfPak problem

While citing Kashmir as the path to peace in Afghanistan may get an op-ed published in the New York Times, the U.S. special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan unequivocally disagrees with the theory.

Some claim that India and Pakistan must resolve their dispute over Kashmir in order for Pakistan to be able to redistribute its military resources from its border with India to challenge the Taliban who cross its shared border with Afghanistan.

"It's a very popular point of view," Ambassador Richard Holbrooke told more than 400 people at Harvard Kennedy School's John F. Kennedy Jr. Forum on Thursday [March 4], "but I don't agree with it and it ain't what we're going to do."

Holbrooke, whom Belfer Center Director Graham Allison introduced as "the diplomatic equivalent of the hydrogen bomb" because of his vast experience abroad and in government, said all countries with a strategic interest in the subcontinent region - beyond just Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India - must be involved in the move toward resolving the conflict.

"Any outcome that's going to stabilize that volatile part of the world, which may well be the most volatile part of the world today, requires the strategic interests of all countries in the neighborhood to be taken into account," Holbrooke said, citing Iran, Russia, China, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia, and the U.S., in addition to the three main countries.

Holbrooke, who took part in the 1995 Dayton Accords negotiations, which brought together officials from Serbia, Bosnia, and Croatia to end the three-and-a-half year long war in Bosnia, faces a different challenge than he did in the Balkans: Not all parties that play a role in Afghanistan's security are affiliated with a government.

"The Taliban do not represent a government of a part of the country," Holbrooke said.

"They represent a kind of political movement. Al Qaeda, with which they are allied, is even more shadowy; it's a network. There is no negotiating with al Qaeda."

Even though Holbrooke thinks the Dayton process teaches lessons applicable to most negotiations, he said Afghanistan presents a unique situation where they do not apply.

Holbrooke also questions the comparison of Afghanistan to Vietnam. The core difference, he says, is that the U.S. had no strategic security stake in Vietnam.

"The North Vietnamese and the Vietcong posed no threat to the American homeland," he said. "In Afghanistan, the enemy we're fighting, and its ally al Qaeda, pose a direct, unambiguous threat to the United States."

It is for this reason that the Obama administration drastically increased the number of civilians and military personnel on the ground in Afghanistan and is working on doing the same in Pakistan. Holbrooke remembers the lessons learned from the U.S.'s last involvement in Afghanistan and does not plan on making the same errors.

"We cannot repeat the mistake of 1989 again," he said. "Once the Soviets left, we turned our back on Afghanistan and it was a catastrophic mistake."

This was originally published here: http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/19987/

Friends in High Places

Maclin, Beth. "Friends in High Places." Boston Phoenix, March 1, 2010.

http://thephoenix.com/Boston/news/97639-friends-in-high-places/

Climate change requires an energy technology revolution, Chu says

Secretary of Energy Steven Chu discussed the need for an aggressive national energy policy at a packed John F. Kennedy Jr. Forum event, “Laying the Foundation for the Next Generation of Clean Energy Jobs,” on August 6, 2009. He outlined challenges of global warming and potential strategies that could provide solutions.

“We are changing the destiny of the earth,” Chu said, “but we have the opportunity to minimize that change.”

The looming threat of irreversible climate change requires a bold “new industrial revolution” sparked by innovation, regulation, and investment, according to Chu and U.S Rep. Edward Markey (D-Malden), who also spoke at the Forum, which was sponsored by the Belfer Center along with the Institute of Politics. Chu and Markey said they believe that revolution is on the horizon with the new administration and proposed legislation.

Markey, co-sponsor of the American Clean Energy and Security Act, commonly referred to as the Waxman-Markey bill, sees the bill, which passed the House earlier this summer, as the third piece to a trio of bills – alongside the 2007 energy act and 2009 stimulus bill. He compared its effect in spurring the creation of new energy technologies to earlier legislative efforts that energized the telecommunications revolution.

“Here, because energy is a four times larger sector than telecomm, we believe it will unleash $1 trillion to $2 trillion, minimum, of private sector investment and we’re already beginning to see the early stages of that in our country,” said Markey, who gave a special introduction to Chu.

While both recognize that this bill has some flaws, they said it is important to begin taking action on energy as soon as possible. “The issue is, quite frankly, you want as strong a bill as possible, but you want a bill,” Chu said. “The real issue is getting going.”

Chu and Markey said the United States needs to advance renewables, such as wind and solar, but also find ways to clean up current forms of energy, such as coal.

“The United States, China, India, and even Russia will not turn their backs on coal because that’s where two-thirds of the coal supplies lie,” Chu said. “We have to figure out how to use it in a clean way and an economically viable way.

“The United States has an opportunity to invent those technologies that can enable us to use this resource,” he said.

Markey noted that the Waxman-Markey bill also places the U.S. in a better position to negotiate a new international climate agreement at Copenhagen next year. He said that when he met with China’s President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao earlier this year to discuss the bill, they understood this was game-changing legislation.

“We are no longer preaching temperance from a bar stool,” Markey said.

Chu highlighted a new McKinsey report that showed enormous savings from energy efficiency. “This is not something that has sunk in to the American public,” Chu said. “When you think of energy efficiency, the vast majority of people think, ‘Oh that costs more money. Can I afford it?’ How can you afford not to do this?”

Better technology will lead to lower costs and smaller bills, he said, citing the refrigerator as an example. Between 1970 and today, the refrigerator decreased in cost and the amount of energy used as a result of new technology.

Chu envisions American innovation that will not only create the technology and jobs for where we are today, but where we will be. The Waxman-Markey bill will create the technologies and “jobs that prepare America for the future,” he said.

This article was originally published here: http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/19503/

Intrastate Conflict Program Advises on Governance in Africa

The Belfer Center's Program on Intrastate Conflict and Conflict Resolution (ICP) at Harvard Kennedy School traveled to meet with leaders and officials in Rwanda and Malawi in January to discuss the 2008 Index of African Governance.

ICP Director Robert I. Rotberg and Rachel Gisselquist, research director for the Index of African Governance, first met with government officials in Rwanda. The government of Rwanda initiated and organized a large seminar in Kigali, Rwanda's capital, for officials, NGO leaders, and donors to explore how the Index of African Governance could most effectively be used to strengthen governmental performance and improve everyday life in impoverished Rwanda, according to Rotberg.

The Index of African Governance is an annual report that ranks 48 sub-Saharan African nations on governance according to 57 different variables, from safety and security through rule of law to various health and educational attainments. The Index was first published in 2007, and the 2008 report appears as a web document and in book form under the title Strengthening African Governance.

Rwanda, which ranked eighteenth in the most recent Index, wants to improve its score and better the lives of its inhabitants and attract foreign investment, Rotberg said. The Index is structured so that countries can clearly see areas they might improve.

"In Kigali, the eighty or so Rwandans at the all-day seminar were interested in the Index's many messages for their future. They also pushed back vigorously in cross-examining the Index and its assumptions," Rotberg said.

In Malawi, where ICP Program Manager Katie Naeve and Editorial Associate Emily Wood joined them, Rotberg and Gisselquist met with the Index African Advisory Council over the course of two days. The Council is made up of African academics and practitioners who oversee the Index quality.

Rotberg and Gisselquist also met with parliamentarians in Lilongwe, Malawi's capital, and showed how Malawi, which ranked eleventh, might improve its scores by strengthening governance and reducing poverty.

"We had a very interesting discussion with the Women's Caucus in parliament, which invited us to present the Index results, specifically those related to gender, Gisselquist said. "These women also shared with us their concerns and priorities. We talked a lot about education, health care, and clean water, and about the particular challenges of communities in peri-urban areas. It was a very useful discussion."

This article was originally published here: http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/18869/

Frazer offers lessons on transformative U.S.-Africa policy

The Bush Administration made a mistake not enforcing a no-fly zone over Sudan in response to the conflict in Darfur, according to Jendayi Frazer, former assistant secretary of state for African affairs, but she hopes President Barack Obama will fulfill the policy he campaigned on and enforce one.

"I think we made a mistake in not trying to put a no-fly zone in place," she said at Harvard Kennedy School's John F. Kennedy Jr. Forum on April 7, 2009. There was concern that a no-fly zone would impede the work of humanitarian organizations in Darfur; however, since Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir expelled most of those organizations, some view the argument as moot.

"I think you can do a no-fly zone. I think it's feasible," Frazer said.

In spite of this policy failure, Frazer saw several U.S. policies put in place toward Africa that she views as being transformational while serving as assistant secretary (2005-2009), senior director for African Affairs at the National Security Council (2001-2004), and ambassador to South Africa (2004-2005). In her address, "Solutions: A Transformative U.S.-Africa Policy," she offered lessons learned - in terms of health, economic development, conflict resolution, and governance - for the new Obama administration as it crafts its policy toward Africa.

The event was cosponsored by Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs and Institute of Politics, Harvard University African Student Association, and Harvard College Black Student Association. Belfer Center Director Graham Allison, who moderated the event, welcomed Frazer home to Harvard Kennedy School, where she was an assistant professor of public policy and a Belfer Center faculty affiliate.

She emphasized the need for collaboration and active dialogue with the "African leaders on the ground," a philosophy she sees as a cornerstone of the Bush administration's policy.

"In the past there was a tendency to try to work Africa through Europe," Frazer said. "Where as I felt we should just work Africa directly."

Frazer highlighted the "President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief," commonly known as PEPFAR, attributing its success to the fact that it was based on an African model. "We had something that we knew worked - coming from Africa, developed in Africa," she said.

The Plan, launched in 2003, expanded on Uganda's ABC prevention and treatment model: "Abstain, Be faithful, use Condoms." Between fiscal years 2004 to 2008, the U.S. has spent more than $18 billion on this effort. Frazer said the Bush administration's policies were successful in treating HIV/AIDS, but more needs to be done in terms of prevention and suggested that Obama should focus on that.

In terms of economic development, she said the Obama administration has to make sure African leaders are not on the sidelines in the policy-making process, noting diversification of trade and greater foreign investment as crucial aspects of a comprehensive development policy.

Frazer attributes the Bush administration's success in attaining resolutions to the six major African wars happening in 2001 to the role of African mediators in the peace processes. She said that for every crisis, the Bush administration worked with African mediators and the sub-regional organizations and trained African peacekeepers. She also noted the increase in and continued need for better governance by African leaders as a means of responding to crises.

Frazer also sees the establishment of institutions and the historic level of funding as key parts of the Bush administration policy's transformational legacy.

To watch Jendayi Frazer's address, go to: http://www.iop.harvard.edu/Multimedia-Center/All-Videos/Solutions-A-Transformative-U.S.-African-Policy

This article was originally published here: http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/18962/