Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

In mid-February, the world’s largest elections took place in Indonesia over the course of a single day. Around 205 million eligible voters were called to the polls to elect a new president, vice president and almost 20,000 representatives for the national, pro­vincial and district parliaments. The spotlight was largely centred on the presidential election, as the president plays a prominent role in the country’s political system, and according to the official results released on 20 March, General Prabowo Subianto will be assuming office in October. His election as head of state is seen by some observers as a threat to Indonesian democracy or even a return to dictatorship. However, it is much more likely that Prabowo will maintain the policies of his predecessor Jokowi, who prioritised the economic development of the country. Nonetheless, democratic institutions and procedures are likely to be further weakened. Germany and the EU should be prepared for Indonesia to adopt a more active and self-confident foreign policy stance under Prabowo as Jakarta will likely come to be driven by a decidedly transactional understanding of international cooperation.

Diversifying Germany’s bilateral partnerships in the Indo-Pacific is one of the central goals of German policy. On the one hand, this diversification aims to reduce economic dependence on China, and on the other – in the context of systemic rivalry with authoritarian states – to bring about cooperation with states that share common values with Germany, so-called Wertepartnern (value-based partners). However, it is not clearly defined which values are fundamental to value-based partnerships. It also remains unclear which states in the Indo-Pacific are referred to as value-based partners and how these value-based partnerships differ from “normal” bilateral relations with other states in the region. Instead, this study shows that the significance that is rhetorically attached to cooperation with value-based partners is at odds with the vague concept of “value-based partnership” and its limited importance as a basis for bilateral cooperation. A comparison of value-based partners with a control group of non-value-based partners across different policy areas produces mixed results. The assumed correlation between being categorised as a value-based partner and closer international cooperation based on shared norms and values cannot, with any coherence, be demonstrated empirically. A comprehensive revision of the hitherto diffuse concept of value-based partnerships is recommended – either by normative sharpening, combined with a narrowing of the circle of states designated as value-based partners, or by eradicating the term from the political vocabulary.

European Perspectives on potential consequences and the policy areas most affected

European politics is braced for a potential right-wing surge at the 2024 European Parliament elections. The center-right European People’s Party (EPP) may face tricky decisions.

Israelischer und internationaler Druck schränken das Palästinenser-Hilfswerk stark ein. Dabei ist die Bevölkerung in Gaza auf UNRWA angewiesen.

Die durch Putsche etablierten Militärregime in Mali (2020), Burkina Faso (2022) und Niger (2023) stellen Deutschland und seine europäischen Partner vor Zielkonflikte und Dilemmata. Entsprechend viel Zeit benötigen die Europäer, einen angemessenen Kurs gegenüber den Militärregimen abzustecken. Dabei geht es letztlich um die Frage, ob und welche Kooperationsangebote politisch vertretbar und in ihrer Wirkung aus­sichtsreich sind oder ob eher eine Politik der Isolierung und Konfrontation angezeigt wäre. Der eigent­liche Klärungsbedarf besteht aber vor allem bei der Frage, welche Prob­leme und Ziele vorrangig sein sollen. Geht es darum, Putsch-Regime zurück­zu­drängen, den wachsen­den russischen Einfluss einzudämmen, oder stehen die sicher­heits­poli­tischen Prob­leme der Region selbst im Vordergrund (illegale Migration, Terrorismus, Instabi­li­tät)? Die deutschen und europäischen Handlungsoptionen sind ohnehin schon be­grenzt. Umso wichtiger sind transparente Grundannahmen und klare Ziel­setzungen.

Event Video 
Photos

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-zmsvrj").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-zmsvrj").fadeIn(300);});});

IPI in partnership with the Life & Peace Institute and the Permanent Missions of the Republic of Kenya, Norway, and Sweden to the UN, cohosted a policy forum on March 21st assessing lessons learned from Kenya’s Peacebuilding Architecture Review.

The pursuit of peace, a foundational goal at the establishment of the UN in 1945, requires member states to assume primary responsibility for conflict prevention through initiatives that are nationally owned and people-centered, respect human rights, and enhance inclusivity and social cohesion. Its implementation requires a constant refreshing of peacebuilding and conflict prevention and resolution methods. This year, determining a way forward on these issues will be key to the impact hoped for in the Pact for the Future.

In 2023, in line with the push for national governments to take the lead in “identifying, driving and directing priorities, strategies, and activities for peacebuilding and sustaining peace,” the Government of Kenya commissioned a review of its national peacebuilding architecture. The initiative was spearheaded by the National Steering Committee on Peacebuilding and Conflict Management and assisted by an Independent Panel of Advisors (IPA), with support from the United Nations Resident Coordinator’s Office and other partners. Resulting from the highly consultative process involving Kenyans from diverse backgrounds, the IPA submitted to Kenya’s political leadership a report with a comprehensive set of observations and recommendations, structured around four pillars: (1) defining a national agenda for peace, (2) promoting political inclusion, (3) enhancing conflict prevention and resolution, and (4) proposing a new institutional architecture for peacebuilding. By pursuing an independent assessment that values the insights and contributions of local peacebuilders and civil society, Kenya demonstrates national ownership and leadership.

The audience heard from the IPA reflecting on its experiences on the review journey and the key findings and recommendations, with a particular emphasis on partnership opportunities in the implementation phase.

Opening Remarks:
H.E. Andreas Løvold, Chargé d’affaires and Deputy Permanent Representative of Norway to the UN
Elizabeth Mary Spehar, Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support, Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs (DPPA)
Shamsa Abubakar, Deputy Chair for the Independent Panel of Advisors for the Peacebuilding Review

Speakers:
Raymond Omollo, Principal Secretary, Ministry of Interior and National Administration, Government of Kenya
Lesley Connolly, Team Leader, Global Policy, Life & Peace Institute
Rana Taha, Peace and Development Advisor, United Nations Resident Coordinator’s Office, Kenya
Sheikh Abdullahi Abdi, Independent Panel of Advisors for the Peacebuilding Review

Moderator:
Jenna Russo, Director of Research and Head of the Brian Urquhart Center for Peace Operations, International Peace Institute

Closing remarks:
H.E. Martin Kimani, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Kenya to the UN
H.E. Anna Karin Eneström, Permanent Representative of Sweden to the UN

Seit April 2023 herrscht Krieg in Sudan. Er ist Ausdruck grundsätzlicher Veränderungen in den politischen Machtverhältnissen. Der vorher dominierende Sicherheitssektor ist tief gespalten und die ehemals schwach vernetzte Zivilgesellschaft hoch mobilisiert. Einerseits ermöglichte die Konkurrenz innerhalb des Sicherheitssektors, eine zivil-militärische Übergangsregierung zu bilden. Andererseits erhöhte der weitere Aufstieg der Rapid Support Forces zur Macht das Risiko eines bewaffneten Konflikts, erst recht nach dem Putsch 2021. Seit Bashirs Fall 2019 haben die Sicherheitskräfte zweimal vergeblich versucht, eine alleinige Militärherrschaft zu errichten. Gleichwohl scheiterte auch die zivil-militärische Übergangsregierung, weil das Militär nach wie vor über erhebliche Machtressourcen verfügte. Sudans politische Elite trug zu diesem Ausgang bei, indem sie sich zu wenig um den Aufbau rechtsstaatlicher Institutionen und zu viel um die eigene Sichtbarkeit kümmerte. Internationale Akteure, die Sudans Übergangsprozess stärken wollten, hätten die Sicherheitskräfte entschiedener zurückdrängen können, statt sie reflexhaft einzubinden. Viele internationale und sudanesische Bemühungen krankten daran, dass sie entweder nur auf Einbindung oder nur auf Ausschluss der Sicherheitskräfte abstellten. Ein neuer Elitendeal allein mit Sudans Gewaltunternehmern wird keinen Frieden bringen, solange keine zivilen Kräfte am Tisch sitzen. Sudans beste Chance liegt vielmehr im Sozialkapital des freiwilligen Engagements seiner Bürger:innen für humanitäre Versorgung, Demo­kratie und lokale Versöhnung.

As the demands on German foreign and security policy increase in a Europe charac­terised by multiple crises, so do the demands on the German armed forces. In order for the Bundeswehr to become more assertive and effective as a deterrent, despite limiting factors such as personnel and materiel shortages, it must be able to employ new technologies more quickly and extensively. The faster and more effectively these technologies are harnessed, the more advantages they will bring on the battlefield. The current political will for change, the pressure to adapt due to the evolved secu­rity situation and the increase in financial resources are creating an unprecedented momentum.

Zwischen innenpolitischer Transition und außenpolitischem Aufstieg

Turkey’s popularity in the MENA region has increased since the AKP’s rise to power in 2002. People-to-people contacts, economic progress, and a perceived European lifestyle have contributed to Turkey’s popularity in the MENA region. Turkey’s seemingly competitive political system and strong participation in elections are sources of appreciation. However, the meanings attributed to the Turkish political system have changed over time. Ankara’s confrontational rhetoric on the perceived double standards of Western states and its calls for reform of the international system are welcomed. Turkey’s increased popularity does not easily translate into broad regional influence. Ankara’s credibility has deteriorated in the eyes of the region’s elites. Its support of Sunni Islamists in the of the Arab uprisings antagonised the region’s autocratic elites, ushering in a period of isolation between 2013 and 2020. Turkey’s recent efforts to reintegrate in the region have thawed relations with Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, but incurred reputational costs vis-à-vis Sunni Islamists. Authoritarian practices and rising xenophobia against Syrian refugees and other Arab citizens also constrain Turkey’s influence in the region.

The Hamas terrorist attack on 7 October 2023 and the subsequent Israeli military intervention in the Gaza Strip marks a turning point in relations not only between the two parties to the conflict but also between Egypt and Israel. Under President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, those ties were steadily being expanded in the areas of economic and security policy right up until the events of last October. Now they are characterized by mutual recriminations: while Egypt accuses the Israeli leadership of working towards the expulsion of the population of the Gaza Strip to Sinai, Israel criticizes Egypt for its alleged support of Hamas. Neither accusation is unfounded and both should be taken very seriously by Germany and its European partners. In fact, the Europeans should stand alongside Egypt in rejecting expulsion, which implies putting pressure on Israel to ensure the protection of the civilian population in Gaza. At the same time, it is important to support Israel’s insistence that going forward, the secu­rity of the border between Egypt and the Gaza Strip cannot be left to Cairo alone.