This International Crisis Group report examines the failed attempts of the past to dismantle the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR)--an insurgency with roots that go back to the 1994 genocide in Rwanda--and recommends a new approach to help end great civilian suffering and restore state authority in the eastern Congo.
As Washington ponders how long to stay in Iraq, it would do well to remember the limited impact of the United States' withdrawal from Vietnam and Cambodia in the 1970s, Lebanon in the 1980s, and Somalia in the 1990s.
With violence down and U.S. troop deaths at their lowest point since the Iraq war began, military analysts are in near-agreement that Iraq is more secure today. But CFR's Stephen Biddle and Steven Simon disagree on how to ensure stability continues. They discuss their views during this inaugural Foreign Affairs Live debate.
In August 2008, violence re-erupted in Congo's North Kivu province. This multimedia presentation brought to you by the International Crisis Group highlights the most recent developments in the region, and provides background to the current crisis.
Authors: Stephen Biddle, Michael E. O'Hanlon, and Kenneth M. Pollack New York Times
“Having recently returned from a research trip to Iraq, we are convinced that a total withdrawal of combat troops any time soon would be unwise,” write Stephen Biddle, Michael E. O’Hanlon and Kenneth M. Pollack. Although recent success in Iraq has prompted more calls for withdrawal, a continued American presence is needed to preserve the fragile peace in that country.
Max Boot writes that Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki’s ambiguous statements about a timetable for troop withdrawal from Iraq are an attempt at political posturing before the upcoming presidential elections.
Congressional delegations can be illuminating despite the obvious limitations imposed by time and security concerns, writes Daniel Senor, giving Barack Obama a list of people he ought to meet on his upcoming trip to Iraq.
Iran’s goals of building a mutually beneficial relationship with Iraq and of undermining the American occupation are at odds with each other, writes Vali Nasr. These conflicting objectives have resulted in Tehran’s first major setback in Iraq.
“For every two steps forward in Iraq, there is also a step backward,” says Max Boot, referring to the faltering negotiations between the U.S. and Iraqi governments over the conditions of the United States’ continued presence in Iraq. Sticking points include whether U.S. soldiers and private security contractors will maintain immunity from Iraqi prosecution, and whether the U.S. will continue to have the freedom to detain terrorist suspects without Iraqi approval.
Mohamad Bazzi criticizes the Bush Administration’s “flawed understanding of basic forces in the Middle East,” by pointing out his inaccurate grouping of Al-Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah in his speech to the Israeli Knesset. This is not the first time the President has made this mistake, says Bazzi. In his January 2007 State of the Union, he lumped Sunni and Shiite extremists as the same “totalitarian threat” with the “same wicked purposes.”
The Council on Foreign Relations' David Rockefeller Studies Program—CFR's "think tank"—is home to more than seventy full-time, adjunct, and visiting scholars and practitioners (called "fellows"). Their expertise covers the world's major regions as well as the critical issues shaping today's global agenda. Download the printable CFR Experts Guide.
The author examines Pakistan's complex role in U.S. foreign policy and advocates for a two-pronged approach that works to quarantine threats while integrating Pakistan into the broader U.S. agenda in Asia.