PUBLIC POLICY UPDATE Aug.

3, 2012 WASHINGTON UPDATE On Tuesday, leadership from the House and Senate announced that they have reached an agreement on a continuing resolution (CR) to extend government funding beyond Oct. 1, 2012. Oct The CR would extend government funding for six months at the top line spending level for fiscal top-line fisc year 2012 $1.047 trillion and it would be free of riders. During the recess, committee members and staff will draft legislation to be passed by the House and Senate when they r return in September. Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) introduced legislation Thursday to authorize increased funding for PA) humanitarian activities in Syria. Among other things, the bill would require a Special Envoy for Syria to coordinate U.S. efforts and encourage the international community to boost their support the for Syrian refugees in Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey and Iraq. For more information on the bill, please see Senator Caseys press release on the legislation. Last Thursday, July 26, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted 13 6 to pass an amended 13-6 resolution to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This coincided with the 22nd anniversary of the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The UN treaty d was originally signed in 2009 and sent to the Senate for ratification in May. Although the amended resolution passed with bipartisan support (Republican Senators Lugar (IN), Isakson (GA), and Barrasso (WY) all voted in favor of the amended treaty), there was heated debate on the treatys specifics. One of the amendments ensured that the conventions provision of equal access to health care for the disabled did not apply specifically to any services or procedures. Another key specifically amendment was a declaration that ratifying the convention does not require the United States to enact any new legislation. Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) released a statement saying, Today we had a . strong bi-partisan vote to advance a treaty to protect Americans with disabilities when they leave isan our shores, and to help export Americas values of non discrimination against all people living with non-discrimination disabilities. This was a vote for equality of opportunity, independent living, economic selfself sufficiency, and full participation for all people with disabilities both here and abroad. Sen Kerry Sen. hopes that the treaty will come to the Senate floor in September.

UPCOMING HEARINGS There are no upcoming hearings relating to international development or humanitarian assistance to next week.

HEARING SUMMARIES Next Steps in Syria Senate Foreign Relations Committee August 1, 2012 Witnesses: Martin Indyk, Brookings Institution James Dobbins, International Security and Defense Policy Center, RAND Corporation Andrew Tabler, Program on Arab Politics, Washington Institute for Near East Policy

Opening Statements: Chair John Kerry (D-MA) Syrian conflict has potential to disrupt key U.S. relations in the Middle East. What would a massive disruption (i.e., massacre, weapons of mass destruction) in Syria mean for the rest of the world? Time is an important component, as it gives greater opportunity for radicals to take advantage of the situation. We need to convince Russia and China that it is in their best interest to seek political change; Russians have the greatest power to be game changers. We cannot allow conversations in the UN Security Council to block support to the opposition. Key questions to address: would it be appropriate to share intelligence with the opposition? What about lethal weapons? Should we employ safeguards such as no-fly zones? We must help provide capacity and engage all key players. Ranking Member Richard Lugar (R-IN) The way forward in this situation is far from clear. The current conflict risks opening room for more terrorist groups and lethal weapons. Interventions have risks of serious unintended consequences. Martin Indyk Definition of U.S. core interests in Syria: o Bring Syria to peace with Israel to ensure stability in the Arab-Israeli heartland and security for Israel. o Prevent proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. o Promote independence of surrounding states. o Advance human rights of the Syrian people. Necessary steps for U.S. to take: o Most important challenge is working with Russians on a political process, whose support for the Assad regime is increasingly untenable. It is time to address the country at the highest level. o Guarantee Assad-supporting groups (Christians, Alawites) that their lives and interests will be secured in post-Assad regime. o Guarantee the army is needed to play an important stabilizing role to sustain the political transition. o Coordinate with Arabs, Turks, and Israelis to prevent regional sectarian conflict. 2

Generate leadership among opposition to develop strong political platform.

James Dobbins Questions to ask when considering military intervention: o Is there a just cause for intervention? o What would intervention look like? o Is there prospect for success? o Are the strategic interests of states sufficiently engaged? o What role would the intervening body have post-conflict? Syrian government is not fulfilling its role to protect its population. Syrian regimes days are numbered; fall is inevitable. Intervention could come in the form of lethal assistance or imposition of a no-fly zone. Conditions for intervention in Syria: o Syrian opposition must ask for help. o There must be support and participation from neighboring allies. o NATO/UN Security Council should pass a mandate for military action. Syrian war is unlikely to end in a negotiated settlement between the opposition and Assad regime; rather, it is likely that one side will collapse. U.S. government must forge relationships with future Syrian leaders and promote democratic values. Andrew Tabler Fear that the next Syrian government will be resistant to U.S. interests due to its limited policy of diplomatic isolation at the present. U.S. invested too much time in diplomacy at UN level and not enough directly helping the Syrian people. Little is actually known about the oppositions political aspirations. U.S. government has not yet established redlines for the Assad regime. Assad has ignored all international warnings. Questioning Chair John Kerry (D-MA) 1. When has U.S. military intervention been for a good reason? Bad reason? Tabler: o It depends on our foreign policy objectives. o A clash between Sunni and Alawite forces could result in a sectarian conflict. o The U.S. is far too late to recognize that the most important action is on the ground in Syria. 2. Do you know exactly who the opposition is? Do you know who would provide with weapons? Tabler: o Absolutely not. We need more efforts to identify and work with these groups. 3. Is there danger of a Sunni rising with an Islamist agenda? Indyk: o Although Syria has been a secular country for a long time, it is not naturally an alQaeda breeding ground. The present conflict is what creates an opening. Dobbins: o We should support insurgents in order to suppress extremist groups. If they are given the choice, insurgents will prefer U.S. support over al-Qaeda.

Ranking Member Richard Lugar (R-IN) 1. Why can the U.S. dictate when the ruler of a country must go? Why must we get involved? Indyk: o It is a mistake that the U.S. decides when leaders should go. That decision should be up to the people. o U.S. should provide support, not dictate objectives, esp. without a means to achieve them. o Americans are typically war-weary, but as humanitarian disasters escalate, the American people will find intervention necessary. Hopefully it will not reach that situation. Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) 1. How can we actively engage on the ground in Syria and regionally to bridge the sectarian divide? Indyk: o The key is to focus on the inside rather than outsiders, first by identifying who the opposition is and then by forging relationships with them. o We can provide military support to the Turks and Qataris. Tabler: o There are a number of groups already on the ground who we can engage with. o If we can turn the tide within the opposition, Russians will follow suit. Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) 1. How do we militarily get involved? Tabler: o We need to look at triggers for direct involvement, such as mass atrocities and the use of chemical weapons. o Indirect involvement would include engaging with existing groups on the ground, which already have an interest in communicating with the U.S. 2. Do we need to decide who we are going to arm? Indyk: o Yes, it is too optimistic to say we are already doing enough. o We must understand who we are supporting and what their intentions are so that we can avoid unintended consequences. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) 1. Is it enough to support other countries that arm the opposition? Indyk: o We need to know exactly who we are arming. 2. Should we be concerned about the threat of chemical weapons? Tabler: o The location of stockpiles is critical because it determines who can get control over the weapons. 3. What might an international effort against chemical weapons look like? Dobbins: o An international effort would not necessarily require military action. It could involve diplomatic pressure to give up weapons under international monitoring. Chair John Kerry (D-MA) 1. Clearly define the interest for U.S. involvement. What would compel us to be more proactive? 4

Tabler: o Avoidance of a larger war would protect our oil prices and relations with Syrias neighbors. o The conflict could lead to decisive blow for Iran. Dobbins: o The U.S. is poised on a war with Iran. Eliminating Irans access will reduce pressure on Israel. Indyk: o Our strategy should not be about securing Israel. o Syrian activities will destabilize Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq and potentially Bahrain in the future. Iranian involvement could spread conflict further. ARTICLES AND REPORTS

L.A. Times July 29: U.S. is the driving force behind the fighting in Somalia The U.S. is largely responsible for supporting a 15,000 person African Union force fighting alShabab in Somalia. While the force is made up of African soldiers, their training and funding comes from the United States. Much of the training is outsourced to ex-military contractors. July 31: More than 600 million people affected by latest blackout in India Electrical grid failures in northern India left more than 600 million people without power on Tuesday. The failure followed Mondays 15-hour blackout that affected 300 million people. The collapse was one of the worlds largest, and raises questions about Indias infrastructure. The New York Times July 30: Islamists in North Mali Stone Couple to Death In front of hundreds of onlookers in Mali, al-Qaeda-affiliated Islamist group Ansar Dine stoned a couple for death for having children outside of marriage. Interim President Traor returned to the country for the first time since being seriously beaten by a mob two months ago. The Washington Post August 1: Somali leaders pass new constitution as 2 suicide bombers trying to attack meeting are killed Somali leaders voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday to pass a new constitution that guarantees numerous individual liberties. The constitution goes farther than previous legislation had in its protections of women and children. Corruption and insecurity continue to challenge Somalia. The Economist August 1: Myanmar's persecuted Rohingyas: No place like home Ethnic violence against the Muslim Rohingya minority in Myanmar has flared recently, despite increased international engagement. The government has done little to stop violence between Rohingyas and Burmese Buddhists. The violence has displaced roughly 100,000 people. BBC August 2: Syria crisis: Kofi Annan quits as UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan, UN and Arab League peace envoy to Syria, has decided to step down from that role August 31. Elements of Annans six point plan have been ignored by both sides in the Syrian conflict, with violence increasing across the country.

Reuters August 3: China state news agency slams Clinton remarks on Africa trip In response to remarks by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during a speech in Senegal, China accused the U.S. of trying to sour its relations with African nations. Chinese influence in Africa is growing fast, but it has faced criticism that its work in Africa is exploitative. Disclaimer: Articles linked in the Update are intended to provide a dashboard view of newsworthy and topical issues from popular news outlets that will be of interest to readers of the Update. The articles are an information sharing vehicle rather than an advocacy tool. They are in no way representative of the views of InterAction or the U.S. NGO community as a whole.