Defense& Diplomacy10IDEAS

April 2012 | Featured IdeaGrassroots Diplomacy and Education

for

10 Ideas for Defense & DiplomacyApril 2012

National Director Taylor Jo Isenberg

Field DirectorWinston Lofton

Policy DirectorReese Neader

Program DirectorAlan Smith

Chapter Services CoordinatorDante Barry

Student EditorsCourtney Joline, Chris Scanzoni

Alumni EditorsMonika Johnson, Charsaree Clay

Ayesha Siddiqui ,Dan BlueRocky Cole

The Roosevelt Institute Campus NetworkA division of the Roosevelt Institute

570 Lexington Avenue, 5th Floor,New York, NY 10022

Copyright (c) 2012 by the Roosevelt Institute. All rights reserved.

The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the authors. They do not express the views or opinions of the Roosevelt Institute, its officers or its directors.

10 IDEAS

FOR

Defense & Diplomacy

Congratulations to Tahsin Chowdhury,

author ofGrassroots Diplomacy through

Globalized Educationand contributing researchers

Karim Eissawi, Mohammad Shamim,Ashish Mathew, Carolina Martinez

Nominee forPolicy of the Year

Inside the Issue P

Grassroots Diplomacy through Globalized EducationTahsin Chowdury et al

A Critical First Step: Preventing Escalation in the South China SeaErich Helmreich

Building 21st Century Allies with the KATUSA FrameworkBrian Jencunas

Effective Aid for a New EgyptGraham Palmer

Defining Our Mission: NATO’s Future RoleAnna Moore and Daniel Pitcairn

Meeting the Needs of Female VeteransLily Roberts

Advance Global Security: Ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban TreatyAriana Rowberry

Promoting Long-Term Economic Growth in Africa:A U.S.-led Approach

Erika K. Solanki

Promoting Music in the Fight Against OppressionKyle Villemain

Protect Funding that Protects FamiliesCorinne White

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

p Letter from New York City

Where do groundbreaking ideas come from? How do they take shape? How do they fundamentally shift the way we see our world? It almost always takes the confluence of a seemingly intractable problem, people of intentional purpose, and a certain boldness to overcome. It’s a potent mix that can be seen in the advancements in workers rights spurred by Frances Perkins’s forward thinking labor policies to the environmental move-ment inspired by Rachel Carson’s revealing work on the damaging effects of pesticides. Ideas have real impact when there is the realization that we need to do better combined with the people who are bold enough to ultimately do something.

The Roosevelt Institute | Campus Network provides a way for young people to tap into this process, a platform for them to unlock the potential to drive progressive change. We received a record number of submissions to our premiere publication series this year from hundreds of students who invested the time and energy to research, write, and design actionable policy solutions for their communities. The 84 authors ultimately selected for the 2012 10 Ideas represent a generation of young people who recognize that it is because of, not in spite of, their age that they are uniquely capable of tackling some of our most entrenched challenges.

With a thirst for action, many of these students will use these ideas to build coalitions, gather resources, and recruit supporters to create real, sustainable impact. Among this group of thinkers, visionaries, and doers, I encourage you to look for the future Frances Perkins and Rachel Carson, leaders who are already combating the injustices of our prison system, reimagining how we use energy, and solving the obesity crisis.

We are proud to present the 2012 10 Ideas series, an inspiring exemplar of our genera-tion’s unique propensity to engage with and accept the responsibility of today’s complex and interconnected challenges. Each one of these pieces represents a powerful remind-er that this generation is not only willing to build a better future, but has already begun.

Taylor Jo IsenbergNational DirectorRoosevelt Institute | Campus Network

Policy Director’s Note P

Welcome and thank you for reading the fourth edition of the Roosevelt Institute | Campus Network “10 Ideas Series”, our annual flagship publication. This series, encom-passing six journals produced from our six student policy centers, represents the most innovative, game-changing ideas coming from our network.

Our country needs a new narrative for how to address the problems we face: skyrocket-ing inequality, rising health care costs, unsustainable deficit spending, climate change, the list goes on. Defeating these challenges will require broad support from our citizens. And yet across the political spectrum the majority of the voting public has expressed strong dissatisfaction with their relationship with government. They feel that they don’t have a voice in how decisions are made. The work of the Campus Network, and our “10 Ideas Series” demonstrates that there is an alternative way forward-grassroots policy-making-and that young people across the country are blazing a trail forward.

Each idea in these journals represents the work of a student who independently took up the challenge of addressing our country’s problems. They worked at local nonprofits and visited community centers to identify the issues that mattered most to their con-stituents. They reached out to community leaders, professors, and government officials to identify resources that could address those issues. And along with writing the policy memos included in this journal they’ve developed public campaigns to attract funding and popular support for their causes. With this new model of engagement our students are bringing government back to “We the People”.

We’re inviting you to join us.

Reese NeaderPolicy Director

Roosevelt Institute | Campus Network

8

Grassroots Diplomacy through Globalized Education

Tahsin Chowdhury, CUNY City CollegeContributing Researchers: Karim Eissawi, Mohammad Shamim, Ashish Mathew, Carolina MartinezThe United States Department of State should engage in grassroots diplomacy by sponsoring interactive international programs in higher educational institutions, known as Globalized Education.

The United States Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) has launched the Global Connections and Ex-change program which uses tech-nology and interactive projects to connect American secondary schools with international institu-tions in Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and the West Bank.1

Other educational nonprofit orga-nizations are involved in grassroots educational diplomacy initiatives. Friendship Force engages in foreign exchanges with the goal of improv-ing cultural awareness and diplomacy through a grassroots campaign. During the Cold War, they made exchanges between the USSR and the United States and today they are active in more than fifty countries, proving the success of international exchange pro-grams as a tool of diplomacy.2 The Institute of International Education, active since 1919, is another nonprofit organization that engages in exchanges between the American civil-ian population and citizens abroad to improve global awareness and cultural sensitivity.3

AnalysisPromoting grassroots diplomacy through education could help break social and cultural barriers as well as improve the quality of American civil society by connecting it with civil societies abroad. Studies indicate that America’s image abroad has plummeted since 2002.6 This soft power diplomacy of international education is a cost effective approach. The average foreign exchange program costs $10,000 plus out-of-pocket expenses.7 If agencies such as the State Department or the Department of Defense sponsored an exchange program it would cost roughly $1 million to sponsor 100 students.

This proposal acts not as an additional international education program, but as a means to develop public-private partnerships between non-profit organizations and the United States government, leading to enhanced cooperation between the two sectors and ef-ficient work on crucial policy issues.

Key Facts• According to a survey by the associa-

tion of international educators known as NAFSA, 73 percent of likely voters in the United States believe that the lack of global education for young people will di-minish Americans’ advantage to compete in the global economy and 57 percent be-lieve that students need to participate in a study abroad program.4

• A survey of young Americans (age 18 to 24) found that 21 percent believe that it is not important to know where countries in the news are located while 38 percent believe that learning another language is unimportant.5

8

Next StepsThe State Department should work with Friendship Force International, the Institute of International Education, and the Roosevelt Institute Campus Network and provide funding to the City College of New York Study Abroad Program, enabling our faculty to devise a new leadership exchange program. This program would consist of exchanging a selective group of ten qualified students who demon-strate leadership capabilities from City College with ten students with similar qualifications in a participating university abroad. The exchange program would require students abroad to apply them-selves in local community organizations and provide an entry point for them to get involved in the Roosevelt Institute Campus Network Chapter of City College. This program would expose both groups of students to the issues faced by communities in the United States and abroad.

Endnotes1. United States Department of State, “Global Connections and Exchange Homepage.” Accessed Novem-

ber 20, 2011. http://exchanges.state.gov/youth/programs/connections.html2. Friendship Force International, “A Brief History of the Friendship Force.” Accessed November 21, 2011.

http://catalog.thefriendshipforce.org/index.php/who_we_are.3. Institute of International Education, “History of IIE.” Accessed November 21, 2011. http://iie.org/Who-

We-Are/History.4. NAFSA Association of American Educators, “Public Opinion Survey on International Education.” Ac-

cessed November 21, 2011. http://www.nafsa.org/_/File/_/2011_EdStudentsGlobalEconomy.pdf.5. National Geographic-Roper Public Affairs 2006 Geographic Literacy Study, 20066. Pew Center for Global Attitudes7. Exchange Student World, “Cost to be an Exchange Student.” Accessed January 27, 2012. http://exchang-

estudentworld.com/info/costs/.8. United States Department of State, “The First Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review 2010.”

Accessed November 21, 2011. http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/153108.pdf.

9

• Talking Points• The State Department has expressed

interest in increasing efforts to engage in public and grassroots diplomacy.8

• Promoting effective diplomacy through education can promote American in-fluence and image abroad as well as improve American geographical lit-eracy through the interaction between Americans and citizens abroad.

10

A Critical First Step: Preventing Escalation in the South China Sea

Erich Helmreich, NYU

To ensure the safety of seafaring vessels and to prevent escalation, the United States and China should sign an ‘Incidents at Sea Agreement’.

In March of 2009 the USNS Impeccable naval surveillance ship sailed through the inter-national waters of the South China Sea on its usual patrol. Over the next few days, Chi-nese planes and ships aggressively approached the Impeccable, nearly causing collisions. Had the Impeccable responded with force, an international crisis would have ensued. The likelihood of an international crisis arising from such an incident is at an all-time high. Even the United States’ top naval commander in the Pacific officially noted that, “there’s potential for an incident in the South China Sea to intensify”.1 The only existing frame-work to prevent escalation is the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement (MMCA) signed in 1998 between China and the U.S. to strengthen communication, which merely mandates annual meetings between the two parties. The MMCA’s ability to prevent discord has been pushed to the brink as it does not setup quick communication be-tween the two navies and does not guide how the two interact while operating in the same area.There is, however, a stronger framework that has proven to work.

In 1972 the U.S. and the Soviet Union signed an agreement accounting for the potential of vessels of their navies to collide and/or interfere with ships of the other nation. This Incidents at Sea Agreement acted as a confidence-building measure between the two superpowers and prevented es-calation.2 Despite this success, China and the U.S. have not yet instituted these measures. In light of recent events, however, it is imperative that the U.S. and China sign an Incidents at Sea Agreement. Without this confidence-building measure, the miscalculation and eventual escalation from an inci-dent such as the Impeccable seems inevitable.

AnalysisCombining the Obama Administration’s new emphasis on East Asia and Chinese mod-ernization, escalation of any incident between the two powers seems inevitable. With the history of collisions building up, any escalation or miscalculation would disrupt the $5 trillion of global trade, carried by half of the world’s trade fleet, through the South China Sea region.6 With $5 trillion of international trade passing through the region, in-cluding 60,000 vessels per year and 13.6 bbl/d of oil, about equivalent to the amount passing through the Straits of Hormuz, the South China Sea’s Malacca Strait is a crucial chokepoint.7 The exit from Iraq, and the eventual drawdown of troops in Afghanistan,

Key Facts• Approximately 50 percent of the an-

nual world crude oil passes through the South China Sea.3

• Any conflict or restriction of naviga-tion in the South China Sea would have severe economic conse-quences for China, Japan, and other nations of East Asia who rely on shipping for economic activity.4

• Past Incidents at Sea agreements, notably with the Soviet Union, have proved successful.5

11

creates an opportune moment for the United States and China to commit to East Asian security. In January 2011, former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates indicated that the stage was set for “taking the military-to-military relationship to the next level”.8 This strengthening of relations has created the environment necessary for the critical first step to preventing escalation in the South China Sea: the signing of an Incidents at Sea agreement. The agreement’s necessitated communication structure between the two navies will allow for quick responses to po-tentially escalatory situations while serving as a cornerstone to building the bilateral relationship necessary for resolving issues between the two nations.

Next StepsThe process of indicating cooperation should formally begin by Defense Secre-tary Leon Panetta and Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus engaging in a high-profile visit to their counterparts in China. While visiting, the Secretary of Defense should re-iterate the Obama Administration’s tone of portraying China as a mutual partner in se-curity and trade. Emphasizing the high risk of continuing the current policy (citing the USNS Impeccable and the E3/Interceptor collision of 2001) and the inadequacy of the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement to deal with the risk, the Secretary of De-fense should indicate the U.S. government’s wish to sign an Incidents at Sea agreement with the People’s Republic of China.

Endnotes1. Associated Press, “AP Interview: US Navy Commander Concerned South China Sea Incident Could

Easily Escalate,” Associated Press, January 17, 2012, accessed January 21, 2012 <http://www.washington-post.com/national/ap-interview-us-navy-commander-concerned-south-china-sea-incident-could-easily-escalate/2012/01/17/gIQAJfPn6P_story.html>

2. Sean M. Lynn-Jones, “A Quiet Success for Arms Control: Preventing Incidents at Sea,” International Security , Vol. 9, No. 4 (Spring, 1985): 154-184. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2538545

3. Commander Gupreeet S. Khurana,, “Securing Maritime Lifelines,” Indian Defense Review, November 26, 2010, accessed December 1, 2011. <http://www.indiandefencereview.com/2009/04/Securing-Mari-time-Lifelines-.html>

4. Ralph A. Cossa, “Security Implications of Conflict in the South China Sea: Exploring Potential Triggers of Conflict,” The Pacific Forum CSIS,: 3, accessed December 1, 2011 <http://www.southchinasea.org/docs/Cossa,%20Security%20Implications%20of%20%20Conflict%20in%20the%20S.ChinaSea.pdf.

5. Sean M. Lynn-Jones, “A Quiet Success for Arms Control: Preventing Incidents at Sea,” International Security , Vol. 9, No. 4 (Spring, 1985): 154-184. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2538545

6. United States Energy Information Administration “World Oil Transit Chokepoints” Updated Dec. 30 2011, accessed February 10, 2012 <http://www.eia.gov/cabs/world_oil_transit_chokepoints/full.html>

7. Ibid.8. Jim Garamone, “Gates Says China Relations Ready for Next Level,” American Forces Press Service,

January 12, 2011, accessed January 17, 2011. <http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=62411>

• Talking Points• The US and China lack a strong com-

munication structure necessary to resolve accidents at sea.

• Such accidents absent a communica-tion structure are liable to escalate.

• Accidents to date have only height-ened distrust between the two nations.

12

Building 21st Century Allies with the KATUSA FrameworK

Brian Jencunas, Wheaton College

The United States should apply the Korean Augmentation to the United States Army (KATUSA) program to American allies throughout the globe. Doing so will provide a cost-effective means to strengthen bilateral relations with these nations and their militaries.

General Douglas McArthur created the KATUSA during the Korean War assigning non-commissioned officers and enlisted soldiers of the Korean Army to the U.S. Army units stationed in Korea. KATUSA soldiers serve a standard term of enlistment attached to their U.S. Army unit and then return to either civilian society or the Korean Army with English language skills and an appreciation for the American military.1 These outcomes could be replicated in other nations if the KATUSA program’s model were expanded. The KATUSA model could be applied to any nation where America is interested in strengthening the relationship between the United States and a foreign military, as well as civil society.

AnalysisOne of the foundational goals put forth in the State Department’s 2010 Quadrennial Diplo-macy and Development Review (QDDR) was the advancement of “community diplomacy,” the cre-ation of “networks of contacts that can operate on their own to advance objectives consistent with our interests.”2 The DoD advances a similar goal stating, “the United States will work with our allies and partners to effectively use limited re-sources by generating efficiencies and synergies from each other’s portfolios of military capabili-ties.”3 Both of these goals require the strength-ening of American “soft power” with respect to our relationships with allied nations. The KATUSA program’s model of attaching soldiers to American Army units has a proven record of strengthening those relationships. In Korea, soldiers who are part of the KATUSA program return to Korean society with an appreciation for the American military. Additionally, the personal connections they form with American military personnel often lead them to continue interacting with the Amer-ican military or government in their post-KATUSA activities, whether they are military or civilian.4 This program does not need to be limited to Korea and can be replicated in partnerships with other countries.5

While the KATUSA program model currently only involves foreign soldiers being at-tached to American units in their native country, this model could be changed to encom-pass nations where America does not have a permanent military presence but would still benefit from the stronger bilateral relations that LKATUSA implementation would provide. For example, America would benefit from stronger ties with the Turkish military,

Key Facts• ●KATUSA has been successful-

ly implemented in Korea since 1950, having Korean soldiers serve in American military units.

• KATUSA veterans are more likely to have a favorable view of America and its foreign pol-icy than non-KATUSA soldiers.

12 13

but does not have the large-scale military presence to support LKATUSA implementa-tion in that country. Allowing soldiers from those nations to serve in American military units deployed in othercountries, such as Korea or Germany, would allow America to benefit from the strengthening of military-to-military relationships despite the lack of military presence in the relevant nations.

Next StepsLKATUSA acts as a projection of American influence into the nations it is used in, and de-crease the American military footprint because it emphasizes cooperation and cultural exchange with local military personnel. The best nations to begin LKATUSA implementa-tion are allied nations where we have a proven record of joint military co-operation, such as Columbia (where our military has a long-standing his-tory of narcotics intervention) and Turkey. The administration of this program would fall under the shared jurisdiction of the DoD and the State Department. The DoD would have operational jurisdiction of imple-menting the LKATUSA program in in-dividual military units, but the State Department would coordinate the strategic elements of the program – i.e. interacting with nations that would have their soldiers attached to LKATUSA units and determining long-term implementation metrics for the LKATUSA program.

Endnotes1. Eighth U.S. Army, Eighth U.S. Army Regulation No. 600-2 “Republic of Korea Army Personnel with the

United States Army.” Seoul, South Korea (2000)2. U.S. Department of State, Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, Washington D.C. (2010)3. U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report 2010. Washington D.C. (2010)4. Eighth U.S. Army, Eighth U.S. Army Regulation No. 600-2 “Republic of Korea Army Personnel with the

United States Army.” Seoul, South Korea (2000)5. Ibid.

• Talking Points• KATUSA has been cost-effective in Korea,

costing only the salaries of the assigned KA-TUSA soldiers, and would be similarly effec-tive if implemented elsewhere.

• Expanding the KATUSA program is an ef-fective means to project soft power, as it provides local soldiers a means to positive-ly contrast the American military with their own.

• Expanding KATUSA into Middle Eastern nation is an effective means of winning the hearts and minds of local soldiers who may have misperceptions of the American army.

14

Effective Aid For A New EgyptGraham Palmer, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

The United States should base its military aid to Egypt on the Egyptian government’s performance on standard of living and good governance indicators. If Egypt under-performs, the U.S. should shift some of its military aid to promote economic growth.

Since 1979, the United States has given an aver-age of $2 billion annually in assistance to Egypt.1

This is divided between military and economic aid, with the majority ($1.3 billion annually) of the aid given for military purposes – training, weap-ons, etc.2 Military aid has historically propped up a government whose forces used “unwarranted lethal force and tortured and abused prisoners and detainees”, according to the Department of State.3 Resentment against America grew when these same forces were used against protesters during the revolution. To counter charges of in-terference, the U.S. should adopt a results-driven system for aid allocation in order to keep Egypt as an ally while avoiding popular resent-ment, ensuring stronger governance and positive relations.

AnalysisThe key to achieving this objective lies in the relationship between the military and eco-nomic aid that the U.S. offers Egypt. The UN Human Development Index (HDI) and World Bank World Governance Indicators (WGI) are impartial measures of the standard of liv-ing and openness of government, respectively. The U.S. should tie Egyptian aid to these two standards. Specifically, the State Department should institute a sliding scale so that if Egypt’s performance falls, more funds will be shifted from military to economic aid. Military aid ensures that the U.S. can continue to reap the strategic benefits of an alli-ance with Egypt – priority access to the Suez Canal and Egyptian airspace, and Egyptian-Israeli peace. Results-based aid would show that the U.S. will not support an authoritar-ian government, but is willing to stand with any government that legitimately works for the Egyptian people. Congress is currently expected to determine aid based on whether the newly elected government shares our ideals. Instead, we should emphasize results over ideology.

In the long term, a stable and prosperous Egypt would provide more security benefits to the U.S. than an ideologically friendly government. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, fought almost entirely to deal with unstable political conditions after regimes were top-pled, will cost the U.S. at least $4 trillion – we cannot afford many more interventions to stabilize countries.4 Additionally, trade ties will develop with an increasingly open and productive Egyptian economy. Most importantly, this policy poses no costs to U.S. tax-payers, as the total amount of aid would remain the same even if the allocation were to shift. These marginal benefits of a stable Egypt far outweigh the marginal cost – the pos-sibility that Egypt may not espouse all American principles.

Key Facts• The US has averaged $2 billion

in aid to Egypt annually since 1979.9

• 18.5 percent of Egyptians still live on less than $2 a day.10

• Egypt’s rating on every World Governance Indicator but “Rule of Law” has decreased since 1996.11

15

The primary beneficiaries of this aid will be the Egyptian people, 18.5 percent of whom live on less than $2 a day.5 Studies have shown that corruption and growth are inversely related.6 Thus, the government would have an incentive to reduce corrup-tion and govern well. Continuing corruption among the military (which currently con-trols one third of the economy and much of the government) would trigger a shift in aid towards economic purposes, simul-taneously benefiting the Egyptian people and weakening a repressive military.7 If we continue to apportion aid without objective measures, the U.S. runs the risk of strength-ening a system that becomes corrupt and ineffective.

Next StepsAny new economic aid should go directly through USAID, so that it would not only be coordinated with the Egyptian government, but also provide assurance that aid does not simply go towards strengthening the military. Congress should be eager to extract every bit of leverage it can from the current level of aid to Egypt without increasing expenditures. This policy will appeal to the Egyptian people and government. It ensures quantitative results for the standard of living, and should not threaten the government as long as we emphasize that military aid will only be cut if the government underperforms. Egypt currently faces the prospect of a collapsing economy and further unrest. This pro-posal will pressure the military into relinquishing power, and thus must be implemented soon in order to prevent a further economic meltdown.8

Endnotes1. Marian Wang, “FAQ on U.S. Aid to Egypt: Where Does the Money Go- And Who Decides How It’s

Spent?” ProPublica, January 31, 2011, http://www.propublic.org/blog/item/f.a.q.-on-u.s.-aid-to-egypt-where-does-the-money-go-who-decides-how-spent.

2. Ibid. 3. U.S. Department of State, “Egypt,” in 2010 Human Rights Report, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/

hrrpt/2010/nea/154460.htm.4. Christopher Hinton, “Iraq War Ends with a $4 Trillion IOU,” The Wall Street Journal, December 15, 2011,

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/iraq-war-ends-with-a4-trillion-iou-2011-12-15. 5. The World Bank Group, “Egypt, Arab Rep.” World Bank Data, last modified 2011, http://data.worldbank.

org/country/egypt-arab-republic?display=graph.6. William Easterly, The Elusive Quest For Growth (n.p.: The MIT Press, 2001), 246.7. David D Kirkpatrick, “Egypt’s Military Discourages Economic Change,” The New York Times, February 17,

2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/18/world/middleeast/18military.html?pagewanted=all.8. Editorial,“Egypt’s Economic Crisis,” The New York Times, January 20, 2012, http://www.nytims.

com/2012/01/21/opinion/egypts-economic-crisis.html?_r=1&hp. 9. Marian Wang10. World Bank Group, “Worldwide Governance Indicators, accessed 2011, http://info.worldbank.org/

governance/wgi/. 11. Ibid.

• Talking Points• Shifting aid from military to eco-

nomic after poor performance would ensure that the U.S. does not militarily support another repres-sive government.

• Results-based aid would provide incentives for the government to improve the lives of its people, in-creasing stability and promoting U.S. national security.

• Shifting aid rather than eliminating it altogether allows the U.S. to main-tain its influence and keep Egypt as an ally.

16

Defining Our Mission: NATO’s Future RoleAnna Moore and Daniel Pitcairn, Yale UniversityContributing Researchers: Jenny Zeng, Sofia Knutsson, and Avery JonesAs NATO adapts to new security and global challenges in the post-Cold War world, a nationwide poll of university students will help the organization redefine its role and relevance.

Founded in 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance (NATO) weighed heavily on the poli-tics of the Cold War, serving as a deterrent to Soviet military force in Europe, as well as a bargaining chip towards the end of the Soviet Union. Since the fall of the USSR, though, NATO’s role in preserving American and European security has seemed less obvious to some observers. As instances of major interstate war decline, small-scale civil wars, counter-terrorism initiatives, and humanitarian crises have become far more frequent. Though very different in nature, the intervention in Libya and the Afghanistan War both represent a departure from NATO’s traditional role and served as recognition of this new trend in warfare. NATO is forced to evaluate its future role in the aftermath of these new trends and will redefine its future mission. As the debate surrounding NATO’s continued relevance regarding American security concerns, a poll should be taken to determine its future role and status within American foreign policy.

AnalysisNATO can and should make itself relevant in the post-Cold War world through occa-sional, targeted military intervention. We caution that this should by no means become a frequent role or one that supersedes treaty obligations amongst member states. Rather, NATO should only intervene in conflicts that threaten international security or appear egregious from a humanitarian perspective.

This view is favored because there is a need for more traditional military intervention in political and humanitarian crises. Unlike the United Na-tions, which does much to provide aid and neu-tral peacekeeping, NATO responds quickly and effectively to military conflicts, best exemplified by the Libyan no-fly zone during the revolution. A multi-state military coalition intervened on be-half of the National Transitional Council in the 2011 Libyan Civil War, with a fair degree of suc-cess. As the world sees more civil wars, political crises, and humanitarian crises, the need for this kind of intervention will only grow. By working with the UN, as NATO did during the Libyan in-tervention, it can achieve military success under the auspices of the international community. To continue this cooperation, NATO member states should meet to discuss the feasibility of assum-ing a more central role in other, similar conflicts.

Key Facts• ●In the post-Cold War period,

the average rate of onset for intrastate (i.e. civil) wars is 3.35 per year whereas the average rate of onset for interstate wars is 0.70 per year.1

• ●In 2011, 62 percent of Ameri-cans polled thought that NATO is still essential to our country’s security.2

• ●U.S. contributions account for between 22-25 percent of NATO’s civil budget, military budget, and security invest-ment program.3

17

Next StepsThrough a partnership with NATO and the Atlantic Council, the Yale Security and Foreign Policy Center will work to create and disseminate an important poll asking questions such as: “Some people say that NATO is essential to American security, while others disagree. Do you believe NATO is essential or unessential to American security?” Among others, this question will help gauge future leaders’ opinions of NATO. The poll will measure Ameri-can college students’ attitudes toward NATO and its continued relevance in the post-Cold War world. By coordi-nating with Roosevelt Institute Campus Network chapters and other politically inclined student organizations, the poll will be sent to various American col-lege campuses throughout the United States. This method of dissemination will ensure the results are particularly reflec-tive of politically inclined college students. This specific data is especially useful and relevant because it reflects the opinions of those future leaders in politics, the military, and the media who will play key roles in determining America’s relationship with NATO.

Endnotes1. Center for Systemic Peace. “Global Conflict Trends.” Webpage updated on February 15, 2012 <http://

www.systemicpeace.org/conflict.htm>2. The German Marshall Fund of the United States. “Transatlantic Trends 2011: Topline Data July 2011.”

Brussels. Survey conducted from May 25, 2011 to June 20, 2011.3. Carl Ek. “NATO Common Funds Burdensharing: Background and Current Issues.” Congressional

Research Service, 2010.

• Talking Points• ●Since the disintegration of the Soviet

Union in 1991, NATO has struggled to find a consistent role for itself.

• ●Because intrastate and non-convention-al warfare have been the dominant form of war in the last two decades and the United Nations itself is currently incapa-ble of intervening in such crises, NATO should assume a role as the international community’s instrument of military inter-vention.

• ●Yale University’s Center on Security and Foreign Policy is polling college students nationwide to ascertain what future American leaders think about the future role of NATO, thereby helping NATO re-define itself for when our generation takes the mantle of leadership.

18

Meeting the Needs of Female VeteransLily Roberts, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

To make medical services more accessible to growing numbers of female veterans, Veterans Administration hospitals should reform therapy access policies and adjust physical layouts of wards.

Over the past decades, women have joined the branches of the United States military at higher rates than ever before, with females comprising 14.6 percent of active duty forces. Specifically, women comprise 13 percent of veterans of Operation Enduring Free-dom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and Operation New Dawn.1 While women do not serve combat roles in the U.S. military, women still suffer from physical and psychological injury. In 2009 and 2010, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), hypertension, and depression were the three categories diagnosed most frequently among female veterans.2 In addition, approxi-mately one in five women seen by Veterans Ad-ministration (VA) hospitals respond “yes” when screened for Military Sexual Trauma (assault or harassment experienced while in the mili-tary).3 While significant cuts to the VA budget in 2009 slowed programming in 2010 and 2011, in-creased prioritization of female veteran health care was achieved in 2010 with the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act. The Act created the first comprehensive study in recent years of barriers to health care for female veterans, designed pilot programming for group therapy for female veterans no longer on active duty, and created a two-year pilot program assessing feasibility of offering childcare to veterans.4

AnalysisIt is vital that the VA adapt to meet the needs of increasing numbers of female veter-ans. While VA services in recent years have increased their emphasis on mental health services, logistical aspects of many hospitals can make accessing care challenging for pa-tients, particularly for women. Women may be barred from group therapy sessions deal-ing with issues of PTSD because spots are reserved for those who saw combat. Even fe-male veterans decorated for their performance in combat may be prohibited from group therapy for this reason.5 While appeals processes exist, they are slow and unknown to many veterans. Making these groups available to all veterans diagnosed with PTSD will increase the speed with which veterans access group therapy services. VA hospitals may also not be physically laid out to provide comfortable access to mental health services. Creating specific exam rooms and separate clinic entrances for women attempting to access female health services (i.e. gynecological services) or mental health services may prevent harassment and discomfort experienced by women, who otherwise must walk through wards of physical care services full of older, largely male veterans.6 In addition to the provision of childcare, these minor policy changes will make health care more ac-cessible to female veterans and will ease their search for treatment.

• Key Facts• Women comprise 14.6 percent

of active duty military person-nel (excluding the Coast Guard).

• Women are a quickly growing percentage of American mili-tary veterans.

• Post-traumatic stress, hyper-tension, and depression are the three conditions most frequent-ly diagnosed in female veterans.

19

Next StepsThe simplest solution to gaining access to therapy for all those facing post-combat trauma would be for the military to acknowledge that women deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan have already experienced combat, regardless of official policy. In spite of potential politi-cal opposition, the VA should amend therapy eligibility to include all patients diagnosed with “combat-related” PTSD; this will include female veterans whose combat experience is unofficial. Individual hospitals should create separate waiting rooms, entrances, and exam rooms for female veterans, particularly when their diagnosis may be more sensitive

(i.e. mental health services or Military Sexual Trauma). No veteran should face harass-ment in his or her search for treatment.

Endnotes1. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Population 2007 (latest official estimate and projection

of veteran population and characteristics from 4/1/2000 to 9/30/2036). Accessed at http://www.va.gov/VETDATA/Demographics/Demographics.asp, November 30, 2011.

2. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, VSSC Women Veterans Health Workload Report, October 2010. Accessed at http://www.womenshealth.va.gov/WOMENSHEALTH/facts.asp#2, November 30, 2011.

3. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Military Sexual Trauma. Accessed at http://www.mentalhealth.va.gov/docs/MilitarySexualTrauma-new.pdf, November 25, 2011.

4. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Center for Women Veterans Fact Sheet. Accessed at http://www.va.gov/WOMENVET/Final_CWV_Fact_Sheet_October2010.pdf. Accessed November 20, 2011.

5. “Combat Veteran Says Gender Bias Led to Untreated PTSD,” National Public Radio, March 21, 2010. Accessed at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124500733&ps=rs on November 30, 2011.

6. “VA Hospital Upgrades Care for Female Vets,” National Public Radio, February 3, 2010. Accessed at http://www.kqed.org/news/story/2010/02/03/27664/va_hospital_upgrades_care_for_female_vets?source=npr&category=npr+home+page+top+stories, November 30, 2011.

• Talking Points• Mental health services are increasingly a part of VA services, particularly for veterans

of recent combat operations.• Despite diagnoses by VA hospitals, women may have difficulty accessing therapy and

other mental health services because official military policy bars them from combat.• The layout of hospitals may contribute to inherent difficulty and discomfort in access-

ing mental health services.

20

To strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime, the United States should ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty

The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), which aims to eliminate nuclear test explosions for civil-ian and military purposes,opened for signature in 1996 after adoption by the United Nations General Assembly. Former President Clinton, the first signa-tory, deemed the treaty “[t]he hardest sought, hard-est fought prize in arms control history.”1

Fifteen years since the CTBT’s adoption, the treaty has still not entered into force. Article XIV of the treaty mandates that forty-four states, known as Annex Two States, ratify the CTBT before it acti-vates. The United States, a key Annex Two State, has signed but not ratified the CTBT after the Sen-ate’s rejection in 1999. Despite strong commitment by the Obama administration, progress is stagnant. The United States’ ratification would galvanize oth-er key states to ratify the treaty, thereby bolstering nonproliferation efforts and subsequently interna-tional security.

AnalysisOpponents of U.S. ratification have three main criti-cisms of the CTBT: it threatens the United States’ stockpile, it does not further nonproliferation ef-forts, and it is not enforceable or verifiable.

The United States has exercised a self-enforced nuclear testing moratorium since 1992 while still ensuring the reliability of its stockpile. Reliability is achieved through the Stock-pile Stewardship Program (SSP), which conducts supercomputer simulations to test the functionality of the stockpile. For FY2012, the SSP has a budget of $7.6 billion.6 The weap-ons stockpile and infrastructure for FY2011-2020 is projected to be $85 billion.7 Further-more, a 2009 study from the JASON’s group, comprised of expert scientists, concluded that the stockpile could be extended for decades without testing.8

The CTBT does strengthen nonproliferation efforts. Former United States National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft argued that once ratified “…the CTBT will expedite agreement on more rigorous export controls… and measures to discourage the spread of enrichment and reprocessing facilities.”9 Beyond setting a precedent for stringent regula-tions, developing a sophisticated nuclear stockpile requires testing. After United States’

Advance Global Security: Ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty

Ariana Rowberry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

• Key Facts• 44 states must sign and rat-

ify the CTBT before it can enter into force. Eight of these states, including the United States, have yet to ratify the treaty.2

• The United States signed the CTBT in 1996, but rati-fication failed before the Senate in 1999, despite the United State’s self-imposed moratorium since 1992.3

• The CTBT monitors for nuclear explosions through its International Monitor-ing System, which has 321 monitoring stations and 16 radionuclide stations worldwide.4

• The functionality of the United States’ stockpile is protected through the Stockpile Stewardship Pro-gram (SSP), which has a budget of $7.6 billion in FY 2012.5

21

20 21

ratification of the CTBT, other Annex Two States would feel pressure to ratify the CTBT, therefore relinquishing their testing abilities. Critics of the CTBT argue that other nonproliferation treaties, such as the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT), are more important to limiting nuclear prolifera-tion. The FMCT would advance nonproliferation efforts by increasing constraints on nuclear weap-ons useable fissile material, but the treaty exists in a nascent stage due internal disagreements about the specifics of the treaty. Because the CTBT has been negotiated and stands ready for ratification, its political feasibility exceeds that of the FMCT.

Lastly, while the CTBT does not have a formal en-forcement mechanism, it does create a global norm that could result in political and economic ramifica-tions if violated. The CTBT contains a verification mechanism, the International Monitoring System, consisting of 321 stations worldwide monitoring for nuclear explosions.10 This monitoring system increases transparency be-tween member states through intensive on-site inspections.

Next StepsHonoring its commitment to enhance nonproliferation, the Obama administration should call for a bipartisan effort to review the CTBT. National laboratories and other science experts who can discredit spurious information about the treaty should step forward to relate the treaty’s merits. Furthermore, the 2015 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Review Conference should prioritize ratification by the United States. Prominent security docu-ments, like the Defense Strategic Guidance, which is facilitated through the Department of Defense, should incorporate United States’ ratification into its vision for national se-curity. While the CTBT does not provide a panacea to all nonproliferation threats, its ratification would significantly increase international security and breathe life anew into the nonproliferation regime.

Endnotes1. 142. Johnson, Rebecca “Unfinished Business: The Negotiation of the CTBT and the End of Nuclear Testing.” United Nations Institute for

Disarmament Research (2009): 1-70. http://www.unidir.ch/bdd/fiche-ouvrage.php?ref_ouvrage=978-92-9045-194-5-en (accessed November 9, 2011).

2. 122. “FY 2012 Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan: Report to Congress.” United States Department of Energy (2012): 1-172. www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/nwgs/SSMP-FY12-041511.pdf (accessed February 15, 2012).

3. O’Learey, Hazel R., and Daryl G. Kimball. “Ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.” The Arms Control Association. http://www.armscon-trol.org/pressroom/Op-Ed-Ratify-the-Comprehensive-Test-Ban-Treaty (accessed November 11, 2011).

4. Collina, Tom Z. “Scientists See Stockpile Lasting for Decades.” Arms Control Association. http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2009_12/JASON (accessed November 15, 2011).

5. 3. Bailey, Kathleen, and Thomas Scheber. “The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: An Assessment of the Benefits, Costs, and Risks.” National Institute for Public Policy (2011): 1-86. http://www.nipp.org/CTBT%203.11.11%20electronic%20version.pdf (accessed November 29, 2011).

6. “CTBT: International Monitoring System.” U.S. Department of State. http://www.state.gov/t/avc/rls/159267.htm (accessed November 21, 2011).

7. “Status of Signature and Ratification.” Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization. http://www.ctbto.org/the-treaty/status-of-signature-and-ratification/?states=4&region=63&submit.x=36&submit.y=13&submit=submit&no_cache=1 (accessed February 16, 2012).

8. LaVera, Damien J. “Looking Back: The U.S. Senate Vote on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty” Arms Control Association. http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2004_10/LookingBack_CTBT (accessed February 16, 2012).

9. “The Future Role of the International Monitoring System.” The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization. http://www.ctbto.org/verification-regime/building-theinternational-monitoring-system/the-future-role-of-theinternational-monitoring-system/page-1/(accessed February 16, 2012).

10. O’Learey, Hazel R., and Daryl G. Kimball. “Ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.” The Arms Control Association. http://www.armscon-trol.org/pressroom/Op-Ed-Ratify-the-Comprehensive-Test-Ban-Treaty (accessed November 11, 2011).

• Talking Points• Despite commitment in his

Prague Speech to pursue ratification, the Obama Ad-ministration has made little progress in advancing the CTBT.

• The CTBT creates a global norm that, once enforced, will dissuade countries from advancing or creating a nu-clear program.

• Unlike the FMCT, the terms of the CTBT have already been negotiated and stands ready to enter into force.

22

To facilitate long-term economic growth in the African continent, the U.S. should lever-age its influential stance in global politics as well as its domestic economic policies in a three-fold strategy: (1) widen the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA); (2) adopt the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI); (3) disable undisclosed bank accounts within U.S. borders from facilitating fraud in Africa; and ultimately en-courage other countries to adopt similar measures.

Over the past ten years, six African nations comprised the world’s ten fastest-growing countries in terms of annual GDP per capita. For many years, Africa as a continent has even grown faster than East Asia. This recent eco-nomic windfall in Africa is a product of: higher revenues from natural resources, favorable demographic trends, and the emergence of do-mestic manufacturing and service economies. Despite these advances, however, African countries are fraught with despotism, corrup-tion, and institutional discord. These institu-tional weaknesses foster less effective devel-opment: most Africans still live on less than $2 a day, food production has fallen since the 1960s, the average lifespan in several countries is still below 50, and drought and famine per-sist as climate change worsens. To mitigate so-cial conditions, Western nations often provide aid, however, aid has proven to be a short-term solution to structural problems in developing countries.

AnalysisTo facilitate long-term economic growth, the United States should leverage its influential stance in global politics as well as its domestic economic policies in a three-fold strategy that opens up trade and increases transparency.

Implemented in 2000, the purpose of the AGOA was to improve economic relations between the U.S. and sub-Saharan Africa by providing trade preferences for quota and duty-free entry into the U.S. for certain goods, most notably for textiles, increasing the prevalence of apparel jobs. Although a step in the right direction, AGOA should be ex-panded to include additional goods and the one-sided agreement should be improved through collaboration with various officials from African nations.

Secondly, the United States should draft legislation that aligns with the EITI, which calls

Promoting Long-Term Economic Growth in Africa: A U.S.-led Approach

Erika K. Solanki, University of California Los Angeles

• Key Facts• Six of the world’s ten fastest-

growing countries were African over the past year.

• The International Monetary Fund expects Africa to grow 6 percent in 2012.

• AGOA combined with the Gen-eralized System of Preferences significantly liberalizes market access for 37 sub-Saharan Af-rican countries to the United States. with approximately 7,000 product tariff lines.

• A majority of the world’s dia-monds, approximately 65 per-cent, valued over $8.4 million a year, originate in African coun-tries.

23

for companies and governments to disclose natural resource payments in order to in-crease transparency between countries and among citizens. When a country agrees to follow the EITI standard, public access is granted to payment figures. Increased global transparency will enable African governments to compare what foreign companies pay for licenses to exploit natural resources in developed countries versus within domestic borders. Although transparency will not ensure optimal management of natural resourc-es, it will mitigate money laundering.

Thirdly, the United States should not allow un-disclosed bank accounts within their borders to facilitate high-level fraud in Africa. For instance, secret bank accounts by African nationals or leaders can protect stolen money and enable tax evasion.

Ultimately, these three measures should set a high institutional standard that encourages other nations to follow similar paths. The costs associated with these three measures include minimal impact on the domestic economy. A more encompassing AGOA would affect im-ports from India and China due to higher com-petition of similar goods, whereas legislation compliant with EITI and stricter banking regula-tions will have associated administrative costs.

Next StepsTo facilitate long-term economic growth in Africa, it is important for the U.S. to set a high standard for institutional practice, ultimately to illustrate to other Western and non-Western nations that profitability does not necessitate a lack of social consciousness. An improved AGOA should be drafted in collaboration with key policymakers from every concerned African nation and its 2015 expiration should be extended in order to insti-tute long-term change. In September 2011, President Obama announced that the U.S. will implement the EITI and legislation is being drafted. The purpose of the EITI aligns well with President Obama’s Open Government Partnership Action Plan, thus interest groups should encourage policymakers to efficiently institute the relevant legislation, while companies with heavy natural resource extraction investments will attempt to hin-der the process. Lastly, stricter regulations on bank accounts from foreign nationals will help trace funds to prevent tax evasion.

Endnotes1. “The Hopeful Continent: Africa Rising,” The Economist, December 3, 2011, accessed October 8, 2011, http://www.

economist.com/node/21541015. 2. “Africa’s Hopeful Economies: The Sun Shines Bright,” The Economist, December 3, 2011, accessed October 8, 2011,

http://www.economist.com/node/21541008.3. “Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative,” accessed October 9, 2011, http://eiti.org./.4. “African Growth and Opportunity Act,” accessed October 9, 2011, http://www.agoa.gov/.5. “Summary of AGOA I,” African Growth and Opportunity Act, accessed October 9, 2011, http://www.agoa.gov/.6. “West ‘Facilitates Corruption in Africa’ Says Top Economist,” CNN, February 9, 2011, accessed October 9,

2011, http://edition.cnn.com/2011/BUSINESS/02/09/joseph.stiglitz.africa/index.html.

• Talking Points• Stagnated economic develop-

ment and subsequent poor hu-man development issues are not “their” problems; we should have a socially conscious world-view.

• Aid is a short-term solution, whereas institutional policies in the U.S. that affect African eco-nomic growth have long-term implications.

• Expanding the AGOA, compli-ance with EITI guidelines, and strict bank regulations will en-able more economic opportuni-ties for African producers, cre-ate greater transparency, and ultimately mitigate fraud.

24

The United States can empower youths, temper radicalism and further its own inter-ests throughout the greater Middle East by promoting rap music as an outlet for social discontent.

As budget constraints and a war-weary citizenry blunt the United States’ ability to project its hard power around the world, it must increasingly turn to soft power in order to achieve its foreign policy objectives. While the tactics have changed, an ex-plicit goal of American foreign policy continues to be the promotion of “governments that reflect the will of the people.”1 In addition, terrorist orga-nizations, such as Al-Qaeda, often cite the need to topple oppressive regimes as a justification for their actions, giving the United States a direct security interest in promoting democracy through peaceful means.2 The recent uprisings across the Middle East have demonstrat-ed the potential of the youth population in those countries to challenge and overthrow repressive regimes. Music was, and continues to be, a catalyst that allows youths to le-gitimize their grievances and mobilize others in support of their cause.

AnalysisThe United States should place greater emphasis on facilitating and encouraging musi-cal expression throughout the greater Middle East in order to encourage thriving liberal democracies. Rap has already demonstrated its significance in the region. El Général, perhaps the most influential rapper of the past year, is a Tunisian twenty-one year old, whose song “Rais Lebled” became the anthem of the rebellion against former President Ben Ali. “I talk with no fear / Although I know I will only get troubles / I see injustice ev-erywhere,” he delivers. During the 2011 movements, Tunisians sang “Rais Lebled” on the streets, and Egyptians called for him to perform in Tahrir Square.5 Somali rapper K’naan, whose popularity has spread to the United States, fired his first gun at age eight but has since used rap to speak out against militarism.6 In Morocco, Muhammad Bahri penned a song condemning Al Qaeda after Islamic radicals bombed Casablanca in 2003. “If you understood the Koran, there wouldn’t be bombs,” he sings.7 Rap’s regional popularity al-lows messages of justice and moderation to reach large audiences - El Général recently sang at a 10,000 seat concert venue.8 Music creates heroes for society to admire and a voice to articulate its desire for peace.

Many American policy-makers have opposed regime change in the Middle East, because they believe it will usher in a wave of “anti-American,” Islamist governments.9 However, this policy is shortsighted. Free expression and democracy can help neutralize extremist ideologies. Turkey has the second-freest press in the greater Middle East10 and is one of only a few democratic, secular states in the region, despite being 99 percent Muslim.11

After democratic elections in Tunisia, the Islamist party Ennahda formed a coalition with two center-left secular parties.12 Sustained democracy will not only provide a true stabil-ity unachievable through authoritarianism, but American efforts to empower the popu-

Promoting Music in the Fight Against OppressionKyle Villemain, University Of North Carolina At Chapel Hill

• Key Facts• Over thirty percent of the

Middle East is between the age of fifteen and thirty.3

• Ninety percent of Egypt’s unemployed were between eighteen and thirty years old in 2010.4

25

lace through music will also better align America’s actions with its rhetoric, thus weakening the po-lemics who charge America of hypocrisy. While the promotion of rap music is a long-term strategy, the benefits of which may not be immediately tangible, its potential to positively and fundamentally shape a society and its low-cost merits this creative strategy a place in American foreign policy.

Next StepsThe State Department should identify local record-ing studios and music venues in the greater Middle East that can benefit from the American music industry’s support and advice. This can be accomplished via the State-Department-affiliated Partners for a New Beginning, which facilitates private industry partnerships and is already established throughout the re-gion.13 The State Department could also help secure grants for the region from recording labels in America, which could then advertise their humanitarian efforts to the Ameri-can audience. In addition, the State Department should also exert diplomatic pressure aimed at preventing the arrests of musicians as political prisoners.

Endnotes1. Obama, Barack. The United States of America, “Remarks by the President on a New Beginning.” Last modified

June 04, 2009. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-cairo-university-6-04-09.2. Public Broadcasting Service, Last modified August 1996. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/interna-

tional/fatwa_1996.html.3. Dubai School of Government, “Facts About Middle Eastern Youth .” Last modified 2011. http://www.shababin-

clusion.org/section/about/facts.4. El Madany, Sherine. “Egypt’s youth on political sidelines-U.N. report.” Reuters, June 27, 2010. http://af.reuters.

com/article/idAFLDE65Q0CZ20100627 (accessed December 1, 2011). 5. Walt, Vivienne. “El Général and the Rap Anthem of the Mideast Revolution.” Feburary 15, 2011. http://www.

time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2049456,00.html (accessed ). 6. Robin Wright, Rock The Casbah: Rage and Rebellion across the Islamic World, (New York: Simon, 2011), 5.7. Erlanger, Steven, and Souad Mekhennet. “Back Home, a Moroccan Rapper Sharpens His Words.” August 21,

2009. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/22/world/africa/22barry.html?pagewanted=all (accessed ). 8. “Tunisia’s revolution rap hits the big stage.” Asharq Alawsat, January 29, 2011. http://www.asharq-e.com/news.

asp?section=7&id=23950 (accessed January 23, 2012).9. Traub, James. “Ready for Their Close-Up.” Foreign Policy, December 2, 2011. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/

articles/2011/12/02/ready_for_their_close_up (accessed January 18, 2012). 10. Freedom House, “Freedom of the Press.” Last modified 2011. Accessed January 23, 2012. http://www.freedom-

house.org/report-types/freedom-press. 11. United States Department of State, “Turkey.” Last modified December 09, 2011. Accessed January 23, 2012.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3432.htm. 12. Moncef Marzouki, (President of the Republic of Tunisia), interview by Taied Moalla, “Tunisian President Mar-

zouki; On Being the Secularist Partner of Islamist Majority,” Le Temps, Record, January 14, 2012, January 23, 2012, http://www.worldcrunch.com/tunisian-president-marzouki-being-secularist-partner-islamist-majority/4484.

13. United States Department of State, “Partners for a New Beginning.” Accessed January 23, 2012. http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/158103.pdf.

• Talking Points• Rap music provides a me-

dium for social discussion and allows youths to ex-press themselves.

• Music is being used to overthrow dictators and delegitimize extremism across the Middle East.

26

The United States should improve standards for maternal health in developing coun-tries by protecting federal funding to non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and pipelining those funds more effectively.

Ronald Reagan enacted the Mexico City Policy, also known as the global gag rule, in 1984. This rule prohibits funding to international aid organizations that support family planning initiatives, following from the notion that taxpayer money should not pay for abortions. Presidents George Bush Sr. and George W. Bush upheld the policy and Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama rejected the policy, making the nation’s stance on the policy appear volatile and susceptible to party politics to other countries.1 Though the policy is currently abol-ished, legislation that restricts funding to maternal health groups continues to be passed. HR 2059, which was passed in 2011, prohibits federal funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), a key group supporting international women’s health issues.2 The Global Democracy Promotion Act, or HR 4879, which has not yet been voted on, would prohibit the application of certain restrictive eli-gibility requirements to foreign NGOs, effectively abolishing the Mexico City Policy permanently.3

AnalysisCongress voted to stop funding to the UNFPA on the basis of budgetary reasons; the funding cut would save $400 million over 10 years.7 Furthermore, according to a recent poll, 59 percent of Americans would support cuts to foreign aid.8 However, that relatively small portion of American appropriations could positively impact thousands of women. Healthy women have the capabilities to build stronger communities and increase fe-male presence in the workforce which can often shrink due to poor family planning. By increasing the economic opportunities for women, a country’s economic viability would similarly rise. Economic viability is strongly linked to a country’s stability and security. As the world’s population climbs past 7 billion, the UNFPA develops strategies to address reproductive health, gender equality and population. Protecting NGOs that provide family planning initiatives would help to control excessive population growth by limiting the number of unwanted pregnancies and births. When the gag rule was in effect in sub-Saharan Africa, NGOs that were previously performing abortions were also the primary providers of family planning services and when funding cuts closed those clinics, women lost access to contraceptives. Furthermore, increasing maternal care would help the quality of life for women in countries with poor maternal health. By improving maternal health care now, and putting these institutions in place, the US will save future foreign aid funds. The US has a moral responsibility as the world’s largest foreign aid donor to

Protect Funding that Protects FamiliesCorinne White, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

• Key Facts• When the Mexico City Poli-

cy was enacted from 2001 to 2008, the number of women having induced abortions more than doubled in the African countries most af-fected by the policy.4

• In 2002, Afghanistan had fewer than 500 midwives, and less than 10 percent of pregnant women received any prenatal care.5

• The UNFPA estimates that Afghanistan still needs roughly 7,400 additional midwives to attain 95 per-cent skilled birth attendance by 2015.5

• Foreign aid comprises less than one percent of the US federal budget.6

27

uphold its standard of bettering the countries it is involved with.

Next Steps Implementation of the Mexico City Policy has historically switched as the parties change between each presidential adminis-tration. Before the 2012 election, Congress needs to pass the Global Democracy Promo-tion Act to prevent the Mexico City Policy from being reinstated if President Obama is defeated. Since the gag rule increases rates of abortions, the GOP-dominated Congress should have an incentive to keep it abolished. Furthermore, the Global Democracy Promo-tion Act would improve national security in fraught nations such as Afghanistan with American military presence. Congress should also reapprove aid to the UNFPA by overturn-ing HR 2059, continuing support at the previ-ous levels, if not higher. The President and the Secretary of State should create a foreign maternal health task force, headed by the House Committee on Foreign Affairs to help correctly channel aid to community-based NGOs and establish beneficial midwifery programs in countries with demonstrated need. Given its expertise, the UNFPA should be responsible for helping the U.S. inves-tigate which foreign agencies to fund.

Endnotes1. Tapper, Jake. Obama Overturns ‘Mexico City Policy’ Implemented by Reagan. January 23, 2009. http://

abcnews.go.com/Politics/International/story?id=6716958&page=1.2. “H.R. 2059.” May 31, 2011. http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/112/hr2059ih.pdf.3. H.R. 4879. March 17, 2010. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-4879&tab=summary.4. Gorlick, Adam. Abortions in Africa increase despite Republican policy to curb payment for procedures.

September 28, 2011. http://news.stanford.edu/news/2011/september/abortion-africa-policy-092811.html.5. Coleman, Isobel. Maternal Health in Afghanistan. September 30, 2011. http://blogs.cfr.org/cole-

man/2011/09/30/maternal-health-in-afghanistan/.6. “Executive Budget Summary.” Department of State. February 14, 2011. http://www.state.gov/documents/

organization/156214.pdf.7. H.R. 2059 moves closer toward full House vote to defund controversial United Nations Population

Fund. October 5, 2011. http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/press_display.asp?id=2012.8. Cooper, Frank. Americans Oppose Cuts in Education, Social Security, Defense. January 26, 2011. http://

www.gallup.com/poll/145790/Americans-Oppose-Cuts-Education-Social-Security-Defense.aspx.9. “Guidelines on Women’s Empowerment.” United Nations Population Information Network. n.d. http://

www.un.org/popin/unfpa/taskforce/guide/iatfwemp.gdl.html.

• Talking Points• Countries in which women are

empowered, valued, and healthy are more likely to succeed eco-nomically and also experience substantive development, creat-ing a sustainable impact that will reduce the need for further aid.9

• Afghanistan, and other nations with direct US influence, should feel that US presence is benefi-cial.

• The Mexico City Policy fails to reduce the number of abortions or improve maternal health stan-dards.

Join a national networkof young professionalsand jump in the Pipeline.

Stay engaged.Take your leadership

to the next level.www.rooseveltpipeline.org

LA - CHICAGO - BOSTON - NEW ORLEANS - SAN FRANCISCODETROIT - LITTLE ROCK - DC - MIAMI - ST. LOUIS - NYC

solve2012#WWW.ROOSEVELTCAMPUSNETWORK.ORG