Chris Seiple, Ph.D., is the president of the Institute for Global Engagement — a "think tank with legs" that studies and actively promotes sustainable religious freedom worldwide. A graduate of Stanford, the Naval Postgraduate School, and the Fletcher School for Law & Diplomacy, Seiple is also the founder of The Review of Faith & International Affairs (www.cfia.org), a Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute (Philadelphia), a member at the Council on Foreign Relations (New York), and a member of the International Institute for Strategic Studies (London). His book, The U.S. Military/NGO Relationship in Humanitarian Interventions, is a seminal work in the field, and he is the co-author of the forthcoming International Religious Freedom: A Handbook for Advocacy. A former Marine infantry officer, Seiple serves on the Wycliffe Bible Translators, USA, board of directors, and also on the board of advisors for Carolina for Kibera, Inc.
With a recognized expertise in national and homeland security U.S. foreign policy, Central & East Asia, humanitarian intervention, religion and international affairs, Muslim-Christian relations, and religious freedom, Seiple has appeared on BBC, MSNBC, Fox News, CN8, and CNN. His many speaking engagements have taken him around the world, including Tashkent, Doha, Peshawar, Bannu, Moscow, Vladikavkaz, Hanoi, Issakul, Urumchi, Oslo, Hama, and Beijing. He also speaks regularly at U.S. military schools regarding national security and religious and cultural engagement. Seiple resides in Virginia with Alissa and their two sons, Liam and Hanan. Seiple's monthly column is available at www.globalengage.org/media/ftp.aspx.
Afghanistan is vital to American and global security for three reasons. Foremost, Afghanistan will determine whether the world's most stabilizing and practical alliance -- NATO -- remains relevant. If NATO countries cannot coordinate an ordered unity of effort -- among their political leaders, among their military and civilian components, between them and the NGOs, and between them all and the Afghan government and people -- then there is not much hope of addressing the other complex global security challenges that our planet faces. Afghanistan-Pakistan also happens to be the ongoing point of origin for terrorist training and resulting attacks… Read more
We must finally move beyond containment to sustainment. Sustainment promotes freedom and justice at the intersection of culture and the rule of law, sensitive to the former, consistent with the latter. The accomplishment of the last century was that the house responsible for the most blood-letting in history -- Europe -- is now free and whole. Sustainment seeks the carefully courageous expansion of this accomplishment in full partnership with the people and leaders of the world's less-than-free regions. For example, one US goal for its grand strategy this century should be the re-envisioning of NATO as it expands, in tandem… Read more
For starters, President Obama is not giving an address to the “Muslim world.” He is giving a speech in (to?) the Arab part of the Muslim-majority world. If we are to avoid stereotypes, it is imperative to remember that there are non-Muslim minority populations in Muslim-majority countries, just as there are Muslim minority populations in Europe and North America. It is also important to remember that Arab Muslims constitute only 20% of the Muslim-majority world. The president’s Cairo speech will be a moment. Given his global popularity, respectful tone, and inaugural call to the Muslim-majority world for a “new way… Read more
“Winning” a counterinsurgency is anchored in two bedrock assumptions: 1) there is a local and legitimate governance structure that the counterinsurgency can support; and 2) the counterinsurgency has the educated and trained personnel to engage the culture and community. A big deal has been made about the “Swat ceasefire” with some disagreement between Ambassador Holbrooke (who understands it as tantamount to surrender) and Secretary Gates who thinks that “Swat” might offer elements of a model that could be applied in Afghanistan. Certainly the threatened “Talibanization” of Pakistan should not be underestimated, but nor should it be oversimplified. Unfortunately, the… Read more
There are three fundamental problems with the current NSC. First, it is still, theoretically, the only place where all elements of national power come together. In a decentralized and multi-nodal world of state and non-state actors, however, a central committee approach will, by definition, be left behind. A new national security act would organize the world regionally under super-ambassadors whose staff included reps from all the elements of national power, and, even, some relevant non-state actors (e.g., anthropologists, humanitarian NGOs, religious/cultural experts). Second, with national security accordingly decentralized to the region (and mirroring the actual national security council), the NSC could then… Read more
This question first begs two more: 1) Why is it vital to U.S. national security that a just peace between Israel and Palestine be achieved? 2) What is the essence of a just peace? The conflict between Israel and Palestine is the primary prism through which the Muslim world views the United States. And that view regards the American role as less than even-handed, providing a recruiting and fund-raising tool for terrorists worldwide. If we remove this prism, then we stand a chance of winning the global war of ideas and preventing the bin Laden-after-next (the next one is already… Read more
Three books sit atop my holiday reading pile that I have no chance of finishing -- it's the thought that counts, right? I read each of them long ago, but recently felt compelled to go down to the basement and find them. The first is George Kennan's American Diplomacy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951). This collection of lectures and essays seeks to engage the world as it is, warning us directly and indirectly about the militarization of our national security. This blog, for example, is about "national security" but the conversation thus far de facto defines national security as… Read more
By whatever name or size that our military forces are called and deployed, they will remain in Iraq for some time to come—certainly longer than 16 months—as it is clearly in the American interest to deftly encourage the fragile stability that now exists in Iraq. Withdrawing military troops, however, is the easy part. The real question is not about the withdrawal of our hard power from Iraq, but the capacity of our soft power to act in an integrated fashion that deepens and expands this fragile stability in a manner perceived as legitimate by the Iraqi government and people. Striking… Read more
I still believe that we are our own worst enemy, an enemy defined by a mindset that is less than holistic in its engagement of the world as it is…a world that includes religion, for worse, and for better. To the question: President-elect Obama will first be tested along the “I-axis:” Israel-Iraq-Iran-India. The most fundamental and common denominator to this interrelated super-region is religion. The challenge for our national security establishment is to allow for the proper place of religion in its analytical worldview…even as this establishment simultaneously understands that the majority of people in this part of the world—especially… Read more
Related Link: http://www.globalengage.org
